Residents push back against widening of Hwy 20 to six lanes in Cherokee and Forsyth counties (Atlanta: living, zoning)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But part of growing to pass them will require investing heavily in alternatives to roads on both the metro and state levels.
But why does Atlanta have to grow to pass Dallas and Houston?
Why can't Atlanta just grow and be successful in its own right (in its own lane), like it appears to be doing now?
Just because Atlanta's numerical statistics may not be as high as Dallas and Houston does not mean that Atlanta has been any less successful than Dallas and Houston. It just means that Atlanta has been successful (highly and massively successful) in a way that is different from the massively successful Texas Sunbelt mega metros of Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston.
And besides, Atlanta likely may never pass Dallas and Houston in numerical statistics just because of some very key economic and geographical differences, differences like:
> The Dallas and Houston areas getting a jump on Atlanta in growth in the post-World War II era because of the presence of the energy industry in both metros and because of Houston's status as a major international seaport on the Gulf of Mexico...
> The lack of equal and larger populated competitors nearby for the state of Texas...
...Texas has no states immediately nearby that compete with it on an equal or greater level economically, something that helps Texas grow at a faster and higher clip (particularly when it comes to attracting an extremely heavy amount of business relocations from a less business-friendly West Coast state like California)...
...Meanwhile, Georgia has to compete both with nearby Southeastern states that are as large or larger than it (like Florida, North Carolina and Virginia) and nearby Southeastern states that are smaller than it (South Carolina, Tennessee and even Alabama)...
...Georgia basically is in a part of the North American continent where there is much more economic and geographical competition than in the part of the continent where Texas is located....Georgia's location in a part of the North American continent with more economic competition has made it much more challenging for the landlocked Atlanta area to build up its water storage infrastructure to the extent that a landlocked Texas mega-metro like Dallas-Fort Worth has built up its water storage infrastructure...
> Dallas and Houston's locations in areas of relatively flatter and relatively less heavily-wooded terrain, terrain that has been (and continues to be) much more conducive to building out a vastly increased amount of road infrastructure than the heavily-wooded rolling-to-hilly-to-mountainous terrain of North Georgia where Atlanta is located...
> The presence of two large central urban core cities in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex in Dallas (1.3 million residents) and Fort Worth (840,000).
The key geographical differences between Georgia and Texas signals that Atlanta likely may never pass Dallas and Houston in numerical stats and measurements.
And the good news is that Atlanta does not have to pass Dallas and Houston in numerical stats and measurements to be successful. That's because numerical stats and figures are not the only measurements of a metro area's success.
Atlanta's status as an extremely robust entertainment, sporting and convention events mecca has given it an image and reputation of being a mega metro region that is massively successful in the eyes and minds of many national and international observers....A massive successful reputation that more than holds its own with the massively successful reputations of Dallas and Houston.
Just because Atlanta does not have the numerical stats and measurements of Dallas and Houston does not mean that Atlanta is losing ground to Dallas and Houston.
If anything, Atlanta has gained ground despite not having the numerical stats and measurements that are as high as Dallas and Houston and despite not having the road infrastructure of Dallas and Houston for the aforementioned geographical and economic reasons.
Last edited by Born 2 Roll; 03-08-2017 at 12:06 PM..
But why does Atlanta have to grow to pass Dallas and Houston?
Why can't Atlanta just grow and be successful in its own right (in its own lane), like it appears to be doing now?
Just because Atlanta's numerical statistics may not be as high as Dallas and Houston does not mean that Atlanta has been any less successful than Dallas and Houston. It just means that Atlanta has been successful (highly and massively successful) in a way that is different from the massively successful Texas Sunbelt mega metros of Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston.
And besides, Atlanta likely may never pass Dallas and Houston in numerical statistics just because of some very key economic and geographical differences, differences like:
> The Dallas and Houston areas getting a jump on Atlanta in growth in the post-World War II era because of the presence of the energy industry in both metros and because of Houston's status as a major international seaport on the Gulf of Mexico...
> The lack of equal and larger populated competitors nearby for the state of Texas...
...Texas has no states immediately nearby that compete with it on an equal or greater level economically, something that helps Texas grow at a faster and higher clip (particularly when it comes to attracting an extremely heavy amount of business relocations from a less business-friendly West Coast state like California)...
...Meanwhile, Georgia has to compete both with nearby Southeastern states that are as large or larger than it (like Florida, North Carolina and Virginia) and nearby Southeastern states that are smaller than it (South Carolina, Tennessee and even Alabama)...
...Georgia basically is in a part of the North American continent where there is much more economic and geographical competition than in the part of the continent where Texas is located....Georgia's location in a part of the North American continent with more economic competition has made it much more challenging for the landlocked Atlanta area to build up its water storage infrastructure to the extent that a landlocked Texas mega-metro like Dallas-Fort Worth has built up its water storage infrastructure...
> Dallas and Houston's locations in areas of relatively flatter and relatively less heavily-wooded terrain, terrain that has been (and continues to be) much more conducive to building out a vastly increased amount of road infrastructure than the heavily-wooded rolling-to-hilly-to-mountainous terrain of North Georgia where Atlanta is located...
> The presence of two large central urban core cities in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex in Dallas (1.3 million residents) and Fort Worth (840,000).
The key geographical differences between Georgia and Texas signals that Atlanta likely may never pass Dallas and Houston in numerical stats and measurements.
And the good news is that Atlanta does not have to pass Dallas and Houston in numerical stats and measurements to be successful. That's because numerical stats and figures are not the only measurements of a metro area's success.
Atlanta's status as an extremely robust entertainment, sporting and convention events mecca has given it an image and reputation of being a mega metro region that is massively successful in the eyes and minds of many national and international observers....A massive successful reputation that more than holds its own with the massively successful reputations of Dallas and Houston.
Just because Atlanta does not have the numerical stats and measurements of Dallas and Houston does not mean that Atlanta is losing ground to Dallas and Houston.
If anything, Atlanta has gained ground despite not having the numerical stats and measurements that are as high as Dallas and Houston and despite not having the road infrastructure of Dallas and Houston for the aforementioned geographical and economic reasons.
Can't rep you again, but, as always, you make very reasonable, sound and compelling points here, B2R.
But why does Atlanta have to grow to pass Dallas and Houston?
Why can't Atlanta just grow and be successful in its own right (in its own lane), like it appears to be doing now?
Just because Atlanta's numerical statistics may not be as high as Dallas and Houston does not mean that Atlanta has been any less successful than Dallas and Houston. It just means that Atlanta has been successful (highly and massively successful) in a way that is different from the massively successful Texas Sunbelt mega metros of Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston.
And besides, Atlanta likely may never pass Dallas and Houston in numerical statistics just because of some very key economic and geographical differences, differences like:
> The Dallas and Houston areas getting a jump on Atlanta in growth in the post-World War II era because of the presence of the energy industry in both metros and because of Houston's status as a major international seaport on the Gulf of Mexico...
> The lack of equal and larger populated competitors nearby for the state of Texas...
...Texas has no states immediately nearby that compete with it on an equal or greater level economically, something that helps Texas grow at a faster and higher clip (particularly when it comes to attracting an extremely heavy amount of business relocations from a less business-friendly West Coast state like California)...
...Meanwhile, Georgia has to compete both with nearby Southeastern states that are as large or larger than it (like Florida, North Carolina and Virginia) and nearby Southeastern states that are smaller than it (South Carolina, Tennessee and even Alabama)...
...Georgia basically is in a part of the North American continent where there is much more economic and geographical competition than in the part of the continent where Texas is located....Georgia's location in a part of the North American continent with more economic competition has made it much more challenging for the landlocked Atlanta area to build up its water storage infrastructure to the extent that a landlocked Texas mega-metro like Dallas-Fort Worth has built up its water storage infrastructure...
> Dallas and Houston's locations in areas of relatively flatter and relatively less heavily-wooded terrain, terrain that has been (and continues to be) much more conducive to building out a vastly increased amount of road infrastructure than the heavily-wooded rolling-to-hilly-to-mountainous terrain of North Georgia where Atlanta is located...
> The presence of two large central urban core cities in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex in Dallas (1.3 million residents) and Fort Worth (840,000).
The key geographical differences between Georgia and Texas signals that Atlanta likely may never pass Dallas and Houston in numerical stats and measurements.
And the good news is that Atlanta does not have to pass Dallas and Houston in numerical stats and measurements to be successful. That's because numerical stats and figures are not the only measurements of a metro area's success.
Atlanta's status as an extremely robust entertainment, sporting and convention events mecca has given it an image and reputation of being a mega metro region that is massively successful in the eyes and minds of many national and international observers....A massive successful reputation that more than holds its own with the massively successful reputations of Dallas and Houston.
Just because Atlanta does not have the numerical stats and measurements of Dallas and Houston does not mean that Atlanta is losing ground to Dallas and Houston.
If anything, Atlanta has gained ground despite not having the numerical stats and measurements that are as high as Dallas and Houston and despite not having the road infrastructure of Dallas and Houston for the aforementioned geographical and economic reasons.
I said it a while back... Not New York, nor Portland, just Atlanta. I suppose I should add Dallas in there?
There serveral points i got to respond to first to
First off the reason DFW has built more freeway is because DFW has had more land to do so, DFW is a Grid this gave DFW more areas to put aside for freeways and etc. where in Atlanta not being a grid would required more neighborhood being razed.
Second off your argument is old tired argument the 50s to the 90s metropolitan leaders and urban planners were pro sprawl and roads. The Fucos from sprawl and not building is something that came about recent during the early 2000s
Again develop react to transportion historically cities where build by water for a reason. Then came the railroad that created cities like Atlanta, streetcars created early suburbs and the interstate system created sprawl we know post 50s
The reason I posted the DFW pics to show how development in DFW directly follows the grid. Where the wide roads and grid stop develop stops once the infrastructure is bad development stops. The reason Atlanta sprawls more than DFW is because developers in Atlanta would build bad infrastructure that developers in DFW wouldn't. Because Atlanta is not a grid developers pretty much thrown the idea that infrastructure too bad to here out the window.
No they have not develop to the north in a similar fashion. One is a grid and the other sprawl further north which makes it an apples to oranges comparison. Comparing Mckinnely tx to Cumming ga is off because cumming is futher out. Where in DFW the area would be rual and undeveloped. Apharetta would be a better comparison and would make sense to expand roads. Cumming further out than any develop in DFW. the point is DFW is not even that far out yet as Atlanta northern suburbs. If Atlanta focus on the same radius as DFW Atlanta wouldn't be widening roads that far north.
Metro Atlanta focus should be where the population is and where it's growing the most. Which is the core and the first and second ring suburbs. Not trying subsidized the exurbs.
DFW is following in the foot steps of LA
Atlanta can't do that it's not a grid. Atlanta has to look at cities like D.C. And Boston as models.
Atlanta isn't filling in its grid so it sprawls along the interstates with lots of lightly developed areas in between. DFW, and to a lesser extent Houston, fill in those areas rapidly. A large amount of Houston's grid outside Loop 610 (the inner loop-about 5-8 miles from downtown) was completed in the 80s and 90s. There are ways to do that outside 285. There are options in some areas inside 285.
Atlanta environmental is different from the other big sunbelt cities Atlanta is too forested and hilly to build the grid network of Texas cities.
Also there more Balkanization in metro Atlanta because of the smaller counties.
Also your speaking as if all major cities just have freeways ever where. This why I keep menting D.C. And Boston. They don't have the freeways or the grid network as Texas cities. There more stuff going on with TOD.
One thing I notice is that the ARC is more pro urban growth than tx cities regional plan organizations. Texas cities have urban projects but nothing in the scale of the ARC 2040 plan.
DC has a very strong grid system. Boston is lacking.
No, Atlanta is a sunbelt city like Dallas and Houston but Atlanta lack of a grid and freeways has more in common with D.C. And Boston.
Saintmarks is basically giving the road map of how to follow LA. That's what DFW, Houston and other western sunbelt cities are doing.
This is something Atlanta is not built for. Atlanta has to look a non grid cities in the US and abroad as models.
I would argue that Atlanta desperately needs to improve its grid. Those cities abroad (and Dallas and Houston and especially LA) have much higher densities.
Atlanta isn't filling in its grid so it sprawls along the interstates with lots of lightly developed areas in between. DFW, and to a lesser extent Houston, fill in those areas rapidly. A large amount of Houston's grid outside Loop 610 (the inner loop-about 5-8 miles from downtown) was completed in the 80s and 90s. There are ways to do that outside 285. There are options in some areas inside 285.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
I would argue that Atlanta desperately needs to improve its grid. Those cities abroad (and Dallas and Houston and especially LA) have much higher densities.
That is an excellent point how the heaviest development patterns follow along Interstate routes because of the lack of a grid in the Atlanta area.
For people who measure sprawl patterns of large major metros, it really is astonishing that Atlanta is able to make other sprawling Sunbelt metros like Dallas, Houston and Los Angeles look almost very dense by comparison.
Though it should be noted that those lower-density development patterns and the meandering road network that fosters it is popular with a large portion of the metro Atlanta public.
The low-density development patterns may have its obvious drawbacks and be frowned upon by many, but many metro Atlantans and North Georgians like the low-density development patterns (and the heavily-wooded vegetation and rolling/hilly/mountainous terrain that fosters the low-density) because it is scenic to look at and because it is something that sets the Atlanta area apart from many large major metro area around the globe.
I agree that it would help if Atlanta could improve its road network to become more of a grid. But imposing a much more complete grid on the metro Atlanta/North Georgia landscape is something that has and will continue to prove difficult because the current setup of a road network that meanders through heavily-wooded rolling/hilly/mountainous terrain is something that is really popular with the public.
A lot of people move to the Atlanta area because of the overwhelming amount of green vegetation (on rolling/hilly/mountainous terrain) in both its urban and suburban/exurban neighborhoods.
And the areas that theoretically would be most in need of a gridded road pattern (like in Northside areas like Buckhead, North Atlanta, Sandy Springs, East Cobb, North Fulton, Dunwoody/North DeKalb, etc, where there are no real east-west cross-regional surface road alternatives to the I-285 Top End Perimeter) would be the most difficult (if not totally impossible) to impose a grid on because of the extremely high value of the residential real estate (and the extreme affluence of many of the residents) in those areas.
Your assertion that there are ways to improve/impose a grid outside of I-285 is a good one as there have been some moves (most notably by the governments of more heavily-populated OTP suburban and outer-suburban counties) to improve the surface road network by aligning major road junctions so that roads cross each other at 90-degree angles instead of at off-setting angles where vehicles may have to turn left or right onto a cross-road to continue straight ahead on the same road.
Also (like in the case of Cobb County's recent very long-awaited construction and completion of the "Windy-Mac Connector" to connect Windy Hill Road with Macland Road between Austell and Powder Springs roads in West Cobb) been efforts to fill-in missing parts of the grid with arterial connector roads, where politically possible OTP.
But it will continue to be almost completely impossible to fill in the road network grid ITP because of the continuing extreme public resistance to further road expansion there. It appears that Freedom Parkway (which opened in 2000) will have been the last new segment of roadway to be constructed ITP.
But part of growing to pass them will require investing heavily in alternatives to roads on both the metro and state levels.
Yes and no they both have strengths and weaknesses in different areas.
Atlanta is already ahead in alternative transportation than DFW and Houston. DFW dart goes further out but it's light rail. Atlanta having a established Heavy rail at the core is a advantage. Dart have a commuter rail going into Arlington but it's no where near development you have nearly drive out the city to get there. Speaking of Arlington a nearly 400k city but they just got buses and it's a tiny route. Y'all rag on the braves going to Cumberland but at least it's a edge city and the building it with a mix use project. Nothing is like that surrounding the stadiums in DFW.
Due to metro Atlanta being older a well the many county seats. There are more historic and traditional downtowns. They can be develop the ARC call them town centers. Cities of in the northeast like Boston And DC are built similar to this. Atlanta should also continue to build around Marta stations and etc. these are advantages Atlanta have over Texas cities.
While there are urban projects in DFW and Houston are still building a lot of suburban style offices parks. And There nothing as organized as CIDs. The ARC is way more focused on urban development than Texas.
Most North American cities are grid but besides Boston and D.C. If you look globally London, Paris and etc are not a grid. That just one way cities can grow.
DC is the most similar suburban layout to Atlanta. DC have a small urban core of a city but it's surrounded by satellite towns, edge cities as suburban sprawl not in a grid. In fact the biggest difference between ATL and D.C. Besides the core is more urban is D.C. Have more rail connect edge cities. Atlanta not have the freeways of Houston and Dallas but Atlanta can develop silver springs, Bethesda, crystal cities and etc and connect with transit.
I'm not against improving roads but that need to be Atlanta first and second ring suburbs. gwinnett county is going to hit a million that needs attention not expand roads in exurban counties.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
