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.
MARTA encorporates heavy rail and has a higher ridership overall.
But yall are acting like buses are not a means of public transportation.
Reading this you would think Houston has lightrail and nothing else.
Remember Metro had a higher ridership than DART.
Its the sunbelt mentality being discussed in the thread about future rail developments.
Reading this thread you would think that simply because of mileage one system is better than the other, taking no account of function, ridership, or alternative means of transit.
Does simply building miles of rail make a system better? Or even more urban?
Bottom line is that I wouldnt want to be in any of them without a car.
They each edge out one another in specific areas, but in the end, the difference between them is tiny. Its splitting hairs at this point.
Splitting hairs is an art form around these parts and is why the forum exists lol.
So most agree that Atlanta's core is more urban compared to Dallas and Houston, even if marginally.
The suburban areas of Houston and Dallas are more uniform with better road connectivity and densities, whereas suburban Atlanta is less dense with more winding local roads but historic/New Urbanist town centers scattered throughout. Not sure if there's something of a consensus about which city has the advantage here.
In my view, I think transit is probably the deciding factor here.
Splitting hairs is an art form around these parts and is why the forum exists lol.
So most agree that Atlanta's core is more urban compared to Dallas and Houston, even if marginally.
The suburban areas of Houston and Dallas are more uniform with better road connectivity and densities, whereas suburban Atlanta is less dense with more winding local roads but historic/New Urbanist town centers scattered throughout. Not sure if there's something of a consensus about which city has the advantage here.
In my view, I think transit is probably the deciding factor here.
Transit is definitely splitting hairs, at least with Dallas vs. Atlanta.
Atlanta has higher ridership and HRT, but DART has better connectivity (which will only improve with the Silver Line in 2023).
I've used the Marta plenty of times so I know the difference. There is a clear advantage Atlanta has with Marta system that Houston lacks and DART simply doesn't have the volume of people using it as much. I agree with everything you said. What I disagreed with is the fact that Atlanta is WAY ahead of Dallas and even Houston when it comes to their core. And at this point maybe we're just just debating semantics at this point but as I've said before ATLANTA's CORE IS MORE URBAN than the 2 Texas cities. I just don't think Atlanta's so far ahead that most people would be in both and say to themselves " I could never walk like this in Houston and Dallas." The city including the core is still too car-centric even with Marta and more walkable neighborhoods than Houston and Dallas and leans more to those 2 cities than a New Orleans or even Miami.
Well yeah, all southern cites are car-dependent and our disagreement may very well be a semantics issue but my general issue with this entire discussion (not you specifically btw) is this obsession with density to the point where the actual function of the cities aren't being discussed. On the ground, Dallas and Houston are miserable to walk around and I know as I'm carless and only get around with transit or the help of friends and family. Houston was a pain to get around. Dallas has a decent transit system but the lack of grade separation downtown holds it back and it's pretty slow compared to MARTA. Atlanta, while not totally easy to navigate on foot, caters to pedestrians more than Dallas and Houston. You can take a train from Decatur to Lenox to shop and it's relatively simple. You can go from College Park to Piedmont Park via Midtown station and it isn't a pain. What's in between two areas doesn't matter when you have reliable train service between them.
Dallas is more walkable than many think due to its abundance of sidewalks and shopping centers. I lived 10 miles south of downtown Dallas during the early 80's. We had sidewalks throughout the neighborhood and along the main thoroughfare bordering the neighborhoods. I could walk to Tom Thumb, Safeway, movie theater, fish market, 7 eleven, cleaners and barber under 10 minutes. Dallas is designed this way throughout much of the city. Atlanta is lacking sidewalks in a lot of places, definitely 10 miles outside of downtown.
Atlanta winning this poll by a landslide let's you know most people who post here don't travel at all.
Atlanta isn't in the top 3 most urban metros in the south, let alone number 1 lmao
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.
