$1.2 billion downtown terminal on track for 2017 opening (Atlanta: to buy, incomes)

[cqholt]

In cities that are dense and lack adequate highway and road infrastructure that might be true, but that doesn't hold true in Atlanta. The marketplace chooses what is most efficient and the general population is not clamoring for more rail transit. They are happy driving their vehicles. The market determines what is most efficient as a whole. Efficiency can't just be judged from emissions. Efficiency is also about derived value for the user. I could take a bus, transfer, bus, then train, transfer, the train and 1 mile walk, but that is incredibly time inefficient. It might be cheaper and better for the environment, but it is inefficient because my time and freedom to move as I wish is more important than those other factors. How much is your freedom to move about worth? I value it greatly. You might like being constrained to rail lines and slow bus routes, but I value my time and freedom. I think most in the Atlanta area would agree with me given the development patterns and general attitude of the populace.

You didn't read my follow up message either, but this is off topic and I am done talking about it so YOU need to get back on topic and stop trolling.

That is absolutely true. Off the top of my head, I know that prior to the recession there were several major plans to redevelop the areas around Doraville, Chamblee, Brookhaven, Lenox, West End, Lakewood, East Point, College Park around the "Lindbergh Model". Hopefully things swing in that direction once everything is back to "normal".

With the upswing in apartment construction, I can see apartment complexes surrounding these stations and becoming very desirable due to their location close to transit.

[cqholt]

New Falcons Stadium site could tie in with MMPT and Gulch redevelopment.
‘South site’ gains favor for new Atlanta Falcons stadium with retractable roof | SaportaReport
I think a site south of the current GA Dome would be better since it can connect with existing MARTA stations, infrastructure, and the booming Castleberry Hill neighborhood. It could go a long way in helping redevelopment of South Downtown. The north site would be too far from existing MARTA and disconnected from downtown. Atlanta doesn't need the typical sea of parking lots to host tailgating. We have our own special brand of tailgating 'under-the-bridge'.

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Imagine instead of building the Metro, they spent an equal amount of money on highway infrastructure. The area would be much different, but I think the culture and development patterns would be different and the city would get by just fine.

There wouldn't be much of a city left. DC would have to be practically destroyed with highways coming in from all direction to accomodate the massive workforce in downtown DC. There would need to be 8-10 lane highways coming into the city from all sides including I-66, I-270, I-95, US 50, . DC's dense urban scale would be a shadow of the past. This is basically what happened to Atlanta. The city has been decimated by highways. It's taken almost all the urbanity out of the city of Atlanta completely fracturing the urban core.

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by MDAllstar

There wouldn't be much of a city left. DC would have to be practically destroyed with highways coming in from all direction to accomodate the massive workforce in downtown DC. There would need to be 8-10 lane highways coming into the city from all sides including I-66, I-270, I-95, US 50, . DC's dense urban scale would be a shadow of the past. This is basically what happened to Atlanta. The city has been decimated by highways. It's taken almost all the urbanity out of the city of Atlanta completely fracturing the urban core.

Had this been built in the 60s like it had been done in other cities, the development patterns would've changed. Sure you can't do it now, but 40-50 years ago, it could've been done. It was most everywhere else.

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by cqholt

You didn't read my follow up message either, but this is off topic and I am done talking about it so YOU need to get back on topic and stop trolling.

Trolling? Really? Adding a point of view based on facts and logic is not trolling. Just because I don't blindly cheerlead every proposed transit project like you does not make it trolling. I've shared my views on commuter rail here several times. I'm not anti-transit or pro-road or anything like that. I am pro good stewardship of the taxpayers money. If this is built with private funds, great. However, my business background makes me wonder why on earth an investor would gamble so big on a project that is based on a 'build it and they will come' strategy. I'd wait until there is a concrete plan in place to add real streetcar (not the weak little tourism line that doesn't go anywhere) and commuter rail lines are being funded and built. Until then, I wouldn't spend a penny on real estate nor would I move one bucket of dirt. Until there is a plan in place, the risk is not worth it.

Many of these topics blend together and overlap. I don't start a new thread everytime there is a potential spin-off topic in a thread. It was my understanding that we keep things grouped together.

[cqholt]

Trolling? Really? Adding a point of view based on facts and logic is not trolling. Just because I don't blindly cheerlead every proposed transit project like you does not make it trolling. I've shared my views on commuter rail here several times. I'm not anti-transit or pro-road or anything like that. I am pro good stewardship of the taxpayers money. If this is built with private funds, great. However, my business background makes me wonder why on earth an investor would gamble so big on a project that is based on a 'build it and they will come' strategy. I'd wait until there is a concrete plan in place to add real streetcar (not the weak little tourism line that doesn't go anywhere) and commuter rail lines are being funded and built. Until then, I wouldn't spend a penny on real estate nor would I move one bucket of dirt. Until there is a plan in place, the risk is not worth it.

Many of these topics blend together and overlap. I don't start a new thread everytime there is a potential spin-off topic in a thread. It was my understanding that we keep things grouped together.

Big Daddy Greg said to stick to the OP so that's what I did.
The investors are going to make money from the office buildings and residential buildings on the property.

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Big Daddy Greg said to stick to the OP so that's what I did.
The investors are going to make money from the office buildings and residential buildings on the property.

Assuming that their is a demand for downtown office space. The demand for this space depends heavily on the transportation links arriving. Without the commuter rail, what is the appeal of downtown office space? There isn't much of a market for one and a largely empty $1.2 billion train station doesn't so much to add to the appeal. Unless this becomes the regions transit hub with train links to the suburbs, what does this add? A clean place for greyhound buses? That won't draw in the office tenants.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Americans like the most efficient form of transportation.

That's what it's all about for me. When it's more convenient to take transit, and assuming the cost is competitive, that's probably what I'll do. That's the same judgment I make about driving.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by cqholt

I think those that qualify for medicaid get reduced fare. MARTA > Fares And Discounts > Half Fare (Senior & Disabled)
Also, local colleges have reduced fare programs.

That's probably a pretty good percentage of riders. So they're only paying .95 per trip?

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by cqholt
I think those that qualify for medicaid get reduced fare. MARTA > Fares And Discounts > Half Fare (Senior & Disabled)
Also, local colleges have reduced fare programs.

It's actually Medicare, not Medicaid...i.e. the elderly, not the poor.