Transportation choices attract young professionals

Transportation choices attract young professionals
By Brad Alexander

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/transportation-choices-attract-young-584278.html

The debate between advocates of transit and supporters of highways often revolves around a metric that might appear simple and indisputable at first blush: dollars invested on a per-traveler, per-mile basis.

If one accepts this guiding principle, the case for roads often becomes stronger because public funds are simply used to pour asphalt and build bridges; passengers cover the costs of the actual cars themselves.

But public investment should never be viewed through such a myopic lens. If government is going to invest hard-earned tax dollars in infrastructure, it owes voters a comprehensive look at the cost and benefits of specific choices.

In transportation, this means considering job creation, real estate values and quality of life in addition to congestion relief.

Cities across America are competing for what urban theorist Richard Florida calls the “creative class.”

The core of Florida’s theory is that as high labor and regulatory costs make the United States a less competitive location for traditional manufacturing, future job creation here will be driven by the creation of intellectual property — cures for diseases, new inventions, entertainment products and more.

The people who will create this intellectual property are the highly educated young people who are not tied down to any specific location and can live anywhere in the world.

If a city can attract large numbers of these people to live their professional lives in its borders, it will gain immeasurable economic advantage in terms of future job creation.

Young professionals today — the lifeblood of tomorrow’s great cities — are looking for a city with transportation choices. Recent DOT statistics show that Americans in their 20s drove 7.7 percent fewer miles in the last decade.

Clearly, the idea that owning a car is a key milestone to adulthood is losing some currency in America.

On the real estate front, studies establish a clear relationship between transit options and property values.

In Georgia, transit-oriented developments such as Atlantic Station, Lindbergh City Center, the Perimeter CID and the downtown hotel/stadium/museum district have created substantial real estate value for owners.

The debate here isn’t whether proximity to transit enhances real estate values, but how landowners who benefit can fairly contribute to the construction and operation of transit systems. While many of us prefer to live in single-family subdivisions linked by roads, the market clearly doesn’t support the notion that such developments are an optimal real estate investment.

From a governmental perspective, property tax receipts rise as commercial real estate values increase, meaning schools and police protection can be provided without homeowners carrying all the burden.

Additionally, any convention planner will gladly extol the benefits of a strong transit system when it comes to booking massive events that pump millions into an economy.

You can’t ignore the fact that the biggest economic failure of a city in America, Detroit, has also refused to make any meaningful investments in transit.

In a recent bipartisan survey conducted by two of the most reputable polling firms in the nation, respondents were offered a choice between spending funds on transit options and building new roads.

They chose transit by a margin of 59 percent to 38 percent.

The American public knows where it wants to be and is waiting on its policy leaders to catch up.

Brad Alexander, a partner with Georgia360 Public Affairs, is a former state government official and congressional staff member.