ATL Urbanist
Recent Posts
Pub-Shed Matters So Shut Up and Accept It
| | No Comments
Pub-shed matters so shut up and accept it.
I’ve heard people hating on the concept of pub-shed – meaning a measure of pubs in walking distance from where you live, as an aspect of urban livability. People have dismissed it as being a hipster appropriation of livability metrics.
Thpthpth, I say.
As I type this, I am what Dean Martin would call “gassed” (thanks to the excellent beer selection at Anatolia Cafe – from which the above pic was taken). To get home, I don’t have to get in a car. I don’t even need MARTA. And considering the sudden downpour that’s hit Atlanta, I’m very thankful that home is a block long sprint away.
Pub-shed means something. Shut up.
I reserve the right to delete this post when I sober up, BTW, in case it looks stupid in the morning.
Does Atlanta Have Mega-Event Syndrome?
| | No Comments
Does Atlanta have Mega-Event Syndrome?
The above photo of Downtown Atlanta shows the Georgia Dome, in the middle, with the shadow of the in-construction Falcons stadium that will replace it to the left, and Philips Arena on the right. Behind that (out of view) is the Georgia World Congress Center. In front, where cars are parked, is a section of the Gulch – a vast sea of concrete that may get turned into an MGM casino if lawmakers and voters allow.
Having all of these events facilities centered in one spot is a problem. With such a singular type of land use – one that brings in a mass of car traffic from the car-centric, sprawling region all around as people attend events here – it’s difficult for much of any other land use to thrive.
That this difficulty should occur next to the historic heart of the city, with some of its pre-automobile buildings and street grid miraculously intact, is grating; with more accommodating surroundings, there is potential for this walkable grid to act as a showplace for good urbanism in a region that is in need of quality examples of it. Instead, we’ve surrounded and stifled it’s potential with a group of events facilities.
An article in City Lab earlier this year defined a malady that I believe Atlanta has: Mega Event Syndrome.“The mega-event syndrome results in oversized or obsolete infrastructure
for an inflated price that the public is forced to pay and in an uneven
and inefficient allocation of resources. These symptoms repeat
themselves, to a greater or lesser degree, in mega-events around the globe.“
Sports stadiums, in particular, have become a racket for millionaire owners. It’s something we’ve come to accept as a society. Local governments shell out huge expenditures to appease the desires of team owners who want new stadiums. We justify the cost by claiming that the end product will generate massive returns that make the effort to build, support and maintain these facilities worthwhile. But many studies have found that the numbers don’t add up for a big return on these investments – very much an “uneven and inefficient allocation of resources.”
And beyond economics, simple livability suffers from this central grouping of events venues. One the most harrowing experiences we have
as a downtown family is dealing with all of the wide one-way streets
that were designed to get masses of cars in and out of the cluster of
events facilities nearby. They’re unpleasant to walk along and dangerous
to cross.
In all, we’ve been very happy living in an apartment in Downtown Atlanta and walking these streets together.
The challenges occur when the place gets taken over by cars during
big events; I think of the
clustering of these events spaces in the historic city center as having
been a mistake. It will take a very concentrated, targeted, creative set of efforts to mitigate the damage.
To see the neighborhood that took the biggest hit in mobility and livability with the placement of these facilities, look no further than Vine City. The image below (from PEDs) compares the 1911 street grid of that neighborhood with what exists today; a lack of connectivity with the Downtown jobs center and a massive dead space of blank walls and parking structures as a neighbor.
The Tourists Are Coming and They Want Our Trains
| | No Comments
The tourists are coming and they want our trainsThe Travel Pulse website has some interesting info on transit usage from a new survey. About 89 million Americans are planning to use public transit at their domestic-travel destinations this year – a whopping 24 percent increase over the numbers for 2014. Here’s a quote:According to the American Public Transportation Association’s annual
“Travel Like a Local” Summer Travel Survey, more than half (57 percent)
of the more than 156 million Americans expected to visit a U.S. city
this summer plan to utilize public transportation at one time or
another.But the most interesting part is the destinations those travelers have chosen. The survey reports that the most popular U.S. cities for summer vacation this year are:1. New York2. Chicago3. Los Angeles 4. Atlanta 5. Las VegasWe beat Las Vegas? Look at us! The tourists are coming, Atlanta, and they want to ride MARTA. With our public transit system being such an important part of our economy, influencing job relocations and vacation decisions (with all of the economic activity that brings), how is it that we still lack state support for MARTA operations? Follow the money, state leaders. It’s time to support the transit system that supports your economy.
Cost of Driving a Car Goes Up in Georgia
| | No Comments
Unless you operate a non-motorized car like Fred (which may not be street legal), the cost of driving goes up today in Georgia.Drivers should expect about a 7 cent increase per gallon at the pump thanks to a new gas-tax set up – it’s part of an effort by the state to raise hundreds of millions of dollars per year to help fill the ailing coffers of transportation funds. One study, earlier this year, found Georgia’s transportation funding gap to be in the billions of dollars.And drivers of electric cars are not immune. The state has done away with its popular $5,000 EV incentive, and now will actually charge a $200 annual fee for EV owners. (Speaking of…a sobering new study found that Atlanta is one many places in the US where EVs currently cause more pollution than gas-powered cars due to a lack of clean energy production.)Additionally, if you live in Atlanta, you’ll pay a higher price for settling traffic tickets out of court. It’s part of Mayor Reed’s effort to raise an extra $7 million in 2016 for the city through traffic fines.In related news, there is no increase in MARTA fare this year. Yay, me! I wish more people in the Atlanta region had the opportunity to commute via transit like I do, but our car-centric environment doesn’t allow it. It’s fair that driving should cost more so that we recoup at least part of the public costs we all pay for that sprawling development style, but I hope leaders are also thinking in terms of building new urban growth in a better pattern so that future generations don’t get saddled with the same problems.A recent analysis concluded that
sprawl costs the U.S. economy more than $1 trillion every
year. That price tag comes from a combination of higher-priced public
services for spread-out home and businesses, plus the various costs of
transportation-related energy consumption including air pollution,
traffic congestion and more. These new, higher costs for driving will be a drop in the bucket toward correcting that damage, but you have to start somewhere.
Atlanta Metro Population Growth in the 1990s
| | No Comments
I’ve written a lot about the way the Atlanta region sprawled in the late 20th century and particularly in the 1990s. Here are a couple of images published by the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) that show the way that sprawling growth happened in a low-density development pattern.Above, you can see the incredible population growth between 1992-1993.
Notice how the population boom is happening on the outer edges and
particularly in the northern suburbs. During the 1990s the Atlanta region outpaced all other metropolitan areas in the
United States except Phoenix, Arizona, in its rate of population growth, while the region’s urban land area expanded 47 percent between 1990 and 1996. It was a period of massive growth for the overall metro area. The center city, however, only saw a minor population bump during this period. Now take a look at the image below. This is a snapshot of population density in 1995. Despite the incredible influx of new residents happening in the outer edges of the region, the significant areas of density are mostly in the city center. That means that those hundreds of thousands of new residents in the metro were spread out evenly in the outer suburbs, in a development pattern that is very car oriented and that is difficult to serve with any other transportation style.
Atlanta’s Past Sprawl: Hitting Our Household Finances and Our Regional Economic health
| | No Comments
According to a Brookings report, 1 out of every $20 that American households spend (this includes everything; stuff like healthcare, housing, food) is for gasoline to power cars. This is an average, so understand that if you are a high earner and high spender, you may spend much less of your budget on gas. But that means the average is swayed by low earners who spend a higher percentage on gas. Below: a chart from Brookings that shows the percentages we’ve spent on household expenses over a period of about 25 years. This statistic is particularly sobering for a sprawled-out region like Atlanta. As I’ve written before, these hidden costs of transportation withing our car-centric sprawl are considerable. Atlanta draws people to its suburbs by way of home prices that are relatively affordable. But when you factor in transportation costs, studies show that sprawling Atlanta region is one of the least affordable places in the US for moderate-income households (based on Area Median Income).
It’s important to think about these things in light of the recent post I made about new development in walkable places. That kind of report paints a rosy picture of new growth for the future, but the challenges we face because of our past growth are significant. Here’s a map that shows the massive footprint of the urbanized area of Atlanta and how it grew over time, with color-coded snapshots of the expanse in different years (source):A recent piece from Associated Press looks at the significant challenges of building better commutes in the Atlanta region with it’s massive scale, which spread out far and wide in the super-sprawling years of the late 20th century. It finds that the negative effects are far reaching, hitting us not only on a personal level but also in terms of the ability of the region to attract new companies.
Atlanta-area officials say a metro area that sprawls from Roswell in the north down to the city’s southern edge means people often travel long distances to reach their workplace. But state and local organizations and governments acknowledge that congestion remains a challenge, affecting everything from recruitment of new companies to quality of life for residents. Something that I feel many local leaders have failed to take into account when thinking about the effects of our land use patterns on transportation – that population is still growing and shows no signs on stopping. From AP:
And it could get worse if the region’s population growth continues. One projection from the Atlanta Regional Commission estimates 7.9 million people will call the area home by 2040. Being even more aggressive in the planning and development of the type of growth that accommodates alternative forms of commuting such as public transit, bicycling and walking is going to be key to the success of our entire Atlanta region in the future. As the Brookings report notes, the economic health of our metro areas hinges, in part, on finding alternatives to both our car-centric built environments and the commutes they demand:The country’s built an entire transportation and planning infrastructure around the car, hurting transit in the process and stretching distances between people and jobs. But as these charts show, finding those alternatives could provide the same economic jolt that lower gas prices did in 2014.
The Atlanta Region Is Kicking Butt With Walkable Urban Developments
| | No Comments
The Atlanta region is kicking butt with walkable urban developments A new report in a series on developments in walkable urban places – referred to as “WalkUPs” – focuses on Michigan, but it contains an interesting graph that combines data from metro regions in that state with that from previous reports on Washington DC, Atlanta, and Boston. The studies are showing a shift away from car-centric development
patterns that dominated development in US metros during the latter half
of the 20th century, and a trend toward building new offices, retail and residential in walkable places. The graph above provides a good comparison between the regions – and it also shows that the trend in Metro Atlanta is actually stronger than in the other metros. A full 50 percent of new properties developed in the Atlanta region from 2009-2014 happened in walkable urban places, which is not only a higher amount than what’s happening in the other regions as charted here, it also shows a much bigger jump between that time period versus what was happening in 1992-2000, when the Atlanta region was really lagging behind and producing a lot of new construction in sprawling patternsThe studies are showing a shift away from car-centric development patterns that dominated development in US metros during the latter half of the 20th century.If you haven’t seen the report on the Atlanta region from 2013, it’s well worth a look: The WalkUP Wake-Up Call: Atlanta. Here are a couple of highlight quotes from it – the first one explores the big boost in new office spaces in the region being built in walkable urban spaces:“Only 19 percent of the office space delivered in the 1990s cycle was built in then-Established WalkUPs. This increased to 31 percent in the 2000s and to 50 percent in the current cycle that started in 2009″The report also shows the connection between these new developments in WalkUPS and public-transit access:“Within both Established and Emerging WalkUPs, the vast majority of recent development has gone to those areas that are served by MARTA rail. In the current 2009-2013 real estate cycle, 73 percent of development in Established WalkUPs went to the MARTA-served places. Even more dramatic, 85 percent of development in Emerging WalkUPs went to places with rail transit.”But wait! You also get…But of course this data on new developments doesn’t even tell the whole story because there’s also a trend happening in the absorption of empty office space in Atlanta’s walkable intown area’s that are near transit. Just this week we have news that Coke is moving another 500 employees from suburbs to existing offices in Downtown Atlanta – this comes on top of another recent shift that saw Coke relocating 2,000 workers to the downtown locations.About that 1992-2000 periodWe should always temper this kind of exciting info with the realization of what happened in the 1990s. That was a period when the Atlanta region, by some accounts, was sprawling outward in its development at a faster rate than any urbanized place in history. So we have a heavy load of non-walkable places that were built prior to this current trend that are weighing us down as a region. Undoing job sprawl and building better new developments, bit by bit, is a good thing. But we have a major sprawl handicap that we’re working under.
Why the Beltline Transit Plan Is So Important
| | No Comments
Rail transit along the Atlanta Beltline path – and along many streets inside the loop – could soon be an official part of the city’s comprehensive transportation plan. A recent piece in the Saporta Report has the story: Atlanta poised to adopt $3.65 billion transit plan for Beltline, Streetcar.Atlanta’s $3.65 billion proposal for transit along the Atlanta Beltline and Atlanta Streetcar could soon be adopted into the city’s comprehensive transportation plan…the Beltline/Streetcar plan is envisioned as a 63-mile system priced at $3.65 billion, without including the cost of the existing Atlanta Streetcar system. The financial importance of putting these rail routes on the record as part of a city plan is indisputable – doing so puts the transit part of the Beltline into the multi-layered process for funding application; without being in this process, it couldn’t be eligible for public dollars from the federal DOT and other avenues.But stepping back to look at the project as a whole, what is the importance of including rail transit at all in the Beltline transportation plan? Does it even need transit?Why a pedestrian/bicycle path isn’t enough when it comes to Beltline transportationSomething that has crossed my mind before, and I’ve seen others mention it in online comments here and there, is the question of why transit is even needed on the Beltline. The northeast trail is packed on weekends with people jogging and cycling and strolling. Restaurants are doing booming business nearby and apartments are popping up like weeds. Isn’t that success enough? Can’t we just save ourselves some money and let this remain as a path and series of parks?When I think about the issue long enough, I always come to the conclusion that the transit component is absolutely necessary and that, in the long term, we can’t let ourselves be satisfied with the Beltline’s current state a popular recreation trail (and, for some, a bicycle-commuting route). Ryan Gravel, who wrote the master’s thesis that was the foundation for the Beltline project, has a section on his blog that addresses the two main reasons that transit is an important piece of the plan. The first reason is equity; we need to make sure that everyone can benefit from the transportation aspects of the Beltline, at all times. If it ends up a route for only physically-able cyclists in good weather, then its service in respect to mobility is limited. Gravel writes: “Winter cold, summer humidity, pouring rain, driving snow, the dark of night, visual impairment, physical disability, physical injury, chronic pain, heavy or cumbersome loads, travel time, and long distances are all good reasons that we need transit service.”The second is volume. Atlanta’s current population is well below its peak in 1970, and market trends, population growth, and the constant shift of jobs from rural to urban areas all point to the probability of the city’s residential base growing considerably. With so many new apartments popping up around the project, the importance of having transit to carry large numbers of people is clear. As Gravel notes, “the need for the Atlanta Beltline to accommodate even greater volumes of people will become increasingly urgent. Only transit within a dedicated right-of-way can reliably and inclusively provide this service.”“Inclusively” is a good word here. Atlanta deserves a Beltline that is truly inclusive in its service to the city’s transportation needs. Rail transit will accomplish that in a way that a recreational path & bicycle-commuting route cannot.
Report: Transit-Rich, Walkable Parts of Atlanta Are Attracting Company Relocations
| | No Comments
A new report from Smart Growth America charts what companies have been expanding in & relocating to “downtown” areas in the last few years across the US (downtown is defined very broadly here as walkable city centers). According to their data, Atlanta seems to be doing pretty well, attracting several relocations to the city near MARTA stations.(I’ll note that, in addition to the intown moves of companies like NCR Corp., WorldPay and Kaiser Permanente, there are some good things happening regionally in Atlanta; namely, State Farm building a huge new campus near a MARTA rail station just north of the city). Many of the companies in the national study were relocating to downtown areas from suburban campuses. Locally, we’ve got several high-profile examples of that happening. There’s an interactive map on the SGA website with the movements, and I’ve captured some of the Atlanta info below in a couple of images. This first one shows a few companies – in purple – moving to Midtown and Downtown from suburban campuses. The yellow dot is an expansion. Notice how close these are to MARTA rail stations, giving commuters an option for transit that they may not have in the suburbs, where 1990s job sprawl saw many drive-to jobs centers spread all around the metro.And here’s a look at activity in Buckhead, where a couple of relocations have happened. This area also lost one (in red), with Teavana moving to downtown Seattle. The report also includes a chart of select relocations that have seen a major upgrade in walk scores. Here are a few examples of companies that have relocated to intown Atlanta spots where their employees are now in much more walkable places. These people can now walk out to lunch and walk in from transit stations much more easily.The report includes a quote from Mike Hurst, Regional Development Coordinator of the SunTrust Bank in downtown Atlanta, that describes how beneficial it can be for companies to be located in proximity to each other instead of spread out in far-flung suburban campuses. He says: “In a city as large as Atlanta it’s important for us to be accessible to our clients, and being downtown puts us near other large businesses where we have significant relationships.”The report notes that the methodology is not scientific – SGA pulled relocation news items from trade journals and industry sources. This info is meant to highlight so good activity taking places in the centers of US cities. My hope is that, with these companies embracing intown Atlanta neighborhoods that are walkable and well-served by transit, we will also see a big boost in residential density in these places. The city’s population growth has been slow in comparison to that of the overall region. While it’s good to have this office activity, a healthy growth will include people living here. If the overall metro sees it’s residency continuing so largely in the pattern of car-centric suburban sprawl, then we’re only making partial strides in good urbanism with these company relocations.
While U.S. Sprawl Generally Peaked Around 1994, Atlanta Kept Spreading Out
| | No Comments
“A century of sprawl in the United States” is the title of a new study on urban sprawl from a professor at McGill University in Montreal.It measures the sprawling urban developments of 20th-century America, noting the way that this sprawl “exacerbates climate change, energy and material consumption, and public health challenges.” The measurement was done by way of analyzing the growth of street networks. “The urban street network is one of the most permanent features of cities. Once laid down, the pattern of streets determines urban form and the level of sprawl for decades to come.”Measuring street network growth from 1920 to 2012, the researchers found that when sprawl is defined strictly by street connectivity (regardless of density, architecture and other features of urban environment), it turns out that this growth pattern actually started before the ubiquity of car ownership. It then continued steadily until the mid-1990s, when it peaked nationally around 1994. Where Atlanta fits in to the story: a sprawling over-achieverBut when it comes to the Atlanta region, that mid-1990s peak doesn’t apply. A reporter with Atlanta’s WSB got a fascinating quote from from Christopher Barrington-Leigh, co-author of the study. He says: “According to our data, Atlanta not only has a lot of catching up to do but has been slow to turn that corner.”Take a look at this image from the report, below. It shows Atlanta’s street connectivity pattern as compared to that of Austin, TX. (See a larger version here.)Those blue areas have streets with better connections, while the red areas are sprawl hell. The Atlanta region, in this regard, is fairly hellish, with it’s outer areas marred by a lack of street connections (think cul-de-sacs, subdivisions, and long stretches of arterial roads with no intersections). This is a “hard to densify” area because, with low connectivity for streets, how can you build places that accommodate pedestrian-focused compact development? This is a pattern made for cars.The study documents include a ranking of the 50 largest US metropolitan areas that grew in the most sprawling manner from 1991-2013. Here are the top three sprawlers from that list:1.) Greenville, SC2.) Greensboro, NC3.) Atlanta, GAThese are the regions that expanded with the lowest amount of road connectivity. Transportation within that growth style is tailor made for long, winding car trips, while leaving safe and convenient pedestrian connections out of the picture. Where did we go wrong while others did right?So what did Atlanta (and these other sunbelt metros) do wrong during this period that many US cities did right when it comes to curbing sprawl? Why did most US metros start to grow in a more connected way during the 1990s (give or take) while Atlanta continued to boom in the car-centric pattern? It’s all about leadership. As the report says: “Local government policies impact sprawl, as the largest increases in connectivity [meaning the opposite of sprawl] have occurred in places with policies to promote gridded streets and similar New Urbanist design principles.”That’s what we need. Let’s get some of that.
Atlanta Region Could Get Managed Lanes for Commuter Bus Lines
| | No Comments
Atlanta region could get 52
miles of managed lanes for
commuter bus linesA good article in the Saporta Report this week takes a look at a bold plan to help commuters get to their jobs around metro Atlanta via public transit. Read it here. In a nutshell: pending approval by the GRTA (Georgia Regional Transportation Authority) board later this year, the state will add 52
miles of managed lanes to interstates around the Atlanta region in order to serve
commuter bus lines.The need for region-wide improvement on access to public transit, particularly when it comes to commuting, is well established. A Brookings
study from recent years ranked
Atlanta #87 out of the 100 largest US metros when it comes to transit access to jobs. Considering this, the managed-lane plan is very welcome news. And while I applaud the plan, I’ll also point out that this is not something that will, in itself, be likely to take a great number of cars off of suburban roads during rush hour, due to the fact that most riders will still be driving on those arterial and side roads in order to get to and from the bus. Here’s a quote from the article that exemplifies the kind of challenges faced when planning transit in areas that are so largely car-dependent. “This is a critical project for GRTA,” [GRTA executive director Chris Tomlinson] said. “We’re working
with access points to the managed lanes, ensuring that park and ride
lots are in the right places, or if we need additional park and rides.”Once people park those cars, there will be fewer solo drivers on the interstate and that in itself is very beneficial. But in the long run, the region needs to consider the sustainability of park-and-ride transit use given population growth. It’s an issue that also pops up this week in regard to suburban Cobb County’s plans for building a new Bus Rapid Transit service. Read about that in this Marietta Daily Journal piece. A quote from there shows the problem with park-and-ride service in suburbs already dealing with surface road congestion: “I can’t detect hardly any support for it in my district. Rank-and-file voters don’t see how it will make their quality of life any better,” [State Sen. Lindsey Tippins (R-west Cobb)] told Around Town. Congestion on county roads is so bad that merely getting to the transit points poses the bigger problem, he said.“The issue we have is getting to where the transit would be,” Tippins said. “If I can get to I-75 at Windy Hill Road, I can get to downtown Atlanta with no problem, but getting to Windy Hill Road is the challenge.”This all points to the difficulty with efficiently serving car-centric sprawl with public transportation. BRT and managed lanes for commuter buses are both good ideas for now, and I hope they pan out. In the end, though, the best idea will be to combine these new bus routes with a plan for walkable infill development – the kind that would eliminate such a major reliance on park-and-ride service.
Georgia DOT to BuildĀ Multi-Use Path Along 400/285 Interchange
| | No Comments
Big kudos to the people at Georgia Bikes for working to create at least a small silver lining on the dark cloud that is the Ga. 400/I-285 interchange project. The Georgia Department of Transportation has committed to building a multi-use path for pedestrians and cyclists along both roadways at this junction. The AJC has the story – here’s a quote:“The final design for the path will be determined by the design-build team (which is still to be selected),” said GDOT spokeswoman Natalie Dale. “It will be a separated facility from the roadways.Construction on the interchange is expected to be complete in 2019 following a 2016 start. As some may recall, I have criticized this project heavily as being an inappropriate use of $1 billion given the serious transportation-funding issues in Georgia. Also, the Atlanta region has many other mobility needs that are not being addressed well that could use this kind of funding, including expansion of alternative transportation for the new suburban poor and for the growing ranks of seniors aging in place. This highway projects is, in effect, a billion-dollar subsidy for employment-age people in the northern suburbs who can afford cars. Given that, I’m encouraged to read that the DOT is committing to some much-needed, safe pedestrian and cycling paths through this jungle of highway infrastructure. Studies show that protected bicycle paths reduce injury risk up to 90 percent. Also, places with protected bike lanes have seen a surge in cycling. Could this path help remove some cars from the roads as commuters in that area try out cycling as an option? That would be a good outcome, though I can’t help but question how many people would feel comfortable cycling through all of this exposure to Georgia sun, alongside the tailgate emissions of a major highway interchange. Will the bike paths abruptly end on arterial roads that have no protected bike lanes? If so, I wonder what the overall safety and growth in cycling will be.“No choice but to drive”Despite my questioning of the number of people who will take advantage of the bike path, it’s certainly true that trying whatever we can to reduce the number of solo car trips among commuters is a good thing. This project certainly has the potential to help. As the AJC points out, this path will be “providing more human-powered transportation choices” which could “help reduce traffic for others who have no choice but to drive.” Which hits exactly at the source of the transportation problem – there are too many people in the Atlanta region who “have no choice but to drive” due to our car-centric built environment. A bike and pedestrian path through this massive area of dead space and car infrastructure is a good thing, to be sure. It allows for safe routes. But it’s nonetheless a case of backward development practice: we’re trying to retrofit bike/ped routes into an environment that was built very specifically for cars and that is fairly difficult to traverse by any other means; the shape of our places in the metro directly informs the range of troubles we have with transportation. Addressing only the transportation aspect in a silo – without a region-wide effort toward better urban planning that allows for infill that is friendly to bike/ped/transit options – that’s the regional dog once again chasing its tail around and around. Thanks to induced demand effect on the highways, we’ll be wanting another road upgrade in no time.The $1 billion expenditure on car flow and car safety here should be accompanied by plans to create places that are less dependent on cars. Population is rising in the region, and that means an increase in the number of people who will commute over time; we can’t just keep chasing our tail with expensive infrastructure for car-flow improvements.This bike/ped path will be a wonderful improvement in safety for existing walkers and cyclists in the area around this interchange, and I’m sure there will be some who will try out switching to a bike commute from a solo-car commute when the path is complete. But the area all around the interchange would benefit from compact urban development that is designed specifically for human-powered transportation that is safe for everyone, not just the brave few.Reducing the amount of car traffic for those people who have “no choice” but to drive – that’s an OK goal for the short term. But it needs to work hand in hand with the much more important long-term goal of reducing the number of people who have “no choice” in transportation, and doing so by making our urban places more accommodating to safe alternative transportation options across the board.