Atlanta’s relationship with the automobile is reaching a crossroads. (Roswell: gated, maintenance)

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

For the record, I have no issue paying tolls to get to a place quicker

If you tasked me with improving traffic flow the one thing I would do is switch all highways to being funded 100% by congestion based tolling. I would do that before more transit funding or anything else.

[Need4Camaro]

Well, in either case we'll just have to see what happens!

Neither you or I am in direct control of what the metro does...lets just hope that the metro does whats best for the masses.

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

If you tasked me with improving traffic flow the one thing I would do is switch all highways to being funded 100% by congestion based tolling. I would do that before more transit funding or anything else.

This is extremely classist though.

No one wants to live in your Darwinistic libertarian transit world.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Highways are great for regional / interstate transportation and would have built most of the Eisenhower Interstate System. Of course Eisenhower didn't want the highways to go through cities.

Huh, the article references this, then it's source brings up the fact that the system had been developed some 20 years earlier and that Eisenhower "didn't know about that". Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.

So yeah, 285 would have been a good distance away to stop the highways.

So, then I guess a much larger major arterial or non-interstate highway network would be in place. A dozen or more 4-6 lane divided, limited access roads? Certainly, you don't think our network of 2-lane winding back roads would be sufficient? I can think of very, very few cities which don't have a network of major roads or highways coming to within just a couple of miles of their main core. In the US, there are pretty much none. Internationally, most large cities have at least a few large highways or a good number of major arterials, and they also have huge transit systems.

Originally Posted by jsvh

If you tasked me with improving traffic flow the one thing I would do is switch all highways to being funded 100% by congestion based tolling. I would do that before more transit funding or anything else.

Would you be willing to deal with economic consequences?

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

This is extremely classist though.

No one wants to live in your Darwinistic libertarian transit world.

Still waiting for what your solutions are. Easy enough to complain about the status quo and shoot down other people's ideas.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

So, then I guess a much larger major arterial or non-interstate highway network would be in place. A dozen or more 4-6 lane divided, limited access roads? Certainly, you don't think our network of 2-lane winding back roads would be sufficient? I can think of very, very few cities which don't have a network of major roads or highways coming to within just a couple of miles of their main core. In the US, there are pretty much none. Internationally, most large cities have at least a few large highways or a good number of major arterials, and they also have huge transit systems.

Per capita our surface street network is on par with most everywhere else at the moment. We do need to legalize more density and require developers to build street grid connectivity (actually allowing developers to inter connect the street grid would be a really great start, right now it is illegal for developers to end a street at their property line to allow for other developers to build connectivity through their property).

I guess it really just depends which hypothetical scenario we are talking about. Were urban highways never built? Are we just instituting congestion tolling?

And yes, just like highways existing I am fine with roads existing. Though it is important that we create streets OR roads and not "stroads" which there are too many of in the metro:

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Would you be willing to deal with economic consequences?

Oh, mysterious and terrifying... Pray tell what economic consequences will we bring on ourselves by tolling our highways that is so common all over the world?

[cqholt]

Boston by that period already had a transit system that outclasses what we have today in Atlanta... They werent in anywhere near as dire need as we are for transit.

Boston has land use to match it's transit system.

[brown_dog_us]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Oh, mysterious and terrifying... Pray tell what economic consequences will we bring on ourselves by tolling our highways that is so common all over the world?

What if the employers found it too hard to attract employees to the urban core and moved out to the suburbs?

[Need4Camaro]

In either case, we can beat at this all day and night but realistically...

Atlanta is not going to toll its inner-city highways. They havent even thought of proposing that... nor would I recommend they try it especially while there's no transit throughout most of the metro.

Unforunately its equally unlikely that we will see the major corridors we need in the suburbs either built, or upgraded...

Right now it seems the only real hope is Transit, which has some promising things but Im not exactly excited yet...I want to see what they they actually do.

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Oh, mysterious and terrifying... Pray tell what economic consequences will we bring on ourselves by tolling our highways that is so common all over the world?

You mean the fact that most people don’t have alternative ways to get work here and many more can’t aford to pay a toll just to get to work?

I know you could care less about the "poors" but that not how you run a society.