ATLANTA TRANSIT (Marta, Beltline, Peachtree Streetcar, LovJoy Commuter, etc...) - Page 60

NativeAtlantan · #**1181** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 5:53 PM**

Oh, and you can't say it doesn't have an impact. It is FACT that there will be an impact one way or the other (even if it's a net impact of one single individual), so no cop outs, here.

NativeAtlantan · #**1182** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 5:56 PM**

My answer to the above question is that there will be a net effect of +3 new intown residents due to rising gas prices.

:-)

Andrea · #**1183** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 5:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NativeAtlantan

This isn't about other factors....it's about isolating the one variable: gas price.

You guys are dancing more than Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers.

Au contraire. I've said repeatedly that most people will take gas prices into account.

But that's not the same as insisting that "Rising gas prices will drive people back to the city." Gas prices may or not have an effect on that phenomenon, depending on the city, and depending on a host of other equally if not far more important factors. That's the point we've been making -- you can't evaluate demographic trends of that nature by trying to isolate one variable, particularly when there's no data demonstrating what effect that variable might have in an environment like Atlanta.

BabydaddyATL · #**1184** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NativeAtlantan

I think you're putting too much weight in the "high paying jobs" point. Everyone who works in a place other than their home has to transport themselves there, regardless of their wage grade.

Intown living for renters become much more viable as gas prices go up because it puts the cost of living further out on the same level as living intown. If you work intown, then it would have to be more of a consideration.

Also, BabyDaddy, I don't think you realize how much people are spending on gasoline. I know many people who spend more on gas than each of the following:

- groceries
- utilities
- property taxes
- entertainment

One guy I work with who lives in Alpharetta and works at the Perimeter was telling folks that his gas expense is beginning to creap up towards $1000 per month. Well, I did some calculating - he works at Perimeter center and his wife works in Buckhead. They both drive SUVs, which is pretty common. $1000 per month, assuming 18 mpg and $3.75 per gallon, would imply that they are both averaging more than 20,000 mi per year, which I guess is reasonable given there commutes, but they're probably driving a lot on the weekends, too, shopping, entertainment, etc.

So I don't see how you can say it isn't as much of a consideration.

I agree that where prices are right now, it's not going to convince a significant number of people to all the sudden pack up and move but for those who know they are moving anyway, I think the intown option becomes more viable, as gas prices rise, which, by the way, is the long term trend. Since the commonly accepted trend is that gas prices are only going to get worse, not better, than it just has to play a role for those who are choosing where to live. If you're already settled, then, yes, I agree it hasn't necessarily become compelling enough, yet, but remember this discussion is about effect of rising gas prices, not where prices are at the moment.

Seems like it would be in your coworker's best interest to change cars to cut expenses. Two SUV's in one family makes no sense. I hope you see our point NativeAtlantan. Just look at the example of your coworker. It would be in their economic interest to drive more fuel efficient cars, but they chose to drive SUV's. Plus, it is a heck of a lot cheaper to change your car as opposed to moving your home. Make sense?

sprtsluvr8 · #**1185** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

Seems like it would be in your coworker's best interest to change cars to cut expenses. Two SUV's in one family makes no sense. I hope you see our point NativeAtlantan. Just look at the example of your coworker. It would be in their economic interest to drive more fuel efficient cars, but they chose to drive SUV's. Plus, it is a heck of a lot cheaper to change your car as opposed to moving your home. Make sense?

They made several choices that could be changed to make a more efficient lifestyle. I would continue to drive the automobile of my choice before I would choose to stay in Alpharetta (I would never have chosen to live there to begin with). I would look for another job before I would commute...anywhere, or I would move. There are many choices people make that affect their life, and which car to drive - if at all - is only one of them.

BabydaddyATL · #**1186** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NativeAtlantan

Oh, and you can't say it doesn't have an impact. It is FACT that there will be an impact one way or the other (even if it's a net impact of one single individual), so no cop outs, here.

The only impact gas prices have on where people choose to live is in lower income families. Therefore, they will POSSIBLY chose to live intown ONLY if their job is intown. Middle and upper income families will not take gas prices into their decision.

Most middle income families make over $100K a year. Gas has not, or will not in the near future dictate where they live.

I think you should probably be debating commute time vs gas prices. If you were arguing commute time I would agree with you. But as Andrea indicated, there are more jobs located in the suburbs than the City of Atlanta.

Andrea · #**1187** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:21 PM**

I think gas prices will have an increasing impact on urban development in the years to come. Just today a Canadian bank predicted that oil prices will double by 2012.

What we probably can say with some degree of confidence that is that rising gas prices will most likely make people seek shorter commutes. What we don't know, however, is how that will play out in real life in our particular environment. This discussion began when I suggested that rising fuel prices could conceivably put a crimp in the "back to the city" movement, since in a place like Atlanta people might want to stay closer to their jobs, homes, shopping, school, etc., which, in our case, are mainly out in the burbs.

If employment shifted back to the city, then that might create a scenario where it's possible for people to shorten their commutes by moving intown. But even then you would still have major issues regarding improving schools in the city, lowering the cost of intown housing, reducing city taxes, improving perceptions of safety in the city, etc., etc.

That’s why the assertion that “rising gas prices will drive people back to the city” is very difficult to support.

sprtsluvr8 · #**1188** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

The only impact gas prices have on where people choose to live is in lower income families. Therefore, they will POSSIBLY chose to live intown ONLY if their job is intown. Middle and upper income families will not take gas prices into their decision.

Most middle income families make over $100K a year. Gas has not, or will not in the near future dictate where they live.

I think you should probably be debating commute time vs gas prices. If you were arguing commute time I would agree with you. But as Andrea indicated, there are more jobs located in the suburbs than the City of Atlanta.

So...middle and upper income bracket people have no financial concerns? I have to disagree with you there, being a middle income bracket individual. Gas prices have a large effect on my decisions.

And...wait...more jobs located in the suburbs than in Downtown, Midtown, Buckhead, Airport, and all other intown areas combined??? I think not...

ATLaffinity · #**1189** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NativeAtlantan

So, if you've just tuned in, the question of the day is:

"For the City of Atlanta, specifically, would it be reasonable to say that, as gas prices rise, intown growth accelerates or decelerates, all other factors remaining constant?"

Ok...

No. It doesn't have any effect on intown growth in ATL. I'm not going to try to prove a negative unless you show some correlation between gas prices and people moving intown.

Native,

You're proving Andrea's point with your example of somebody who lives in the suburbs with a long commute to...the suburbs. And have they traded in their SUVs for Priuses? Moved?

BabydaddyATL · #**1190** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

So...middle and upper income bracket people have no financial concerns? I have to disagree with you there, being a middle income bracket individual. Gas prices have a large effect on my decisions.

And...wait...more jobs located in the suburbs than in Downtown, Midtown, Buckhead, Airport, and all other intown areas combined??? I think not...

Gas prices is a financial concern, but in my opinion does not dictate where you live.

Family Making $100K Decision Tree - Which makes more economic sense?

Living In Town
Pro - lower cost of gas consumed
Pro - Drive an SUV
Con - Higher housing cost
Con - Higher taxes

Suburb Living
Pro - Lower housing costs
Pro - Lower taxes
Con - Higher cost of gas consumed
Con - Maybe trade my SUV for a high gas mileage car

Without a doubt it makes more economic sense to live in the suburbs if expenses are your only decision for where you live. Housing cost and increased taxes by far outweigh the saving in gas expenses for living in town.

BabydaddyATL · #**1191** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 6:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATLaffinity

Ok...

No. It doesn't have any effect on intown growth in ATL. I'm not going to try to prove a negative unless you show some correlation between gas prices and people moving intown.

Native,

You're proving Andrea's point with your example of somebody who lives in the suburbs with a long commute to...the suburbs. And have they traded in their SUVs for Priuses? Moved?

Thank You!

NativeAtlantan · #**1192** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 8:13 PM**

ATLAffinity,

How am I proving Andrea's point when one works at Perimeter and one works in Buckhead? If gas prices went high enough for them to decide that a move was in order, they would move between Buckhead and Perimeter center. Remember, they can't change cars, as that's not a variable in this discussion....only home location and gas prices.

Andrea, I agree with you: higher gas prices will result in shorter commutes. This statement pretty much proves my point by itself. The population of Atlanta goes up tremendously during business hours then goes back down to offpeak at night and on weekends. How can you say this doesn't support my theory?

sprtsluvr8 · #**1193** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 8:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

Gas prices is a financial concern, but in my opinion does not dictate where you live.

Family Making $100K Decision Tree - Which makes more economic sense?

Living In Town
Pro - lower cost of gas consumed
Pro - Drive an SUV
Con - Higher housing cost
Con - Higher taxes

Suburb Living
Pro - Lower housing costs
Pro - Lower taxes
Con - Higher cost of gas consumed
Con - Maybe trade my SUV for a high gas mileage car

Living In Town - live in a smaller space for the same or even less money, same amount of taxes, drive a more efficient vehicle, use less gas all the way around = have more expendable income.

Who wouldn't want that??? I don't care how much money one earns (up to a point, of course), we always want more expendable $$. And gas prices aren't the only concern - people of all income brackets have become more aware of gas USAGE and it's effect on our way of life. That in itself definitely has an impact on people moving into the city.

BabydaddyATL · #**1194** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 8:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NativeAtlantan

ATLAffinity,

How am I proving Andrea's point when one works at Perimeter and one works in Buckhead? If gas prices went high enough for them to decide that a move was in order, they would move between Buckhead and Perimeter center. Remember, they can't change cars, as that's not a variable in this discussion....only home location and gas prices.

Andrea, I agree with you: higher gas prices will result in shorter commutes. This statement pretty much proves my point by itself. The population of Atlanta goes up tremendously during business hours then goes back down to offpeak at night and on weekends. How can you say this doesn't support my theory?

You proved Andrea's point because your coworker has NOT moved in town. They are sucking it up and paying the higher gas prices as will most people will do. Albeit, cutting back on discretionary purchases - going out to eat, vacation, clothes etc.

Why can't they change cars? But they can move to a house in town?

Stop trying to prove your point with your opinions and give us some hard facts. Take a look at this population chart for Atlanta. Where do you see the growth? THE SUBURBS. Even as gas prices have increased! Our point is proved!

BabydaddyATL · #**1195** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 8:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

Living In Town - live in a smaller space for the same or even less money, same amount of taxes, drive a more efficient vehicle, use less gas all the way around = have more expendable income.

Who wouldn't want that??? I don't care how much money one earns (up to a point, of course), we always want more expendable $$. And gas prices aren't the only concern - people of all income brackets have become more aware of gas USAGE and it's effect on our way of life. That in itself definitely has an impact on people moving into the city.

Who wouldn't want that??? Most of the people moving to Atlanta don't want that. Hence the ridiculous growth of the suburbs. Look, Andrea and I both live in town. Actually neighbors so to speak. WE LOVE ATLANTA, but we also recognize that it is not for everyone.

BabydaddyATL · #**1196** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:07 PM**

I think panhandling factors more into a person's decision not to move in town and not the price of gas. That is the ONLY variable one considers.

testarossa50 · #**1197** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:18 PM**

You guys are placing way too much importance on the nominal number of jobs in an area. The important factor is the ratio of jobs to residents in a given area. When transportation costs rise, we expect these ratios to more closely equal 1 across the board. When transportation costs fall, we expect these ratios to become more variable in different areas.

Downtown and midtown may have a lower aggregate number of jobs, but they probably have a lower corresponding number of residents. Thus their job:resident ratio is likely quite high, which would theoretically result in a decrease in jobs and an increase in residents.

Suburban areas may have more jobs in total, but they probably have very low job:resident ratios, which mean we would expect in influx of jobs and an outflow of residents due to the transportation price shock.

Note that various other factors like cost of living, quality of life, etc are marginally irrelevant in this model because the system is assumed to be at equilibrium at the starting point. If it is not at equilibrium in the starting point, the trends previously in play would most likely compound upon the trends I describe above.

sprtsluvr8 · #**1198** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

Who wouldn't want that??? Most of the people moving to Atlanta don't want that. Hence the ridiculous growth of the suburbs. Look, Andrea and I both live in town. Actually neighbors so to speak. WE LOVE ATLANTA, but we also recognize that it is not for everyone.

I'm sensing a secret crush on Andrea...I think you want to be her babydaddy, but I think she may be spoken for already.

BabydaddyATL · #**1199** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by testarossa50

You guys are placing way too much importance on the nominal number of jobs in an area. The important factor is the ratio of jobs to residents in a given area. When transportation costs rise, we expect these ratios to more closely equal 1 across the board. When transportation costs fall, we expect these ratios to become more variable in different areas.

Downtown and midtown may have a lower aggregate number of jobs, but they probably have a lower corresponding number of residents. Thus their job:resident ratio is likely quite high, which would theoretically result in a decrease in jobs and an increase in residents.

Suburban areas may have more jobs in total, but they probably have very low job:resident ratios, which mean we would expect in influx of jobs and an outflow of residents due to the transportation price shock.

Note that various other factors like cost of living, quality of life, etc are marginally irrelevant in this model because the system is assumed to be at equilibrium at the starting point. If it is not at equilibrium in the starting point, the trends previously in play would most likely compound upon the trends I describe above.

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Atlanta has the second highest commutes in the country. What does this mean? They don't give a damn about gas prices, they don't live where they work and they prefer to live in a big suburban home a opposed to a smaller house in the the city.

sprtsluvr8 · #**1200** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

I think panhandling factors more into a person's decision not to move in town and not the price of gas. That is the ONLY variable one considers.

Oh my God, are you kidding me? Panhandling is nonexistent in most in-town neighborhoods. It is basically common to parts of Downtown and isolated areas of Midtown, to a lesser extent. I would venture to say that most people in the suburbs or anywhere else don't associate panhandling with, say, Virginina-Highland.