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.
Just for comparison, here is a map of the limited access roads here in the Dallas Fort Worth area. The green roads are toll roads, the others multi-lane limited access freeways. This does not include an outer beltway being mapped to encircle the whole region. Would be interesting to overlay this on Atlanta... even just the Dallas side without Fort Worth... to see what an improvent to traffic flow this kind of road network would do for the Atlanta region. Note the great east/west access to the north of Dallas.
Even with all those freeways, Dallas/Ft. Worth still struggles with bad traffic all over the place. Plopping down a highway for local traffic relief almost never works in the long run; it just encourages more people to drive. This phenomenon has been documented multiple times and is one of the major reasons why the suburb-to-city live-and-work model failed. DFW has sprawl that is just as bad as here; that is THE reason why they struggle with traffic. By contrast, freight needs to get from Point A to Point B regardless of the traffic, meaning that more trucks won't take to the highways simply because they are cleared up. The only question is the route the trucks take.
When I think of light rail - that's Chicago's EL (electric) system. Heavy rail (or 150#/ft) is Metra or CNW, Milwaukee Road which uses large EMD engines.
I understand your line of logic, but when discussing transit
Metra is a commuter rail, the chicago El, DC Metro, and ATL's MARTA is heavy rail.
The heavy rail requires full grade separation, but it is higher capacity and can start and stop much more rapidly.
Light rail often looks like large street cars. They are lower and lighter in profile and can operate on streets.
The move less people and often can't start and stop as fast.
Even with all those freeways, Dallas/Ft. Worth still struggles with bad traffic all over the place. Plopping down a highway for local traffic relief almost never works in the long run; it just encourages more people to drive. This phenomenon has been documented multiple times and is one of the major reasons why the suburb-to-city live-and-work model failed. DFW has sprawl that is just as bad as here; that is THE reason why they struggle with traffic. By contrast, freight needs to get from Point A to Point B regardless of the traffic, meaning that more trucks won't take to the highways simply because they are cleared up. The only question is the route the trucks take.
I realize it is not a scientific poll and is only my perception, but getting around DFW is easier for me than it was getting around Atlanta when traffic congestion (or lack thereof) is the only thing being considered. I lived in Marietta then, live in McKinney now, McKinney is further out from Dallas than Marietta is to Atlanta, but I feel I can get to downtown Dallas in rush hour about the same as I did from Marietta to downtown Atlanta.
But the kicker to me is my commute 17 miles due west to Frisco. I can do it in almost 17 minutes, the 121 tollway is completely speed limit even in my morning commute. Add to the fact that I have been away from the ATL for almost 9 years now. Try going from Roswell or Alpharetta to Marietta or Acworth in that time (similar east/west commute).
we don't need any more interstates. we aren't dallas, we aren't LA. we need to stop cutting through the countryside, destroying the natural resources and historical sites that surround us. it's absurd to want to build a freeway for "traffic control" that far out when it's incredibly obvious when you drive in traffic that the majority of traffic doesn't occur that far out.
look at I-75/I-85 during the day for example. it's as wide as it's ever going to get, and it's STILL backed up hell to breakfast. atlanta has changed and we are going to have traffic like this as long as we are going to be a city.
the problem is that we don't have adequate means of transportation outside of vehicles, so when the traffic's bad— everyone's stuck! in other major metropolitan areas you have commuter rail, more heavy rail coverage, etc., so even though the traffic is bad, people have the opportunity to travel around the area by ALTERNATE MEANS.
we don't need any more interstates. we aren't dallas, we aren't LA. we need to stop cutting through the countryside, destroying the natural resources and historical sites that surround us. it's absurd to want to build a freeway for "traffic control" that far out when it's incredibly obvious when you drive in traffic that the majority of traffic doesn't occur that far out.
look at I-75/I-85 during the day for example. it's as wide as it's ever going to get, and it's STILL backed up hell to breakfast. atlanta has changed and we are going to have traffic like this as long as we are going to be a city.
the problem is that we don't have adequate means of transportation outside of vehicles, so when the traffic's bad— everyone's stuck! in other major metropolitan areas you have commuter rail, more heavy rail coverage, etc., so even though the traffic is bad, people have the opportunity to travel around the area by ALTERNATE MEANS.
The problem is even if these transit infrastructures were to be built would the difference in overall ridership really have that much of an effect on the amount of traffic on the interstates.
The problem is even if these transit infrastructures were to be built would the difference in overall ridership really have that much of an effect on the amount of traffic on the interstates.
Stop refuting these points with common sense. It messes up the argument.
The problem is even if these transit infrastructures were to be built would the difference in overall ridership really have that much of an effect on the amount of traffic on the interstates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks
Stop refuting these points with common sense. It messes up the argument.
that's not the point, do you not understand what i'm saying? we will always have traffic. there is nothing we can do to clear the roads. look at what happened when they widened 400— not much. the growth was so fast that it just clogged up again after they opened the lanes up. the same thing when they added the fifth lane during rush hour. we can add new interstates all we want, but we're still going to have bad traffic. the reason i'm pushing for transit is to get people from point A to point B despite the traffic. a city as large as atlanta is going to have traffic, period, but if you have transit, those who are really in a hurry have an opportunity to get around the traffic. if you don't build transit, eventually traffic is just going to be a complete standstill almost all the time. commuting will be a thing of the past— people will have to move much closer to work. is that good in the long run? sure. but as for functionality in the short term, it leaves a lot of people unable to get around.
that's not the point, do you not understand what i'm saying? we will always have traffic. there is nothing we can do to clear the roads. look at what happened when they widened 400— not much. the growth was so fast that it just clogged up again after they opened the lanes up. the same thing when they added the fifth lane during rush hour. we can add new interstates all we want, but we're still going to have bad traffic. the reason i'm pushing for transit is to get people from point A to point B despite the traffic. a city as large as atlanta is going to have traffic, period, but if you have transit, those who are really in a hurry have an opportunity to get around the traffic. if you don't build transit, eventually traffic is just going to be a complete standstill almost all the time. commuting will be a thing of the past— people will have to move much closer to work. is that good in the long run? sure. but as for functionality in the short term, it leaves a lot of people unable to get around.
It isn't always about having completely clear roads. I think we had to throw that out the door a long time ago.
...but it is about how many workers can get to specific areas and it is about how far away someone can feasibly commute from.
While traffic won't go away, we can make road changes to allow more workers into an area from further away. We can make changes to encourage employers to move to different locations to spread out the traffic and congestion (and wealth).
One thing I'm sure of is everything can't be a transit-only approach. Although I want transit too.
The real question is take the transit arguments away. What are the right road investments to make us prosperous, because ultimately that is a piece of the puzzle that attracts employers and workers and helps our quality of life.
People in the ATL area are scared Atlanta will become the next Chicago, D.C., or NYC so they vibrantly reject any Transportation plan unless it involves widening freeways to 16 lanes. More transit in Atlanta will help it along the way of becoming a truly, world class city in the likes of NYC, Chicago, LA, SF, D.C., Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, etc. Every single successful, world class city has an extensive transit system EXCEPT LA which is extremely unique. All of the top 10 cities in the world have a transit system that takes you across the city and metro area. What does that tell you? Why don't people in Atlanta like progress???? Progression towards the future? They only think of the now, not 20, 30, or even 50 years down the road. WE WANT 16 LANE HIGHWAYS NOWWWW. 5 years down the road, traffic reports of stop and go on this new Northern Arc. Sprawls goes out to Athens. Athens becomes part of the Atlanta metro. Density of Atlanta metro now <1000 psm because of how sprawly it is.
Atlanta used to be progressive. Creating the only heavy rail/subway like transit in the South and still basically that way even now. Now it struggles to be progressive. It's a struggle to progress. Atlanta is lucky it got the Olympics(which is probably because of the heavy rail in the first place) because it would be no where near as recognized as a city if it hadn't gotten the Olympics.
People in the ATL area are scared Atlanta will become the next Chicago, D.C., or NYC so they vibrantly reject any Transportation plan unless it involves widening freeways to 16 lanes. More transit in Atlanta will help it along the way of becoming a truly, world class city in the likes of NYC, Chicago, LA, SF, D.C., Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, etc. Every single successful, world class city has an extensive transit system EXCEPT LA which is extremely unique. All of the top 10 cities in the world have a transit system that takes you across the city and metro area. What does that tell you? Why don't people in Atlanta like progress???? Progression towards the future? They only think of the now, not 20, 30, or even 50 years down the road. WE WANT 16 LANE HIGHWAYS NOWWWW. 5 years down the road, traffic reports of stop and go on this new Northern Arc. Sprawls goes out to Athens. Athens becomes part of the Atlanta metro. Density of Atlanta metro now <1000 psm because of how sprawly it is.
Atlanta used to be progressive. Creating the only heavy rail/subway like transit in the South and still basically that way even now. Now it struggles to be progressive. It's a struggle to progress. Atlanta is lucky it got the Olympics(which is probably because of the heavy rail in the first place) because it would be no where near as recognized as a city if it hadn't gotten the Olympics.
atlanta will come around, once we get enough out-of-towners, or once the area becomes more integrated. the biggest problem is racism. if you talk to any of these anti-transit advocates for a long period of time, and they get to trust you, they'll tell you, well, i just don't want *those* people coming to my area. that's really what it's all about. just about every person i've talked to who is anti-transit has that same problem. it's a sickness of the mind, a mental delusion. but somehow they think that they're right.
they'll even try to justify it by saying 'well, i know some black people that are alright, so i can't be racist. it's those other blacks', when you know good and damn well that you could fill up a station with black professionals, CEO types and they'd feel the same way.
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.
