Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-18-2013, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
23,726 posts, read 24,762,829 times
Reputation: 5702

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtcorndog View Post
Reading comprehension fail.

I said it would not be faster when you include the other portions of the trip, including getting to the original MARTA station, the transfer to the original train, the train ride to Lindbergh and then the transfer to the LRT.

If you want to argue that we need LRT as a pro-growth tool, there is more merit to that than marketing it as a cost-effective transportation solution, which it clearly isn't.
What is your solution to tackling the congestion on Clifton? More buses that get stuck in traffic?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-18-2013, 01:26 PM
 
2,406 posts, read 3,342,473 times
Reputation: 907
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
What is your solution to tackling the congestion on Clifton? More buses that get stuck in traffic?
Yes. None of the proposed solutions offer a good alternative, so go ahead and run more frequent buses. Sync up the traffic lights and look at how to improve traffic flow this way. MARTA's own results of the LRT study indicate that the project does very little to alter traffic in that area regardless. Spending $700 -$1,100 million to create a solution that does little to improve the traffic is not a viable solution. Hell, you can come up with half-assed solutions that would have minimal impacts for much less than that. There are plenty of areas that are more conducive to development within the infrastructure already present. If that development occurs 2-5 miles away from the CDC/Emory, it would not be the end of the World.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 02:05 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
23,726 posts, read 24,762,829 times
Reputation: 5702
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtcorndog View Post
Yes. None of the proposed solutions offer a good alternative, so go ahead and run more frequent buses. Sync up the traffic lights and look at how to improve traffic flow this way. MARTA's own results of the LRT study indicate that the project does very little to alter traffic in that area regardless. Spending $700 -$1,100 million to create a solution that does little to improve the traffic is not a viable solution. Hell, you can come up with half-assed solutions that would have minimal impacts for much less than that. There are plenty of areas that are more conducive to development within the infrastructure already present. If that development occurs 2-5 miles away from the CDC/Emory, it would not be the end of the World.
Buses get stuck in traffic. Lights get out of sync too. Its about providing long-term solutions to congestion, your proposal is short-term and just kicking the can down the road a couple more years. Rail-based transit adds value to areas served, not all but in most cases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Decatur, GA
7,347 posts, read 6,493,194 times
Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtcorndog View Post
Yes. None of the proposed solutions offer a good alternative, so go ahead and run more frequent buses. Sync up the traffic lights and look at how to improve traffic flow this way. MARTA's own results of the LRT study indicate that the project does very little to alter traffic in that area regardless. Spending $700 -$1,100 million to create a solution that does little to improve the traffic is not a viable solution. Hell, you can come up with half-assed solutions that would have minimal impacts for much less than that. There are plenty of areas that are more conducive to development within the infrastructure already present. If that development occurs 2-5 miles away from the CDC/Emory, it would not be the end of the World.
How does adding more vehicles to traffic, improve traffic? At that point, the buses don't become a viable alternative to driving except for people who can't afford a car...or is that your plan? Keep transit in the realm of the poor so those with more political influence will reject it?
The Clifton Corridor would be mostly grade-separated, and where it isn't, still runs in a reservation within the road which wouldn't lose any lanes. This means, the trains will ALWAYS be faster than driving along the corridor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 03:04 PM
 
9,008 posts, read 13,998,458 times
Reputation: 7638
Quote:
Nobody is being forced to drive on these interchanges or cruise at high speeds.
I don't want to cruise at a high speed.

Generally, if you do want to cruise at a high speed, you have to get over into the fast lane to do so. On this interchange, you have to cut off the fast drivers whether you want to drive fast or not. It's ridiculous.

I'm glad I don't have to use this interchange. The couple of times in my life I did, I said this is the most dangerous design I have ever seen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 03:35 PM
 
32,000 posts, read 36,621,829 times
Reputation: 13269
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLTJL View Post
I'm glad I don't have to use this interchange. The couple of times in my life I did, I said this is the most dangerous design I have ever seen.
I'm with you on this one. If I'm leaving town and going straight up 400 or taking 285 eastbound I may use it, but otherwise I avoid this intersection. At peak times these umpteen-billion-dollar "freeways" don't save you much if any time anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 04:18 PM
 
Location: Savannah, GA
4,582 posts, read 8,939,778 times
Reputation: 2421
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
How does adding more vehicles to traffic, improve traffic? At that point, the buses don't become a viable alternative to driving except for people who can't afford a car...or is that your plan? Keep transit in the realm of the poor so those with more political influence will reject it?
The Clifton Corridor would be mostly grade-separated, and where it isn't, still runs in a reservation within the road which wouldn't lose any lanes. This means, the trains will ALWAYS be faster than driving along the corridor.
While I agree with you on most of this, I am going to respectfully disagree with you that merely the poor ride buses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLTJL View Post
I don't want to cruise at a high speed.

Generally, if you do want to cruise at a high speed, you have to get over into the fast lane to do so. On this interchange, you have to cut off the fast drivers whether you want to drive fast or not. It's ridiculous.

I'm glad I don't have to use this interchange. The couple of times in my life I did, I said this is the most dangerous design I have ever seen.
This is slightly off topic, but I can't stand it when someone is cruising in the far left lane.
That is, unless they move over for those going faster behind them. Generally though, the far left lane should be used for passing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Decatur, GA
7,347 posts, read 6,493,194 times
Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by WanderingImport View Post
While I agree with you on most of this, I am going to respectfully disagree with you that merely the poor ride buses.
I also respectfully disagree with myself. However, when the buses begin to take ridiculous amounts of time to travel, as gtcorndog was proposing for the Clifton Corridor, you have far less people, who can afford a car, that choose to take the significantly slower option and the statistical demographics begin to skew toward those who have no choice rather than those that do, but choose to take the bus.
But unfortunately, many people have the misconception that buses are just for the poor, and my statement was that gtcorndog's proposal would do more to maintain that misconception rather than creating a viable transit system for everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Morningside, Atlanta, GA
280 posts, read 388,393 times
Reputation: 215
[quote=gtcorndog;28303460]Yes. None of the proposed solutions offer a good alternative, so go ahead and run more frequent buses. Sync up the traffic lights and look at how to improve traffic flow this way. MARTA's own results of the LRT study indicate that the project does very little to alter traffic in that area regardless. Spending $700 -$1,100 million to create a solution that does little to improve the traffic is not a viable solution. Hell, you can come up with half-assed solutions that would have minimal impacts for much less than that. There are plenty of areas that are more conducive to development within the infrastructure already present. If that development occurs 2-5 miles away from the CDC/Emory, it would not be the end of the World.[/QUOT

Do you think the things you suggest have not been tried? You clearly don't understand the situation in the corridor. Study the map, learn the history and don't say ignorant things. Go to the Clifton corridor transportation website. Do you see the elaborate network of shuttle buses that Emory and the CDC run and how often they go? Every road to the West and South into Atlanta is ultimately one lane. On many, there are no traffic lights to sync. Should we sync the stop signs? Which neighborhood should be bulldozed? These are the same neighborhoods that defeated I-485, so good luck with your alternatives. The traffic is maxed out in the area, so LRT is not going to change it. What it will do is allow people to get though to an otherwise impassible area.

You also don't understand the type of work we do. Emory College, Emory Hospital, Children's and the CDC all have other campuses. But there is a reason that the premier facilities are clumped together in one place. It would certainly not be the end of the world to move to new facilities, but Atlanta would loose competitive advantage over our competing cities. If you want the CDC in Seattle, by all means go ahead and do nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2013, 05:49 PM
 
2,406 posts, read 3,342,473 times
Reputation: 907
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
How does adding more vehicles to traffic, improve traffic? At that point, the buses don't become a viable alternative to driving except for people who can't afford a car...or is that your plan? Keep transit in the realm of the poor so those with more political influence will reject it?
The Clifton Corridor would be mostly grade-separated, and where it isn't, still runs in a reservation within the road which wouldn't lose any lanes. This means, the trains will ALWAYS be faster than driving along the corridor.
Reading comprehension fail.

I didn't say it wouldn't be faster from Lindbergh to CDC, but look at the entire trip and the multiple transfers required at the original station and at Lindbergh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top