There is so much above I need to try to synopsize. My cut is:
1. Transit is making a BIG comeback.
2. GTA buses are great and we should all take a ride on one.
3. All growth is not good, many on UP don't understand this esp. SC pol's
4. Traffic would be minimized if we had a grid system
5. Most on the board don't like the way G'ville has been growing since the 70's, I guess excepting the ones from #3 above.
Starting from the top, I'll take your word on the transit trends. Obviously, there are people on the board who follow this breathlessly. My only thought is, until G'ville is MUCH larger I wouldn't get my hopes up for a significant increase in demand or interest on this front. Until there are REAL traffic and REAL parking problems in core areas, there won't be big demand for transit.
Which brings us to item 3, where I think most everyone agrees some developments are better than others. The issue is, for those interested in developing an urban core (see above), G'ville needs LOTS of growth, both urban AND suburban. The "managed growth" you advocate slows growth in general and delays the development of the urban core that I assume you'd like to see. Hey, I'm not advocating anything goes, but developments like Magnolia, the new one behind the Pointe, and yes, the ones on Pelham are not horrible developments. Yet, they are constantly questioned, if not outrightly opposed, by many on the board. I think that is bad news for the metro area, and by connection, for urban development within G'ville. Stopping a development on Woodruff isn't going to make the developer move it to DT - but sometimes it seems that's what some people think.
To digress, the fact is city development is dependent on large masses of people in both the city and outlying areas. It seems popular to decry the "growth and sprawl" of Atlanta, but if you really study it, DT and MT Atlanta have been BOOMING the past 10 years or so with huge development and infill. This was not the case 30 years ago, but large metro growth has inevitably created the demand for intown residential, retail, commercial, and yes, neighborhood development. Similar trends can be seen in Charlotte. This is driven by a critical mass that effectively demands core urban development for the same reasons as in #1 above, traffic, commute times, parking, nightlife, etc. G'ville doesn't have critical mass and none of the forces that drive this demand. Hence, core urban development is slow and spotty - what little we have is driven by a handful of eateries and a little nightlife, which is good, but we need more people to drive more urban development. Slowing growth in the 'burbs doesn't help our people needs.
Lastly, I'm not so sure so many are unhappy with the way G'ville has developed since the 70's. There are lots more options for living, dining, and shopping than when I moved here in the mid-90's. I think most on UP and elsewhere like that. I realize most growth has been in the 'burbs, but considering that the G'ville suburbs were so small it was inevitable that growth would flow there. Along the way, DT has done alright given the limits of a small city. What will help DT is continued growth around the city to help create that critical mass.