Atlanta Beltline

[cybele]

Originally Posted by reet

Yes -- great point. I think that increasing residential (and retail) density around major, shared features of the city such as the big parks (like Piedmont), MARTA stations and large office areas is the best way to push Atlanta towards a more sustainable, pedestrian-friendly future.

I'm strongly in favor of increasing Atlanta's density to a more sustainable level and improving the city's walkability. However, that's not at all incompatible with cars. Properly used, they are an extremely convenient way of getting around.

Too often I think people look at the huge suburban mess you see on roads like the Downtown Connector or I-75 or GA 316 and jump to the conclusion that the automobile is some devilish contraption that must be done away with. That misses the point. It's not cars per se that are the problem, but the way we build and use them.

Yes, it's unsustainable for people to live at Atlantic Station and commute to work every day at Windward Parkway. Or to live in McDonough and drive up to Buckhead every day. But that's very different from driving a mile or two up to your local grocery store once a week or taking your dogs to the park on Sunday.


By the way, you can judge a lot about a city by the way it treats its animal citizens. As Ghandi said, "A society's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members."

[reet]

Originally Posted by cybele

I'm strongly in favor of increasing Atlanta's density to a more sustainable level and improving the city's walkability. However, that's not at all incompatible with cars. Properly used, they are an extremely convenient way of getting around.

True, I'm sometimes too quick to condemn Atlanta's car dependency based on my own desire to live a less car dependent life, even though I drive a car everyday myself and know the benefits as well as the headaches.

But I nonetheless believe that an inordinate amount of development intown has been geared exclusively or at least very heavily towards car use. In a major urban area there should be a tendency towards development that either favors pedestrian traffic or at least makes concessions equally for car traffic and pedestrians. It just makes sense to me.

I wouldn't favor a push to ban car use or development that makes concessions for cars, but I'd love to see a day when they aren't as necessary in this city as they have been for the last several decades.

[(four 0 four)]

Originally Posted by cybele

I have walked by it but haven't parked there yet. Don't you have to pay to park there?

There is a fee but I don't know what it is...I remember hearing $2.00 but please don't come looking for me if its more.
If the main goal is to get to the dog park, go to the shops on Amsterdam (off Monroe) and drive around to the back side of the building. Park along the RR tracks and you'll see a path that leads up over the tracks and into the dog park.

[cybele]

reet, good points. I totally agree with you.

[Curious Atlantan]

It's OK to have cars and use them in cities. However Atlanta (and many other US cities) make it too easy by offering a lot of free parking, enlarging streets, mandating businesses and residential buildings to build too much parking. In many other cities it is not that easy to find parking (therefore expensive) and generally the environment is less car friendly. And as a consequence there is more demand for transit thus making it more available and civilized. People walk, bike, take transit, etc in addition to driiiiiviiiiiiing everywhere.

[ATLaffinity]

^ anyone think "Shared space" roads would work anywhere in Atlanta.

my first thought is "No" though ATL is so far behind almost every other city that it might be worth rolling the dice.

seems like downtown could have shared space sections

[reet]

Originally Posted by Curious Atlantan

...by offering a lot of free parking, enlarging streets, mandating businesses and residential buildings to build too much parking.

I'm very glad to see that in the Peachtree corridor of Midtown, where I live, it has become nearly impossible to find free parking in the last couple of years. As you point out, making free parking less difficult to find is a good way to break the city of its car dependency.

This point you make about the requirements for parking spaces for new buildings -- this is something that has bothered me for a long time. I hope requirements like this can be changed.

[Curious Atlantan]

The problem is the following: we need to get from point A, where Atlanta is today, which is not sustainable and arguably does not offer a good quality of life for everybody (certainly not for people like me which find alienating to have to drive everywhere), to point B, which would be a denser city with more choices in terms of housing and transportation.
I would guess most people would like point B since it would offer a more balanced set of choices, but unfortunately to get from point A to point B you would need to go through a difficult phase where people would need to make some sacrifices. Case in point: people would need to get used to having less parking along Piedmont Park while having less transit options and fewer parks around their neighborhoods until the Beltline comes to full fruition adding more of both the above.
Are people willing to make some temporary sacrifices? I am. I hope that if someone can make a good case, so will others. But this needs to be thoroughly explained. I hope we can find this sort of leadership soon enough, because so far there was none of it.

[smArTaLlone]

"The BeltLine: Its Journey" tells the stories of Atlanta residents and how they already have - and how they will be - touched by the BeltLine.

[dante2308]

Originally Posted by Curious Atlantan

It's OK to have cars and use them in cities. However Atlanta (and many other US cities) make it too easy by offering a lot of free parking, enlarging streets, mandating businesses and residential buildings to build too much parking. In many other cities it is not that easy to find parking (therefore expensive) and generally the environment is less car friendly. And as a consequence there is more demand for transit thus making it more available and civilized. People walk, bike, take transit, etc in addition to driiiiiviiiiiiing everywhere.

Well the problem with such a system is that what it does is it makes one form of transportation less convenient and more expensive until another one becomes feasible.

Because of the sheer size of the metropolitan area, full transit coverage is a near impossibility. Further compounding this pact is that it is mostly impossible to fill in most of the area with a density that makes transit even advisable.

I guess what I'm getting at is that we are a bit too big and developed to expect a large percentage of people to start using transit organically. We should not create a permanent gridlock with expensive parking to force it on people because it devalues the quality of life and increases the cost of living. I'm for small enclaves doing this, but in general, my position is that faster-than-walking transportation capacity should always be increased.

Don't mow down a road or start stripping parking until you put in more transit.

[Curious Atlantan]

Originally Posted by dante2308

Well the problem with such a system is that what it does is it makes one form of transportation less convenient and more expensive until another one becomes feasible.

Because of the sheer size of the metropolitan area, full transit coverage is a near impossibility. Further compounding this pact is that it is mostly impossible to fill in most of the area with a density that makes transit even advisable.

I guess what I'm getting at is that we are a bit too big and developed to expect a large percentage of people to start using transit organically. We should not create a permanent gridlock with expensive parking to force it on people because it devalues the quality of life and increases the cost of living. I'm for small enclaves doing this, but in general, my position is that faster-than-walking transportation capacity should always be increased.

Don't mow down a road or start stripping parking until you put in more transit.

In this case you will hear conservatives complaining that transit is underused. In any case, my point was that there is going to be a transition period and people should be aware and accept it.

[dante2308]

Originally Posted by Curious Atlantan

In this case you will hear conservatives complaining that transit is underused. In any case, my point was that there is going to be a transition period and people should be aware and accept it.

No reason the transition should inconvenience a single person. The point of government is not to make my life harder, more expensive, and limit my choices.

[cybele]

Originally Posted by dante2308

We should not create a permanent gridlock with expensive parking to force it on people because it devalues the quality of life and increases the cost of living. I'm for small enclaves doing this, but in general, my position is that faster-than-walking transportation capacity should always be increased.

Well said. People here to be in a "low density" frame of mind. I know a number of people who refuse to venture even as close as the Perimeter area because it's so crowded, has too much traffic and, they believe, probably has a high crime rate. So intentionally creating a high traffic area just drives them off.

[Curious Atlantan]

Originally Posted by cybele

Well said. People here to be in a "low density" frame of mind. I know a number of people who refuse to venture even as close as the Perimeter area because it's so crowded, has too much traffic and, they believe, probably has a high crime rate. So intentionally creating a high traffic area just drives them off.

I get it. If you don't like it here move your ass to Portland. We like our low density and cars here.

[dante2308]

Originally Posted by Curious Atlantan

I get it. If you don't like it here move your ass to Portland. We like our low density and cars here.

Not so much that as much as we should have thought of that back in the 70's. Believe it or not, cars were actually invented after trains and are indicative of societies that developed the most in the late 20th century.

Portland is too expensive. It falls on us to find a sensible way to improve sustainability without damaging affordability. At this point, plug in hybrids seem like the only real way forward for the greater metropolitan region. Atlanta's core should focus on developing the poverty stricken areas of the city instead of focusing on remodeling the nicer areas of town.

I think there is a lot more upside to the tax base and to the community quality of life you focus on the problem areas and the beltline does that to some degree.

[Rail>Auto]

Originally Posted by cybele

Too often I think people look at the huge suburban mess you see on roads like the Downtown Connector or I-75 or GA 316 and jump to the conclusion that the automobile is some devilish contraption that must be done away with."

The problem I have with auto's is that they have multiple problems... Currently, most ppl believe that if they can develop a car that doesn't use oil than it will be fine. The truth is, you can make these things the most sustainable built things on the planet and you will still have problems with parking, road congestion, break downs, and the fact that they kill over 40,000 ppl a year.

Last year, I took my car to NYC, far away from my home, and the transmission went completely out. There I was, screwed, and had to go digging for another car on my vacation.

I use to believe that cars were a necessary evil but with the High Speed Rail, Personal Rapid Transit, Communter and Light Rails, MAGLEV, and even the Interstate Traveller Project, I think its time to invest in some of these new technologies and start implementing the "shovel ready" technologies right now. Transportation and a Unified Electric Smart Grid would make a good stimulus package.

[geoking66]

Originally Posted by cybele

Yes, it's unsustainable for people to live at Atlantic Station and commute to work every day at Windward Parkway. Or to live in McDonough and drive up to Buckhead every day. But that's very different from driving a mile or two up to your local grocery store once a week or taking your dogs to the park on Sunday.

That mentality is one of America's (not just Atlanta's) biggest problems: it's only a little thing, no damage. The logic in that is flawed on two counts. First, it neglects to mention that those mile-long drives add up relatively quickly. Even if you drive two miles to get to the grocery store once a week, that's 104 trips (52 there and back), adding up to 208mi/annum. If your car gets 17mpg with a 16 gallon tank, the average for an American car, that's 76.4% of a tank of petrol every year. If 150m people in the US go two miles for groceries every year and back, then we've used up 1,833,600,000 gallons per annum, or 35.9bn lb (16.3Mt) of CO2. That's a big improvement, but still a lot of wasted fuel. Second, if your grocery store is "local," then you shouldn't need to drive to it.

Atlanta needs to understand that just randomly putting in temporary solutions for congestion, whether they be for road or rail, isn't the solution. There should be a hierarchy for public transport such as this, from local to far-reaching:

• Bus for very short trips in areas without public transport infrastructure or incredibly low-density areas.
• Light rail for short trips with medium-density TOD development, should always be at grade level in the median of a busy road such as Peachtree, separating traffic. By eliminating two lanes of traffic (with the argument that a station takes up about 28 feet for a ROW, with two tracks at 9ft tram loading gauge and a 10ft wide platform), pedestrians can safely walk across one lane. In lower-density and narrower streets, light rail can and should take up the entire street for two-way train traffic or one half of it for one-way train traffic. Light rail should never mix with road traffic for safety reasons; Americans aren't accustomed to dealing with such traffic nowadays. Light rail, such as the Beltline, can also use existing ROW.
• MARTA rapid transport for longer distance trips. This should be confined to the Perimeter (grandfathering in North Springs) and include a west-side line to complement existing infrastructure and spur projects west of the Connector, especially Atlantic Station). A northern east-west line across 14th/17th Street to Emory would also be a good idea.
• Commuter rail to outlying suburbs. All stations (with two exceptions) should be outside the Perimeter to speed up when inside. There should be six radial lines from a new Five Points passenger rail terminal heading to:
  
  Canton via 75 to 575
  Cartersville via 75
  Cumming via 400 (with stops at Buckhead and North Springs MARTA)
  Gainesville via 85 (with a stop at Buckhead MARTA)
  Lawrenceville via the Stone Mountain Freeway
  Macon via 41 to 75
  
  Of these, only the Cumming Line will need new tracks; these can go in the central reservation of 400 north of North Springs and one on each side of existing MARTA tracks south of North Springs with a setup for cross-platform interchanges at North Springs at Buckhead, which will require redoing those stations.

[cybele]

Originally Posted by geoking66

That mentality is one of America's (not just Atlanta's) biggest problems: it's only a little thing, no damage. The logic in that is flawed on two counts. First, it neglects to mention that those mile-long drives add up relatively quickly. Even if you drive two miles to get to the grocery store once a week, that's 104 trips (52 there and back), adding up to 208mi/annum. If your car gets 17mpg with a 16 gallon tank, the average for an American car, that's 76.4% of a tank of petrol every year. If 150m people in the US go two miles for groceries every year and back, then we've used up 1,833,600,000 gallons per annum, or 35.9bn lb (16.3Mt) of CO2. That's a big improvement, but still a lot of wasted fuel. Second, if your grocery store is "local," then you shouldn't need to drive to it.

Well, that's a little idealistic for a place like Atlanta. Let's say you're over 55 years old, like about 1 in 5 Atlantans are. It's not all that easy to schlep 40 pounds of groceries home on foot, for 2 miles, when there's not even a sidewalk in some places and cars are zooming by at 40+ mph. And suppose it's raining or freezing cold or after dark? What if you need a cane or other assistance? Suppose you have to climb steep hills, or pass through a rough neighborhood? For many Atlantans, even those who live "close-in", a decent grocery store is still quite a daunting hike.

And it's not like buses run without pollution or fuel either. If you were to beef up the bus routes so that they went more places and ran frequently enough to make them a more feasible alternative, you'd quickly see energy costs mounting up. And a lot of it wasted -- many times on my bus there were only a handful of people.

[geoking66]

Originally Posted by cybele

Well, that's a little idealistic for a place like Atlanta. Let's say you're over 55 years old, like about 1 in 5 Atlantans are. It's not all that easy to schlep 40 pounds of groceries home on foot, for 2 miles, when there's not even a sidewalk in some places and cars are zooming by at 40+ mph. And suppose it's raining or freezing cold or after dark? What if you need a cane or other assistance? Suppose you have to climb steep hills, or pass through a rough neighborhood? For many Atlantans, even those who live "close-in", a decent grocery store is still quite a daunting hike.

And it's not like buses run without pollution or fuel either. If you were to beef up the bus routes so that they went more places and ran frequently enough to make them a more feasible alternative, you'd quickly see energy costs mounting up. And a lot of it wasted -- many times on my bus there were only a handful of people.

If Atlanta ups its bus fleet to hybrid/natural gas buses, those energy costs go right down. NYC did and it shot down.

[cybele]

I'm not disagreeing with the idea that we need more transit. My point is simply that a few short trips around the neighborhood per week is not anything near the problem of people making daily freeway commutes of 40 miles or more. Those things are different by several orders of magnitude.

And for many purposes the automobile is a fairly sensible way to travel. It's supported by 100 years of infrastructure and most of our communities are geared to it. It's not realistic to propose that it will or should go away overnight.