Has anyone's opinion on an Outer Perimeter / Outer Bypass changed? (Atlanta: real estate, chapel)

[the resident09]

Originally Posted by cqholt

The ICC is just like GA 400 ITP.

The ICC (MD-200) is if you will a "first leg" of a potential Outer Beltway, so not at all like GA-400 which runs North-South. I would like to see suburban DC and ATL both get outer beltways, but in MD/VA situation you have two states who have to get this done, as opposed to one in Atlanta.

[JMatl]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I am personally of the belief that alot of these NIMBY people are people who do not drive, or don't drive enough to care about traffic, thus why they want to keep their community as rural as possible to begin with as at one time those communities were pretty far from the city centers.

Nope. All the NIMBY's out there drive plenty. They just don't wish to see the landscape around them destroyed by a Freeway, and then over-developed and basically paved over around every exit.

I'm pretty much the anti-NIMBY, and very pro-development most of the time - but I totally get it.

People simply don't trust the State or the Counties enough to not turn any Outer Perimeter into a cash cow of land grabs and over-development by 'connected' interests at totally every unnecessary exit.

The idea to only have interchanges at Interstates and important U.S. Highways was overruled by the Politically connected, with plans for exits every few miles. That's what killed it.

North Georgia hardly ever feels about anything in a monolithic way, but there is collectively no stomach for any new Freeways here. I personally feel the Outer Perimeter debacle cemented these feelings.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by Soccernerd

Do you really think people want to drive or take a bus to their local station and then have take a bus to their job? This isn't Chicago or New York where they have large central business districts not to mention a century more of infrastrure that have allowed commuter rail.

I....think you should research the railroad history of Atlanta....

[Soccernerd]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I....think you should research the railroad history of Atlanta....

I don't necessarily just mean tracks. People have commuted into the city of Chicago for decades by train. Atlanta's jobs are more spread out in job centers not in Downtown or Midtown. Chicago has the loop which I'm sure has a much larger portion of jobs in its metro area than Atlanta does in its central business district(s). I don't know much about Atlanta (yet), but I have a feeling people aren't going to like commuting via rail especially between suburbs.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Soccernerd

I don't necessarily just mean tracks. People have commuted into the city of Chicago for decades by train. Atlanta's jobs are more spread out in job centers not in Downtown or Midtown. Chicago has the loop which I'm sure has a much larger portion of jobs in its metro area than Atlanta does in its central business district(s). I don't know much about Atlanta (yet), but I have a feeling people aren't going to like commuting via rail especially between suburbs.

Atlanta used to have dozens of light rail transit lines crisscrossing the city and connecting (at the time) distant suburbs like Fairburn, College Park, Marietta, Decatur, and Stone Mountain.

[Clayton white guy]

The City of Atlanta DOES have many of the major job centers (Downtown, Midtown, Buckhead/ uptown, etc.) and if you throw in connections to Perimeter Center and Cumberland, you could have great commuter rail connectivity to many (perhaps most) of Metro Atlanta's job centers (MARTA already goes to the airport, remember.)

[Soccernerd]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Atlanta used to have dozens of light rail transit lines crisscrossing the city and connecting (at the time) distant suburbs like Fairburn, College Park, Marietta, Decatur, and Stone Mountain.

That was also in 1924...It would be more sustainable expanding public transportation than simply building more freeways and lanes. I'm not saying it would be bad just unlikely. Any Northern Arc or outer perimeter would be just as unlikely imo.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Soccernerd

That was also in 1924...It would be more sustainable expanding public transportation than simply building more freeways and lanes. I'm not saying it would be bad just unlikely. Any Northern Arc or outer perimeter would be just as unlikely imo.

Considering we just voted to fund a transit expansion last November, I am going to say transit is the more likely option.

Like I said earlier in this thread, I am not opposed to a norther arc if there is enough demand to fund it via tolls (which I don't think there is) but transit is just the more viable way to move people around a city.

[Soccernerd]

I'm not a resident of Georgia yet, so I'm not familiar with the political climate and the history of Atlanta. I would submit that Los Angeles has a vast public transportation and freeway network, but it is still not enough to curb congestion. Atlanta has developed as a car dependent city, and to change that, there need to be some sort of government action to get the area to become denser and more pedestriation friendly to make public transportation feasible. The other alternative is to build a vast system of highways similar to Dallas/Fort Worth or Houston, but that just accelerates sprawl. Plus by the time people realize "Hey we kind of need a freeway here", it's too late and NIMBY people start popping up. That's all I'm going to say.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by Soccernerd

I'm not a resident of Georgia yet, so I'm not familiar with the political climate and the history of Atlanta. I would submit that Los Angeles has a vast public transportation and freeway network, but it is still not enough to curb congestion. Atlanta has developed as a car dependent city, and to change that, there need to be some sort of government action to get the area to become denser and more pedestriation friendly to make public transportation feasible. The other alternative is to build a vast system of highways similar to Dallas/Fort Worth or Houston, but that just accelerates sprawl. Plus by the time people realize "Hey we kind of need a freeway here", it's too late and NIMBY people start popping up. That's all I'm going to say.

Of course, Houston and Dallas urban areas are about 70% denser than Atlanta. Los Angeles has the densest urban area in the country. While its not Manhattan level, the urban area of the Los Angeles metro is actually denser than the urban area of New York (6,999/sq mile vs. 5,319).