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.
From the neighborhoods, the Philly area feels vastly larger; from the freeways, Atlanta feels vastly larger. How is this even up for debate?
Rate this post positively
That picture is a very illustrative one! It gets at pretty much the entire reason for this thread. From the freeways, Atlanta can *feel* pretty enormous for the same reasons that Houston does from the freeways.
That picture is a very illustrative one! It gets at pretty much the entire reason for this thread. From the freeways, Atlanta can *feel* pretty enormous for the same reasons that Houston does from the freeways.
If were going by that logic then Los Angeles and Phoenix should feel much more larger than NYC. I never judge how massive a city feels just solely based on how many lanes are on the freeway.
From the neighborhoods, the Philly area feels vastly larger; from the freeways, Atlanta feels vastly larger. How is this even up for debate?
This makes no sense really. So you judge the size of an area by the number of lanes on a highway? Haha. No, all this shows is just how terribly inefficient Atlanta's public transit system is.
Philadelphia's highways get congested for sure, but they do not require as many lanes because of Philadelphia's extremely extensive public transit and commuter rail system... one of the best in the country. Hundreds of thousands of people commute in and out of the city every day for work and school using public transportation.
And in areas of the metro where the public transit is less effective, the highways are wider. Also, I-76 in that image in the link for Philly was built in the 50s and has not been expanded yet. Reason being? It can't be. On one side of the highway is a cliff, with multi million dollar mansions on top, and protected park land. The other side is the Schuylkill River.
The picture is also "illustrative," as one poster said, because in addition to displaying the 3-lane highway near downtown Philadelphia vs. the 7-lane highway near downtown Atlanta, you can see the many train tracks with Philadelphia's 30th Street Station in the background (although in fairness many of the tracks visible in this picture are freight lines). However, another reason the Schuylkill Expressway would be difficult to widen is because there are rail lines paralleling it for miles, in some cases 10-feet away.
Very different highways and growth patterns, regardless of which you think is "better."
This makes no sense really. So you judge the size of an area by the number of lanes on a highway? Haha. No, all this shows is just how terribly inefficient Atlanta's public transit system is.
Philadelphia's highways get congested for sure, but they do not require as many lanes because of Philadelphia's extremely extensive public transit and commuter rail system... one of the best in the country. Hundreds of thousands of people commute in and out of the city every day for work and school using public transportation.
And in areas of the metro where the public transit is less effective, the highways are wider. Also, I-76 in that image in the link for Philly was built in the 50s and has not been expanded yet. Reason being? It can't be. On one side of the highway is a cliff, with multi million dollar mansions on top, and protected park land. The other side is the Schuylkill River.
I voted Philly from the get go. The photo that you are criticizing almost swayed me, but your post made me realize that I was stupid to think that an asphalt corridor is indicative of actual metro size.
Location: Bmore, The cursed land of -> Hotlanta -> Charlotte
305 posts, read 416,646 times
Reputation: 242
Step 1, Atlanta needs to upgrade the damn public transit(MARTA) before anything if we want to be a 'complete' metro, oh and how about some sidewalk in all our burbs, I mean seriously even in Alpharetta there are places you have to walk on the grass. Atlanta is my home but we have alot to do before we can compete with Philly, a city/metro that has been around for ages and Im sure has alot more development, and actual sidewalks in all the suburbs.
Step 1, Atlanta needs to upgrade the damn public transit(MARTA) before anything if we want to be a 'complete' metro, oh and how about some sidewalk in all our burbs, I mean seriously even in Alpharetta there are places you have to walk on the grass. Atlanta is my home but we have alot to do before we can compete with Philly, a city/metro that has been around for ages and Im sure has alot more development, and actual sidewalks in all the suburbs.
Agreed 1,000% ....Philly progressed along with the other Northern cities at the same time..boomed with the transit infrastructure. I think the public transportation plays a big part into the city / metro. We was blessed to have railroads and have them heavily used and passed down. I always wonder how this city would be like if we had no railroad, or some type of transit system less then what it is now. PHILADELPHIA is its REGIONS CORE even with the pitfalls. The city/area has been in the Top 5 -10 population rankings since its existence.
Because a lot of observant people voted for Atlanta, which seems much larger than the Philly metro when passing through by car. It is what it is.
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.
