Atlanta Streetcar (Downtown Loop) progress (Glenwood: ranked, population, jobs)

[cqholt]

So you're spending huge guap for ridership that may or may not materialize? If you're going to spend money on a "starting point," then why not choose a cheaper alternative such as BRT

LRT is better suited for the BeltLine. The density on the eastside trail warrants rail-based transit and by connecting it to the downtown streetcar it will not require a transfer for riders from Virginia-Highland or Glenwood Park to Downtown or Midtown. Preventing transfer will encourage more use.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Because BRT is not as effective for this route since it is so dense.

Really? Denser than the DC suburbs where they're using BRT? Doubt it.

Montgomery Planning: Transportation - Bus Rapid Transit

Originally Posted by jsvh

But more importantly, it will not handle the capacity of a broader network

What capacity? Why is that even a concern? Should I also buy a mansion to house all of the expensive sports cars I'm sure to own 10 years from now?

Originally Posted by jsvh

My logic is that people want to live in an appealing area (to them) and have good transportation access to their job and areas they like to "play".

So basically, people want to have funnnnnnnnn. And that's a reason to spend a billion dollars?

Originally Posted by jsvh

So if it fits their route, those near it will take transit, but more so than that people and business will move to be closer to transit.

If that's the case, why aren't there hundreds of thousands of people in the metro area fighting tooth and nail to live near MARTA stations? And why are there still parking lots directly across the street from downtown MARTA stations and skyscrapers? If pent up demand were as strong as you suggest it is, then those lots would have been developed a long time ago.

Originally Posted by jsvh

The interstate highway network had to start somewhere, New York or London's subway had to start somewhere. So must this.

This is a silly comparsion. Manhattan in 1900 had a higher population and population density than the City of Atlanta will ever have. Public transit was an absolute necessity on an island that's only 23 square miles in size. They didn't build the New York Subway because a few people thought it would be hip. They built it because it was the best way to move large numbers of people around on an island that was short on space. The demand for transit was already there. Building the subway did not create the demand.

London is an ancient city that could not be easily retrofitted around autos. Same with Paris and many other European cities.

Not true for Atlanta. You have a low density, auto-centric city (and many people prefer it that way). I don't see how massive spending on public transit is going to boost ridership to the levels that would warrant additional heavy and light rail investment.

[cqholt]

Really? Denser than the DC suburbs where they're using BRT? Doubt it.

Montgomery Planning: Transportation - Bus Rapid Transit

That is the ugliest bus ever.

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

This is a silly comparsion. Manhattan in 1900 had a higher population and population density than the City of Atlanta will ever have. Public transit was an absolute necessity on an island that's only 23 square miles in size. They didn't build the New York Subway because a few people thought it would be hip. They built it because it was the best way to move large numbers of people around on an island that was short on space. The demand for transit was already there. Building the subway did not create the demand.


Not true for Atlanta. You have a low density, auto-centric city (and many people prefer it that way). I don't see how massive spending on public transit is going to boost ridership to the levels that would warrant additional heavy and light rail investment.

While it is true that Manhattan had a population density at that time (or ever) unlike that which Atlanta would ever experience, the subway absolute drove development in Manhattan (and the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens). Prior to the building of the subways and elevated lines, the only reliable way for most people get around was by foot. This meant that most of the city's poor were relegated to the denser south end of the island. Those who could afford carriages, built mansions and hotels north of Houston Street to be away from the from the poor folks south of it.

When the subways were built, it allowed people who formerly could only afford to live in the south end of the island to move north to Harlem, Washington Heights, and the Bronx. This is why Manhattan has this odd lay out of the traditionally poor immigrant neighborhoods of Little Italy, Chinatown and Alphabet City in the South (though those neighborhoods are no longer that), it's rich neighborhoods of the eastside in the middle, and then it's poor or middle class neighborhoods in the north like Harlem or Washington Heights + the Bronx.

To drive this point further home, here is an area of Northern part of Manhattan before the subway:



What would be the intersection of Broadway and 84th street in Manhattan in 1894


Same intersection today


Most of the upper part of Manhattan looked like the first picture above prior to the building of the subways, so yes, it did drive Manhattans density.

So don't doubt that Atlanta build transit will drive density. It has happened in other cities as well as here already. Relying on this idea that Atlanta is a car centric town and will always be is nonstarter. Residents of the city want it, the leadership wants it, and it's the next logical step in our city's development. Buses will not cut it for what we need to achieve.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by cqholt

That is the ugliest bus ever.

Who cares? The point is that if BRT can serve DC's denser suburbs than BRT could also serve Atlanta. The areas of Silver Spring, Maryland the BRT is set to serve range from 5,000 to 12,000 ppsm. That's denser than most of the route Atlanta's streetcar will serve. So it's not that population density will overwhelm a BRT line. That's just silly.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

While it is true that Manhattan had a population density at that time (or ever) unlike that which Atlanta would ever experience, the subway absolute drove development in Manhattan (and the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens).

The issue is not whether subways helped develop the rest of New York. The issue is whether NYC had a sufficient population density to justify construction of heavy rail in the first place. You just don't go building heavy rail hoping that the people will come later. If Manhattan had not been a borough with a population density of 51,086 ppsm in 1880, do you seriously think there would have been any contemplation of a subway system there? A population density that high can justify money being spent to rip up the streets and put tunnels underground. Census tracts hovering anywhere between 3,000 to 6,000 ppsm can't justify hundreds of millions (and possibly billions) being spent.

Originally Posted by waronxmas

So don't doubt that Atlanta build transit will drive density. It has happened in other cities as well as here already. Relying on this idea that Atlanta is a car centric town and will always be is nonstarter. Residents of the city want it, the leadership wants it, and it's the next logical step in our city's development. Buses will not cut it for what we need to achieve.

Man, Atlanta already has rapid transit and its densest census tract only has 21,189 ppsm! And that's with highrise buildings (and in a CBD). What makes you think building even more transit is going to densify Atlanta to the point where ridership becomes commensurate with such a huge investment of public funds? There are currently parking lots in the middle of Midtown Atlanta directly in front of skyscrapers and MARTA stations, so apparently heavy rail couldn't get the job done. Do you think a $700 billion light rail line (or a billion dollar fully built out streetcar system) will finally be the trigger that sets Atlanta down the road towards Manhattanization?

[Zanarkand A East]

I can't wait for this to connect to the Beltline Eastside Trail, which I've been enjoying alot lately. It'll also be fun to hang out on Edgewood more, since it's always been a pain to park there.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

Really? Denser than the DC suburbs where they're using BRT? Doubt it.

Yes. Downtown Atlanta is denser and will continue to grow denser than DC suburbs.

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

What capacity? Why is that even a concern? Should I also buy a mansion to house all of the expensive sports cars I'm sure to own 10 years from now?

Yes, if you seriously are planning to buy a lot of sports cars then you should plan to have a place to store them instead of waiting till your front lawn is filled with sports cars to decide what to do with them.

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

So basically, people want to have funnnnnnnnn. And that's a reason to spend a billion dollars?

No, getting people to and from work will likely get more of the usage once the system is built out. But people need transportation solutions for other trips as well.

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

If that's the case, why aren't there hundreds of thousands of people in the metro area fighting tooth and nail to live near MARTA stations? And why are there still parking lots directly across the street from downtown MARTA stations and skyscrapers? If pent up demand were as strong as you suggest it is, then those lots would have been developed a long time ago.

That is happening. MARTA has owned many of the lots near their stations and has started to sell / lease them to create urban developments: //www.city-data.com/forum/atlan...-projects.html Also, most of the lots in Midtown are getting absorbed and re-development is spreading into downtown.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Zanarkand A East

I can't wait for this to connect to the Beltline Eastside Trail, which I've been enjoying alot lately. It'll also be fun to hang out on Edgewood more, since it's always been a pain to park there.

Yea, agreed!

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Yes. Downtown Atlanta is denser and will continue to grow denser than DC suburbs.

Um, no, it's not. The densest Census tract anywhere near Downtown Atlanta is 12,280 ppsm. Silver Spring has a census tract that's 12,113 ppsm. And the census tract that's actually near the Metro station is 30,138 ppsm, which is denser than any census tract in the Atlanta metro area. Even Old Town Alexandria, which is not served by Metrorail, has a population density of 15,591 ppsm, which is also higher than Downtown Atlanta. So your whole "it's too dense to use BRT" argument is clearly some nonsense.

Mapping the 2010 U.S. Census - NYTimes.com

Originally Posted by jsvh

Yes, if you seriously are planning to buy a lot of sports cars then you should plan to have a place to store them instead of waiting till your front lawn is filled with sports cars to decide what to do.

Right. Just gimme the money and I'm on it.

Originally Posted by jsvh

No, getting people to and from work will likely get more of the usage once the system is built out. But people need transportation solutions for other trips as well.

Yep. Like buses.

Originally Posted by jsvh

That is happening. MARTA has owned many of the lots near their stations and has started to sell / lease them to create urban developments: //www.city-data.com/forum/atlan...-projects.html Also, most of the lots in Midtown are getting absorbed and re-development is spreading into downtown.

All of these areas need to be developed before there's even a conversation about building more transit lines. I mean, the transit lines are already there, but yet you have SFHs, empty lots, and in some cases forested areas within a stone's throw of the stations. Building more transit lines in Atlanta would be like caving into a kid's demands for Maine Lobster because he refuses to eat the Prime Rib that's already on his plate.