MARTA to make an $8 billion pitch to change the face of Atlanta (Clayton: deal, build)

[sumitsu]

Originally Posted by fieldm

Too early in the morning for trolling sir

In fairness to Arjay, he just asked a question (albeit in a slightly weighted manner). This would be my answer:

It is true that Atlanta's suburban sprawl has made Atlanta a vastly more difficult (and expensive) problem with regard to transit than it otherwise should have been, and I agree that encouraging density in the core is a worthy goal of regional public policy. (Certainly, as an in-town resident, I am all for enhancing in-town transit connectivity.)

However, to paraphrase a certain former Secretary of Defense, you have to formulate a transportation plan for the metro area you have, and not the one you wish you had. The reality is that the Atlanta area consists of a network of widely-dispersed residential and employment centers, and maximizing the utility of MARTA -- both for urban and suburban Atlantans -- requires that MARTA serve as many of the major nodes as it reasonably can, be they in the urban core or in the suburbs. Alpharetta is one of those nodes. So is Lithonia/Stonecrest (or so I am told; I don't know the area very well).

So the short answer to Arjay's question is that we must do both: extend rail lines to currently-underserved suburban centers as well as enhance connectivity in the city. In Atlanta, there is so much interplay between businesses and residents in the city and those in the suburbs that ignoring either one or the other reduces the usefulness of MARTA for everyone.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by fieldm

Too early in the morning for trolling sir

Why is this "trolling"? It's a very fundamental question.

[fieldm]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Why is this "trolling"? It's a very fundamental question.

Trolling because you say the same stuff daily in multiple threads

[cqholt]

Commuter Benefits Parity Is Fair for Transit Users But Might Actually Lead to More Driving - CityLab

[bu2]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Why is this "trolling"? It's a very fundamental question.

Its trolling because he doesn't like your opinion and doesn't want to hear people who don't agree.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Commuter Benefits Parity Is Fair for Transit Users But Might Actually Lead to More Driving - CityLab

Commuters are rational. Driving is usually a quicker, more convenient alternative.

Now if employers charge for parking and subsidize transit, then commuters start looking at the financial side and may save money taking transit, offsetting the convenience of driving.

If you just build it, they won't necessarily come. It has to make sense.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by bu2

Commuters are rational. Driving is usually a quicker, more convenient alternative.

Yep. I used to take MARTA daily. Took me an hour door to door. MARTA finally pushed me over the edge, and I adjusted my schedule slightly, takes me 20 minutes to drive door to door.

Now if employers charge for parking and subsidize transit, then commuters start looking at the financial side and may save money taking transit, offsetting the convenience of driving.

Mine does, still isn't worth it.

If you just build it, they won't necessarily come. It has to make sense.

Absolutely agreed. There are several components to that, one of which is reliability. Even scheduled headways of 2 minutes mean nothing if you can't ever count on them.

[sumitsu]

https://twitter.com/AdvanceATL/statu...36155104243712



And now it's on to the full Senate. (I think.)

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by sumitsu

https://twitter.com/AdvanceATL/statu...36155104243712



And now it's on to the full Senate. (I think.)

Is that the less toxic one?

[Gulch]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

Is that the less toxic one?

Yes