MARTA unveils its dream project list for November Referendum (occupancy, parks)

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I don't think it does. So why are we holding up the Brookhaven TOD?

It's my understanding the folks up there were concerned about increased traffic in an area that's already severely impacted. They know from hard experience that more apartments means more cars, regardless of the presence of a MARTA station.

Why are TODs on the south and west sides of town of concern to the Brookhaven TOD?

They're not. It's one or two people on this forum who feel that building yet another apartment complex in Brookhaven is critical to the welfare of the entire city. Their argument is that if this latest MARTA proposal doesn't go foward it is somehow a barrier to development elsewhere. Obviously it's not.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by arjay57

It's my understanding the folks up there were concerned about increased traffic in an area that's already severely impacted. They know from hard experience that more apartments means more cars, regardless of the presence of a MARTA station.

I am curious, what do you think the solution to traffic in Brookhaven and the metro is?

I mean you can't really think that stopping this TOD and even other new apartments will stop people from moving to the area. And even if it does push some of the people out of the area due to the lack of supply, that just means more and more people commuting through the area. So, even your best case is only hoping to slow the deterioration of traffic. But what is the solution?

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I am curious, what do you think the solution to traffic in Brookhaven and the metro is?

I mean you can't really think that stopping this TOD and even other new apartments will stop people from moving to the area. And even if it does push some of the people out of the area due to the lack of supply, that just means more and more people commuting through the area. So, even your best case is only hoping to slow the deterioration of traffic. But what is the solution?

I don't think there's any "magic bullet" solution for traffic in Brookhaven or elsewhere. It's just life in an urban area and people have to adapt to it. Traffic is actually a sign of health and vibrancy -- it's when you don't have it that folks need to start worrying.

You can make small incremental changes, such as timing the lights, adding turn lanes and creating more efficient intersections. You can encourage biking, walking and transit use. Staggered working hours and people working from home can also make a dent. To some degree, you can also limit and/or direct new development. In my opinion, it's helpful to improve the mix of uses and to foster walkable environments and TOD.

However, in the big picture, people simply have to adapt. And that takes time and patience.

One more apartment complex is not make or break (despite contentions that tapping the brakes on this latest MARTA proposal will lead to an apocalyptic housing crisis). Everyone knows the parking lot around the Brookhaven station will be redeveloped in due course. But let the good people up there work it out on their own schedule.

In the meantime, we've got plenty of other areas in Atlanta that are crying out for this kind of growth. Why don't we get cracking on that, instead of pounding on Brookavenites?

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I don't think there's any "magic bullet" solution for traffic in Brookhaven or elsewhere. It's just life in an urban area and people have to adapt to it. Traffic is actually a sign of health and vibrancy -- it's when you don't have it that folks need to start worrying.

You can make small incremental changes, such as timing the lights, adding turn lanes and creating more efficient intersections. You can encourage biking, walking and transit use. Staggered working hours and people working from home can also make a dent. To some degree, you can also limit and/or direct new development. In my opinion, it's helpful to improve the mix of uses and to foster walkable environments and TOD.

However, in the big picture, people simply have to adapt. And that takes time and patience.

One more apartment complex is not make or break (despite contentions that tapping the brakes on this latest MARTA proposal will lead to an apocalyptic housing crisis). Everyone knows the parking lot around the Brookhaven station will be redeveloped in due course. But let the good people up there work it out on their own schedule.

In the meantime, we've got plenty of other areas in Atlanta that are crying out for this kind of growth. Why don't we get cracking on that, instead of pounding on Brookavenites?

Again, stopping this TOD development will not help the south and west sides develop any faster, you seemed to agree on that point, not sure why we keep going back to it.

One apartment building own isn't going to make a huge difference. But a TOD will certainly has the most benefits to offer in terms of traffic improvements. If there was going to be one development Brookhaven was going to build to improve traffic, it should be this TOD.

But also, this is of course about a bigger fight in Brookhaven. They are trying to put the brakes on all apartment development in their city, and that certainly will have a negative impact on the metro.

[demonta4]

Originally Posted by arjay57

It's my understanding the folks up there were concerned about increased traffic in an area that's already severely impacted. They know from hard experience that more apartments means more cars, regardless of the presence of a MARTA station.



They're not. It's one or two people on this forum who feel that building yet another apartment complex in Brookhaven is critical to the welfare of the entire city. Their argument is that if this latest MARTA proposal doesn't go foward it is somehow a barrier to development elsewhere. Obviously it's not.

Using this logic, why should any community want TOD's if all they're going to do is put a strain on infrastructure. Why would the southside communities want that? I mean since we're not even gonna try to update our infrastructure, how about we just stop all development period?

[primaltech]

Originally Posted by MattCW

So now you want to build buildings that no one will live in. Great, an abandoned building is definitely better!

I dunno, though. The change has to start somewhere.

If you make the parking-less apartments cheaper than average (for now), then they should still fill up, and then eventually, once the metro is more transit-navigable and transit-rich, they can be more normal price.

I'm just agreeing with Brookhaven- that building a development at that MARTA station with parking will look nice, but it will increase their traffic.

The only way they wouldn't see a traffic hit, is if the new development does not have parking.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by demonta4

Using this logic, why should any community want TOD's if all they're going to do is put a strain on infrastructure. Why would the southside communities want that? I mean since we're not even gonna try to update our infrastructure, how about we just stop all development period?

What's wrong with TOD?

Sure, new development will have some impact, but would you rather not have any growth at all?

Look at the areas around many of our existing transit stations -- they could handle a LOT more development before they start feeling the strain. Time to bring everybody to the table and let them get a little of the prosperity that areas like Midtown and Brookhaven have enjoyed.

[jsvh]

arjay57, holding up development at the Brookhaven TOD is not helping anyone in other areas of the city. Why do you keep going back to this? Thought you agreed on that point already?

[demonta4]

Originally Posted by arjay57

What's wrong with TOD?

Sure, new development will have some impact, but would you rather not have any growth at all?

Look at the areas around many of our existing transit stations -- they could handle a LOT more development before they start feeling the strain. Time to bring everybody to the table and let them get a little of the prosperity that areas like Midtown and Brookhaven have enjoyed.

Isn't this your argument for Brookhaven. We all know that building the TOD will take at least a certain number of people off the road yet Brookhaven is against that growth. Development is happening at the Eastside and Westside stations, but Brookhaven has to come to the table.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by arjay57

What are the barriers to development at Oakland City that need to be removed?

MARTA owns a 3 acre closed parking lot and an additional 8 acre site there, and has full authority to blast ahead.

This looks just like the projects that have been built all over Brookhaven. Why not add a few to the southside?

Perhaps more developers could justify the finances if they could put a building where that massive parking deck is, and collect lease / rent? Perhaps Those setbacks could be turned into revenue-generating street-facing retail establishments? Perhaps that massive parking lot could have more buildings put in it? Perhaps if the floor-area ratio were smaller more people could rent in the area, generating more revenue?

Perhaps if these things were brought up on a wide enough scale, more developers could justify the costs for developing in an under-demand area to meet profit margins, even at lower rent points, and house a decent number of people?

These are things that we have said quite a few times before.


As others have pointed out, though, Brookhaven isn't a barrier to development on the southside. You can't just cut a development from Brookhaven and paste it in a different part of the metro. There are reasons that a development works in one place and not another.

That reason is that Brookhaven is 'nice' enough that you can have high enough rents to justify the costs associated with development projects. The Southside isn't. Not without removing barriers to development that Jsvh and I have spoken about ad nauseum.

Even so, as others have pointed out as well, simply building in the southside won't remove the demand for development in Brookhaven. They are two different markets, pulling from an already pent-up supply of demand. To reiterate, you can't just cut and paste and expect that to be a solution.