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.
Why is New Orleans ridership so low?Its an urban paradise you would think would have a better transit.
Economy, also street cars are really slow. Oh and the street cars don't go into the suburbs. Although I believe the Broad St bus is one of the higher riderships in the south.
Economy, also street cars are really slow. Oh and the street cars don't go into the suburbs. Although I believe the Broad St bus is one of the higher riderships in the south.
Im not knocking New Orleans but he brought it up that transits and urbanity go hand and hand which he says you cant have one without the other,but I sure so see a double standard when he/speaks.
Personally I think he has this desire for American cities to all be more like Europe.
Yes Americans should embrace urbanity but we should also embrace how we like to live.Atlanta will never be a car independent city just like L.A. or rustic Southern jewel like New Orleans. no matter how good the transit gets,people will prefer to drive as long as its not expensive.
Im in Montreal right now and there is still traffic just like the subways are packed with people in the mornings just like in Atlanta at this time.
The trains are so packed with people you sometimes have to wait and fight to get on a car in both cities.
The only difference is that Atlanta has much less times after business hours unless its a holiday weekend or special function.
Atlanta is rapidly changing and becoming much more cohesive with large scale reuse projects as well as ground up developments and I do believe the OP got it right that both are sprawling car centric cities BUT there is a noticeable difference in how people use transit and how Atlanta is infilling even in its "sprawling" suburbs.
Never mind the fact that if I live in the city or closer in burb, it really has no bearing on the average Atlantan but more of a "talking point" for people on city data.
NOLA is dead wrong and he has clearly been proven so time after time yet he refuses to believe what he think he knows,he does not.
I'm way late for this but I would kill to have some of the highways DFW has in Atlanta... on top of a Heavy Rail and Commuter rail System that is offered in Chicago...
...But you know what will happen? Atlanta becomes a second Chicago and EXPLODES in size.
I'm way late for this but I would kill to have some of the highways DFW has in Atlanta... on top of a Heavy Rail and Commuter rail System that is offered in Chicago...
...But you know what will happen? Atlanta becomes a second Chicago and EXPLODES in size.
More and bigger roads = more and bigger sprawl = more and bigger traffic = more and bigger problems.
The Texas cities keep building bigger and wider and longer and higher freeways because the geography, by and large, has no natural limitations.
The blessing and curse of Atlanta is that the freeway system was built along the lay of the land, rising and falling and curving with the natural landscape of Georgia. In many places, including the Brookwood Split where I-75 and I-85 separate north of Midtown, the freeways pass through ridges of Stone Mountain granite that had to be blasted away during construction, creating a near tunnel affect. The surface street network is often criticized by outsiders for not being built on a logical "grid" like most cities, but doing that in Atlanta would have required leveling many hills and destroying (or redirecting) creeks and streams that flow naturally through the region -- just like they did to Manhattan with the NYC street grid.
I'll take Atlanta's natural beauty over the ugly, flat, freeway crazed landscape of Dallas any day.
More and bigger roads = more and bigger sprawl = more and bigger traffic = more and bigger problems.
The Texas cities keep building bigger and wider and longer and higher freeways because the geography, by and large, has no natural limitations.
The blessing and curse of Atlanta is that the freeway system was built along the lay of the land, rising and falling and curving with the natural landscape of Georgia. In many places, including the Brookwood Split where I-75 and I-85 separate north of Midtown, the freeways pass through ridges of Stone Mountain granite that had to be blasted away during construction, creating a near tunnel affect. The surface street network is often criticized by outsiders for not being built on a logical "grid" like most cities, but doing that in Atlanta would have required leveling many hills and destroying (or redirecting) creeks and streams that flow naturally through the region -- just like they did to Manhattan with the NYC street grid.
I'll take Atlanta's natural beauty over the ugly, flat, freeway crazed landscape of Dallas any day.
I certainly understand a preference for the geography of Atlanta over the Texas cities but there's absolutely no way you can deny that the Texas cities have a much more extensive and appropriate road network for their sizes. It's simply a fact that metro Altanta has less roads and worse traffic.
I'm way late for this but I would kill to have some of the highways DFW has in Atlanta... on top of a Heavy Rail and Commuter rail System that is offered in Chicago...
...But you know what will happen? Atlanta becomes a second Chicago and EXPLODES in size.
Be careful for what you wish for...
Only in DFW, have I seen a damn roundabout on a highway. Every time I visit Fort Worth, I come close to having multiple accidents...
For the record... DFW is upgrading and expanding it's roads and it's rails. The public and government opinion of rail and bus transit in this area is definitely more open and progressive than in Georgia and the Metro ATL burbs.
More and bigger roads = more and bigger sprawl = more and bigger traffic = more and bigger problems.
The Texas cities keep building bigger and wider and longer and higher freeways because the geography, by and large, has no natural limitations.
The blessing and curse of Atlanta is that the freeway system was built along the lay of the land, rising and falling and curving with the natural landscape of Georgia. In many places, including the Brookwood Split where I-75 and I-85 separate north of Midtown, the freeways pass through ridges of Stone Mountain granite that had to be blasted away during construction, creating a near tunnel affect. The surface street network is often criticized by outsiders for not being built on a logical "grid" like most cities, but doing that in Atlanta would have required leveling many hills and destroying (or redirecting) creeks and streams that flow naturally through the region -- just like they did to Manhattan with the NYC street grid.
I'll take Atlanta's natural beauty over the ugly, flat, freeway crazed landscape of Dallas any day.
Aesthetically yes Atlanta is much more appealing. However more freeway improvement is a major necessity for any growing metropolis. Most people drive to work.
Or you can invest more in transit. Atlanta's commute shares should double in the next couple decades if you do it right, particularly as infill takes hold.
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.
