City of Atlanta, Cherokee and Henry County Fastest Growing in Metro Atlanta (Alpharetta: condos, townhomes)

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

I didn't ask for exact dollar amounts. I'm simply asking what you want to make equal. That doesn't involve a single number. You have very, very strong opinions on this, but won't even say what those opinions are based on. "I want it equal" or "I want it balanced" is extremely vague and holds no actual meaning. I get it...you want modes to have equal share, but of what pie? I couldn't walk in to a meeting and say "We need things to be better for people", but not specify what that even means. No one would pay attention and I would be ignored.

You could say something like "I want the budget for GDOT and MARTA to be equal, even though they serve vastly different geographical areas and populations". You could say "We should charge a large amount for parking at MARTA stations to dissuade people from driving to MARTA and not subsidize that parking". You could say "10% of all road construction project budgets should be for sidewalk and bike lanes". Then we could have actual discussions based on possible policy, and determine exactly how mismatched that funding is. It's impossible to debate with vague generalities.

I have said it before and others seem to get that I am saying that the dollar amount at the Fed and State level for car infrastructure should be equal or surpassed by fed / state spending on transit + ped + bike infrastructure. That is what I am asking to be equal. You can silo that into different agencies however you want. MARTA is not a state agency but could still be given state grants. Or the state could fund commuter rail or give grants to a company like Virgin Trains USA to build rail between Atlanta and Savannah. Feds could give grants to local governments for bike / ped trail projects or increase funding for things like Amtrak.

Just stop the disproportionate subsidy in favor of cars. Even out the funding for the modes. Don't obsess over which agency has it's name on it.

But if you wonder why I have found it is useless to get into the details with you anymore, when the facts do run counter to what you are arguing then you simply try to discredit the facts and / or source. Like in this other thread today where you are doubting injury data simply because you "...have never seen a single emergency vehicle..." there.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by bu2

In the US until construction costs skyrocketed in the last couple of decades. Its called the gas tax. In fact, a substantial portion of the federal gas tax was subsidizing transit.

Making the argument that we should subsidize transit is fair. Claiming transit pays for itself just discredits everything else you say.

I'd actually blame most of that on government managed project costs. I mean, just look at the billions we are spending to rebuild 285 / 400. It is more than it would cost to double the amount of MARTA rail we have in the metro. So it is not like car infrastructure is immune from high costs. But if you look in Asia and Europe there are multiple examples of profitable transit companies operating today. So it certainly can be done.

Still, on a per mile basis just looking at costs, you are often right. A mile of urban subway is going to be way more expensive than a mile of two laned road in a green field.

But I am not expecting those costs to be the same. Just the total dollar amount we are spending on subsides for cars to be equaled out with subsidies for ped, bike, & transit.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I have said it before and others seem to get that I am saying that the dollar amount at the Fed and State level for car infrastructure should be equal or surpassed by fed / state spending on transit + ped + bike infrastructure. That is what I am asking to be equal. You can silo that into different agencies however you want. MARTA is not a state agency but could still be given state grants. Or the state could fund commuter rail or give grants to a company like Virgin Trains USA to build rail between Atlanta and Savannah. Feds could give grants to local governments for bike / ped trail projects or increase funding for things like Amtrak.

Okay. So we're getting closer. What you want is for statewide road spending, on tens of thousands of miles of roads and covering tens of thousands of square miles and serving millions of people per day, to equal spending on a transit system covering a small region, maybe 1/20th the area, and a small fraction of route mileage, covering far less than a million people.

Just stop the disproportionate subsidy in favor of cars. Even out the funding for the modes. Don't obsess over which agency has it's name on it.

So, you're evening it out over simple dollars, not route mileage, people served, area served, per capita, or anything else. So, by every metric possible, transit would (and is) far more subsidized, except in actual dollars.

But if you wonder why I have found it is useless to get into the details with you anymore, when the facts do run counter to what you are arguing then you simply try to discredit the facts and / or source. Like in this other thread today where you are doubting injury data simply because you "...have never seen a single emergency vehicle..." there.

There was no data. There were dots on a map. Thousands of dots. Apparently, every other intersection in the city is incredibly dangerous and responsible for numerous injuries. And no dots where we have seen multiple crashes with completely totaled cars on major roads, but multiple dots on a two-lane road which no one I know has ever seen any incident. I wish I could find it again. Sorry...I don't buy it unless I see the actual data.

EDIT: The map in question was in the document that CQ posted. It lists Moore's Mill and Bolton Rd. as one of the highest-injury intersections in the city. It classifies Bolton at Coronet as a higher-injury intersection. And others down the road as high. Now, if those intersections were that dangerous, don't you think someone who lives less than 3/4 mile from them, travels through them on an almost daily basis, and has a neighborhood discussion page where things like this are discussed frequently, would have heard of at least one incident in 14 years if it were that dangerous? I find it hard to believe that no one I know in a neighborhood of hundreds would have seen the results of one of the highest-injury intersections in the city. I'd like to see the actual data that led to that conclusion.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Okay. So we're getting closer. What you want is for statewide road spending, on tens of thousands of miles of roads and covering tens of thousands of square miles and serving millions of people per day, to equal spending on a transit system covering a small region, maybe 1/20th the area, and a small fraction of route mileage, covering far less than a million people.

Nope. I want it to be state wide (and nation wide) subsidies to stop favoring cars in total. Equal it out with spending on peds, bikes, and transit. So covering the same number of people and same area. Not just limited to the MARTA service area. Subsidy dollar for dollar. Offer grants for commuter rail to Athens, Bike paths in Valdosta, ect.

I feel as though this is more difficult than it should be. Did you really need me to answer this same question over again? I worry it still will not get us anywhere.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Nope. I want it to be state wide (and nation wide) subsidies to stop favoring cars in total. Equal it out with spending on peds, bikes, and transit. So covering the same number of people and same area. Not just limited to the MARTA service area. Subsidy dollar for dollar. Offer grants for commuter rail to Athens, Bike paths in Valdosta, ect.

I feel as though this is more difficult than it should be. Did you really need me to answer this same question over again? I worry it still will not get us anywhere.

That's literally exactly what I said. You want to spend the same dollars on transit and alternative methods even in the 99% of the country that is not urban, or even the 3/4 (or more?) of Georgia that is not urban. That's what's making me really confused as it makes literally no sense. So yeah...it is indeed more difficult than it should be, and why I'm trying to figure it out.

[atler8]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Definitely in terms of multi-family. Unless we balance that with more SFH's, we risk turning into a city of apartments.

Hmm...

Where & how within the COA city limits can the sfh numbers you are expressing concern over be increased so as to bring about more of a "..balance.." to use your word choice, with the large multi family unit permit numbers?

As has been noted here & in other previous threads, much of the current sfh construction in the City of Atlanta consists of replacement &/or infill housing.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

That's literally exactly what I said. You want to spend the same dollars on transit and alternative methods even in the 99% of the country that is not urban, or even the 3/4 (or more?) of Georgia that is not urban. That's what's making me really confused as it makes literally no sense. So yeah...it is indeed more difficult than it should be, and why I'm trying to figure it out.

124 of the 158 counties offer transit, which includes dial-a-ride. Transit is not just a urban thing.
Transit

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by cqholt

124 of the 158 counties offer transit, which includes dial-a-ride. Transit is not just a urban thing.
Transit

Sure, but look at the numbers. 80 rural systems with a total yearly ridership of 1.6 million, meaning 80 systems with a total daily ridership of about 4,400. That's 80 transit systems which added together serve fewer people than Wyman Street in your neighborhood, which isn't a busy street at all. All of the transit systems in Georgia serve fewer people than drive through just the connector each day (391,000 vs. over 400,000).

I'm just saying that doesn't warrant equal funding to a state-wide road network that serves probably over ten million people every day over a square mileage of nearly 60,000. Should it get more funding? Sure. Absolutely. Should it be equal? No way. If it were equal just because someone wants it that way, would it make financial sense? No. Would it be cool if it could be equal through more equal user fees? Heck yeah!

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

That's literally exactly what I said. You want to spend the same dollars on transit and alternative methods even in the 99% of the country that is not urban, or even the 3/4 (or more?) of Georgia that is not urban. That's what's making me really confused as it makes literally no sense. So yeah...it is indeed more difficult than it should be, and why I'm trying to figure it out.

It's not like non-car options only exist in dense urban cores and that anywhere outside of the center of Atlanta it is only possible to use a car. Heck, most the towns around Georgia were created around rail stops. Plus walking and biking is possible everywhere. Peachtree City probably has one of the best network of bike / walk / cart paths in the state. It is not urban at all.

And I am not saying the vast majority of infrastructure some places won't be car-only. Just that holistically we got to stop subsidizing and encouraging cars over other greener, healthier, safer, better for business, better urban design, more efficient, more equitable, and higher capacity. You can still drive all you want. The government merely needs to even out how it alloticats it's incentives and drivers need to pick up more of their costs directly.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Would it be cool if it could be equal through more equal user fees? Heck yeah!

That is really the main way this will happen. The current level of tax funding for cars is not sustainable. Expect a lot more tolls in the future. The remaining tax subsidies should be shifted to greener, healthier, safer, better for business, better urban design, more efficient, more equitable, and higher capacity alternatives. The government should want to encourage more of that and less car traffic.