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.
I don't see how newer developments are much different. Just because you build a mall these days with some next-door faux historic townhouses, or some "lofts" above a PF Changs, doesn't mean that the suburban node is functionally different. Yeah, 20 years ago, those fake townhouses would have been more likely to be an out-lot Applebees, and maybe the townhouses would have been across the highway interchange. I don't see any huge evolution here.
Mixed-use is a buzzword without much substance, most of the time. It's also hardly new. The first mall in the U.S., Southdale Centre, near Minneapolis, had the following plan: "Southdale would eventually include "a medical center, schools and residences, not just a parade of glitzy stores."
"Fake townhomes" as oppposed to "real" townhomes?How is one different from the other and how are you the expert of something you have never seen in person.
None of the developments I posted are anything remotely like what you just posted.
Since when is suburbia any different in Atlanta than say Chicago or New Orleans or D.C. or San Francisco?
Mom and pop places will not be predominately found in mass in suburbs anywhere unless they are on the decline and national chains have left.
Yes, this is classic sprawl, just in a Disney-style New Urbanist architectural style to appeal to the "Ye Olde Towne" demographic.
I guarantee you no one is buying here without cars, no one is going to WalMart by bus, etc. They're living typical sprawl lifestyle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Othello Is Here
Since when is suburbia any different in Atlanta than say Chicago or New Orleans or D.C. or San Francisco?
We aren't talking about suburbia; we're talking about sprawl. The difference is that those other cities have neighborhoods somewhat more oriented around pedestrians and transit. There's no French Quarter in Atlanta; nothing comes close.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,486 posts, read 14,999,411 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
Sure, but you can always run light rail more frequently to have the same volume of people. Low ridership heavy rail system have similar ridership per mile as well used light rail systems. Calgary and Boston light rail both have higher ridership per mile than Atlanta's MARTA
I really wouldn't use ridership per mile as a useful metric. The LRT in Boston has a higher ridership per mile than MARTA because the Green line is only 26 miles in length while MARTA's four lines are 47 miles total. It's the same reason why LA's subway has double the rider per mile than the Chicago L. Are we going to say the LA subway is "better" than the L. Nah, don't think so.
However you do make a salient point about how light rail could be just as effective as heavy rail if deployed correctly. I wouldn't necessarily point to the Green line as an example of how that experience could be translated to an entire city since it's just one component of a system that includes good subway, bus, and commuter rail connectivity. On it's own I don't think it would fair as well.
A better example would be Vancouver's SkyTrain, which is a essentially a light rail system with rolling stock that is closer to that of heavy rail.
Then your point is still stating the obvious which is not what the thread was about but you felt the need for a one liner so carry on.
And you felt the need to respond to my comment even though you had no idea what I was talking about. If you can't keep up with the conversation, don't respond.
Yes, this is classic sprawl, just in a Disney-style New Urbanist architectural style to appeal to the "Ye Olde Towne" demographic.
I guarantee you no one is buying here without cars, no one is going to WalMart by bus, etc. They're living typical sprawl lifestyle.
We aren't talking about suburbia; we're talking about sprawl. The difference is that those other cities have neighborhoods somewhat more oriented around pedestrians and transit. There's no French Quarter in Atlanta; nothing comes close.
Yes and there is no area like Buckhead with its modern architecture and palatial estates In New Orleans.New Orleans is a city you visit,Most people dont want to live there. So what?
Only you think that neighborhoods that are pedestrian friendly must be connected by transit.
Im not saying it does not have to to be better but that does not stop a city or area to be more dense.
That neighborhood is a sustainable neighborhood.You dont have to drive everywhere.Everything is within walking distance connected by sidewalks and trails.
They have restaurants,entertainment,retail are near where they live.In fact people like me have driven out there to enjoy the community they have.
The argument was made that Atlanta has curbed the sprawl.Not that it does not have it.Its here to stay but its important as to how we go forward managing it.
You want argue points that are SOO obvious just so you can discount anything positive that is taking place.Every urbanist type publicans or experts have largely noticed the huge strides Atlanta has taken to build more inward and there is all the data provided that proves that is indeed is what happenong.It will not happen overnight as it did not begin overnight.
Continue to live in the past and never look forward.I guess thats why you love Nawlins so much.
I really wouldn't use ridership per mile as a useful metric. The LRT in Boston has a higher ridership per mile than MARTA because the Green line is only 26 miles in length while MARTA's four lines are 47 miles total. It's the same reason why LA's subway has double the rider per mile than the Chicago L. Are we going to say the LA subway is "better" than the L. Nah, don't think so.
My point was that light rail system can carry as much volume as some light rail systems, not whether one is better than the other.
Quote:
A better example would be Vancouver's SkyTrain, which is a essentially a light rail system with rolling stock that is closer to that of heavy rail.
I think you meant the reverse; Skytrain is a heavy rail system in the way its grade separated but the rolling stock is light rail sized. Traincar for most rolling stock hold 130 people / car max, and many trains are 2 car trainsets, many stations can't handle more than 4 cars platforming.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,486 posts, read 14,999,411 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
I think you meant the reverse; Skytrain is a heavy rail system in the way its grade separated but the rolling stock is light rail sized. Traincar for most rolling stock hold 130 people / car max, and many trains are 2 car trainsets, many stations can't handle more than 4 cars platforming.
No, I meant what I said. It is grade separated and uses a third rail, but the rolling stock is light rail. A better name for this, which I failed to state, is medium-capacity rail.
It's a type of system that is very common in Europe and Asia, but for reason no US city has employed on a wide scale. Such a system would serve places like Houston, Dallas, Seattle, or Phoenix well since building a full fledged heavy rail subway is out of the question now.
No, actually the numbers show that Dallas and Atlanta are virtually indistinguishable.
They are both massively car-oriented, and they both have very few transit riders. In both cases, there are very few cities on the planet with similar car orientation. Probably none outside the U.S.
Show me please because the data ive seen is quite a difference.Why is New Orleans ridership so low?Its an urban paradise you would think would have a better transit.
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.
