ATL has only 21st worst traffic in USA...LA first, Austin 4th (Atlanta: sales, rental)

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by bu2

And doing nothing degrades the quality of life if the city continues to grow. Austin (#4 on the OP's list) adopted that approach from the early 70s until early 90s when it began to strangle on its traffic. Don't build it and they won't come. But they did anyways. And the city continued to spread out, mostly along the one major freeway, I-35. Now they realize is was a huge mistake and are desperately trying to catch up with a series of toll roads. And Austin is a much more liberal, green area than Atlanta.

Traffic might be bad, but total commute times in Austin are not. I am a big fan of (government) doing nothing. Let people have the freedom to make the choice. Every time you build a freeway you are forcing people to move to cheaper land away from their job to take advantage of a subsidy. You are then hurting the options for people to choose a close-in walkable lifestyle. You take away their customers and take their taxes to pave the suburbs.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Traffic might be bad, but total commute times in Austin are not. I am a big fan of (government) doing nothing. Every time you build a freeway you are forcing people to move to cheaper land away from their job to take advantage of a subsidy. You are then hurting the options for people to choose a close-in walkable lifestyle. You take away their customers and take their taxes to pave the suburbs.

So you would try to force everyone to choose a lifestyle you like, instead of allowing options.

Reality is higher density drives up prices, forcing people further out as many can't afford higher priced housing in reasonably safe neighborhoods. And many people can't afford private schools, so they want the good schools further out. Some people like having more space, which they can't afford closer in. And some people don't like fixing things up, which you get in the older, close-in housing.

And there is always this thing called competition. If other cities do it better, they will get the jobs. Of course, if Atlanta becomes like Detroit, that will solve the traffic problem.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Traffic might be bad, but total commute times in Austin are not. I am a big fan of (government) doing nothing. Every time you build a freeway you are forcing people to move to cheaper land away from their job to take advantage of a subsidy. You are then hurting the options for people to choose a close-in walkable lifestyle. You take away their customers and take their taxes to pave the suburbs.

Austin is not as spread out as the larger cities like Houston, Dallas and Atlanta. But its getting there. It takes a long time in rush hour to get to far North Austin or Georgetown on I-35 or 183 or out 290 to the southwest.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by bu2

So you would try to force everyone to choose a lifestyle you like, instead of allowing options.

Reality is higher density drives up prices, forcing people further out as many can't afford higher priced housing in reasonably safe neighborhoods. And many people can't afford private schools, so they want the good schools further out. Some people like having more space, which they can't afford closer in. And some people don't like fixing things up, which you get in the older, close-in housing.

And there is always this thing called competition. If other cities do it better, they will get the jobs. Of course, if Atlanta becomes like Detroit, that will solve the traffic problem.

No. People should have the choice to spend more on rent (per sq ft) and live in the city or spend more on tolls and live in the burbs. Currently we are forcing those that do not have money to live in the suburbs by giving away highways for free (among many other suburbs subsidies). You are taking tax money from those that live in the cities to subsidize your suburban highways. Stop forcing people to the suburbs to save money. Drop the subsidies and let people spend their money how they choose.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by jsvh

No. People should have the choice to spend more on rent (per sq ft) and live in the city or spend more on tolls and live in the burbs. Currently we are forcing those that do not have money to live in the suburbs by giving away highways for free (among many other suburbs subsidies). You are taking tax money from those that live in the cities to subsidize your suburban highways. Stop forcing people to the suburbs to save money. Drop the subsidies and let people spend their money how they choose.

There aren't going to be many free new lanes in the suburbs. Its going to be overwhelmingly HOT lanes and toll roads if anything gets built at all.

Americans are moving more and more to the suburbs, by choice. Crime, schools and real estate economics. There's only so much land in the city and as it gets more dense, it gets more and more expensive. And cities seem unable to solve the school problems and aren't doing well enough on crime.

[Mishap]

Here's my take as a frequent business traveler that sits in other people's traffic for the past 3 yrs. As a native Atlantan, I've lived the traffic having been all around the metro(commuting as much as 25k+/yr down to last year where I drove less than 5k) so I consider myself a commuting expert. Atlanta traffic isn't that bad if you can afford to live in town or close to corporate areas and compared to most other places it's definitely still affordable.

LA - 5 months
Doing this 4 days/wk right now. They have rail, buses, etc but just a ridiculous # of people and a complete lack of density to make any of it worthwhile. I do the reverse commute from DT LA -> Irwindale on the 10 which is 23 miles but about 25-30 min and maybe 40 min in evenings when there are events downtown. Drive in to the office from the airport is ~1hr most days. People going the other way into DT in the AM are blocked all the way out 10-15 miles pretty much every day. The roads aren't that big but there are multiple parallel freeways that all get similarly clogged. Most of the client team have 1-2+hr commutes from more affordable areas every day so they never work extra hrs. Have started taking luxury rental cars just to make all the driving more bearable.

SF - 3wks
Ridiculous density, geographic challenges, and people trying to commute in b/c of housing costs. Rough to drive/park but was mostly cruising on the 101 out to various sites in either Palo Alto or San Jose so didn't experience the crush that is to getting into SF. It's not pretty but there are alternatives to driving that actually work so that helps but I didn't take the trains.

Austin
Just visited but saw that it's just growth outrunning infrastructure so I can't say how it'll play out. Got stuck and putted along a ways. Feels like it could either go either way ie LA or Seattle.

NYC - 3wks
Why would you drive here? There is far more hassle than it's worth unless you're moving something large or sightseeing w/ a bunch of people. Trains, cabs, and even bicycle work better than trying to figure out why you're paying $30/hr for parking. Nothing like circling for parking longer than it would have taken to just ride the train in. My friends take Citi bikes everywhere they can these days b/c it's cheaper and faster.

San Jose - 2 wks
The 101 is stupidly small for the amt of people getting around Silicon Valley. Not a ton of density out this way. Trains are actually used by people though but the whole bay makes things very linear & spread out. Lots of corporate buses to get techies to their jobs so even if you're stuck on a bus at least you can sleep/work.

Seattle - 10 months
Roads are pretty small relative to the population but there are trains, buses, etc that are actually effective in moving a lot of people. Colleagues would actually use them on the weekends rather than drive between Bellevue and DT Seattle. The lake makes things a bit rough getting into DT but a lot of people commute out to Bellevue/Redmond/etc so it can be bidirectional. The run from Bellevue to SEA was nightmarish most afternoons but I don't know if most people live down that way given the COL of Bellevue. Lot of people bike their way in to work since there are solid paths everywhere...I'm talking people going DT Seattle to Redmond even in the rain. Lot of badly designed freeway interchanges + a lot of construction on 520 probably slows stuff down too.

Others:
Houston - the only place where I managed to drive 500 miles in a single weekend. Road design sucks. Got stuck everywhere and my phone battery couldn't even survive navigation from one place to the next. Hard to imagine a place worse than LA traffic but they might take it.
Dallas - ick. Like Atlanta but bigger and more toll roads and traffic. Plus stupid hot.
Boston - avoided driving so not too bad. Got to the airport pretty fast and was able to walk most places.
DC - Metro + cab = no driving and decent density. Would avoid driving like the plague though unless you lived out in MD or VA.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by bu2

There aren't going to be many free new lanes in the suburbs. Its going to be overwhelmingly HOT lanes and toll roads if anything gets built at all.

Yes, it is a good thing. We should be paying for existing maintenance that way too. Not general fund taxes.

Originally Posted by bu2

Americans are moving more and more to the suburbs, by choice. Crime, schools and real estate economics. There's only so much land in the city and as it gets more dense, it gets more and more expensive. And cities seem unable to solve the school problems and aren't doing well enough on crime.

I think the reverse of that is true. But, all I am suggesting is that you let people make the choice between more expensive transportation to the suburbs or higher rent in the city. People can decide for themselves which one is better.

[Mishap]

In town housing in Atlanta is still relatively affordable. It's not like NYC where a hovel costs $1M+. We don't have ridiculous land constraints (or any constraints at all) that let us basically build all the way to NC which acts as a bit of a cap on housing prices since there's always more forest to bulldoze. As long as people continue to make their desire to have massive yards and entertainment rooms/man caves you're going to have to drive further and further out.

Yes, you can't have 5k sf for 200k inside the perimeter at a good school but honestly do most people need as much house as they wind up buying? My fiancee's friends all have 4-5bdr homes in the burbs (most are DINKs) meaning a lot of wasted heating/cooling. My brother's loft in Buckhead offers plenty of room for their son while keeping them within 15 min of their jobs and walking distance of the elementary school. It's far from cheap but not out of the budget of 2X working professionals and I don't see them jumping for the burbs anytime soon.

[magnetar]

Atlanta's had notably bad traffic for so long that the city is overly self-conscious about it, like a prominent birthmark. The reality is that every urban area in the United States is congested. If you want to see a micro example, try driving on 280 in Birmingham, or Abercorn St. in Savannah, during rush hour. For a mega-example, visit DC around commute time. DC's traffic was so bad I couldn't ever get comfortable driving there. When I lived in Baltimore (where I sat in gridlock every day, despite having a reverse commute) I'd never even bother trying to drive into DC; I'd just drive to a Metro station and take the train in. Compared to all that, Atlanta's traffic can certainly be annoying — but that's why I bought a house on the east side, intown.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by jsvh

No. People should have the choice to spend more on rent (per sq ft) and live in the city or spend more on tolls and live in the burbs. Currently we are forcing those that do not have money to live in the suburbs by giving away highways for free (among many other suburbs subsidies). You are taking tax money from those that live in the cities to subsidize your suburban highways. Stop forcing people to the suburbs to save money. Drop the subsidies and let people spend their money how they choose.

How are "we" forcing anyone to live anywhere? Intown, suburbs, on the moon or otherwise?