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)
 
Old 11-28-2016, 07:16 PM
 
28,147 posts, read 24,679,387 times
Reputation: 9544

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by magnetar View Post
Or the quick and convenient MARTA train that parallels DeKalb, perhaps.
Well, yeah, but that line has been there 40 years and it has never generated a great deal of local ridership.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-28-2016, 07:17 PM
 
Location: In your feelings
2,199 posts, read 1,491,763 times
Reputation: 2168
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
Well, yeah, but that line has been there 40 years and it has never generated a great deal of local ridership.
Treating DeKalb as more of a neighborhood street with houses and businesses on it, which it is, instead of as a miniature freeway, might just do the trick to inspire folks to give MARTA a try.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2016, 08:19 PM
 
2,074 posts, read 2,002,327 times
Reputation: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnetar View Post
The study you linked two is two years old, the result of a Georgia Tech student project led by Mike Dobbins who, for reasons passing understanding, is a fan of reversible lanes. The plan is still being updated.



A number of those "hundreds of comments" were from my neighbors in Reynoldstown who live right next to these lanes, and hate them.

The current executive of the Memorial Drive project at Central Atlanta Progress is Greg Giuffrida. In August 2016 he spoke at the Reynoldstown community meeting and gave an update that included this:



That last bullet point isn't specific to this conversation, but I include it because I'm so jazzed about that project.

All signs point to the reversible lanes going away on Memorial Drive, too. In a perfect (self-driving) world they might work alright for cars. But with human drivers still a factor, they don't work. People make mistakes. They get confused. And they cause crashes. There are plenty of reasons to remove the reversible lanes that have only to do with making car drivers' lives better.
So the last guy was a fan of reversible lanes, the new guy isn't, and that invalidates the research that was done back then? Point is, someone at the top of all of these projects is steering the conversation towards solutions they favor, on Dekalb and Memorial. It's got less to do with finding solutions that make sense for everyone (not just everyone who attends meetings) and more to do with justifying a heavily biased future vision.

Here's the rub: it's seemingly impossible to be critical of any of these projects without being attacked as an outdated, subburban-gobbling, automotive worshiper who hates progress and safety.

Some of us are reasonable people who just need to get to work on time, and can't spend 90 minutes doing it on MARTA each way. Some of us are realists about the neighborhood cut through traffic this is going to create and want to see that given real consideration instead of just lip service. Some of us don't have jobs where showers or lax hygiene standards make bike commuting a reliable alternative, even if distances are manageable. Some of us have jobs that require short notice travel to other sites around the city, and need flexibility to do that. The default answer for criticism of this project is just to yell "OMG but there is a train right there if traffic is bad just use that train LOL!", and that's where people tune out. You aren't going to brow beat people into riding marta, and being unwilling or unable to doesnt make them the dregs of society.

MARTA simply isn't a solution for a lot of people. Saying that out loud seems to offend some transit fans to their very core, for some reason. Like they take personal offense to the fact that my life does not fit into the neat little box that is their personal ecosystem, and can't picture a job environment that doesn't accommodate their desire to ride a bike to work. I'd love to not drive; really. But thems the breaks. We can talk about transit improvements and expansions that might be viable in the coming decades with recent funding increases and offer some relief, but that's honestly a totally different time scale than the pain these projects will create.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2016, 09:45 PM
 
Location: In your feelings
2,199 posts, read 1,491,763 times
Reputation: 2168
Quote:
Originally Posted by red92s View Post
So the last guy was a fan of reversible lanes, the new guy isn't, and that invalidates the research that was done back then? Point is, someone at the top of all of these projects is steering the conversation towards solutions they favor, on Dekalb and Memorial. It's got less to do with finding solutions that make sense for everyone (not just everyone who attends meetings) and more to do with justifying a heavily biased future vision.
Incorrect understanding of what I wrote. The early project seemed to consider Memorial's status as an arterial as a primary concern. The process of revising the plan through community input, which is exactly what the quote I provided talks about, is the process by which the plan has changed from reversible lanes to a center turn lane.

Regardless of your choices about where to live and where to work and how to get from one to the other, Memorial is a street just a block from my house, that runs through the middle of my neighborhood. I am highly invested in making it an easier place to drive stress-free, make left turns, make safe pedestrian crossings, and yes *gasp* possibly even ride a bicycle. It's a street in my neighborhood. Anyone else's desire to use it to get to work in the morning is secondary to the needs of the communities the road passes through. This is a three-lane city street, not an interstate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2016, 10:41 PM
 
28,147 posts, read 24,679,387 times
Reputation: 9544
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnetar View Post
Regardless of your choices about where to live and where to work and how to get from one to the other, Memorial is a street just a block from my house, that runs through the middle of my neighborhood. I am highly invested in making it an easier place to drive stress-free, make left turns, make safe pedestrian crossings, and yes *gasp* possibly even ride a bicycle. It's a street in my neighborhood. Anyone else's desire to use it to get to work in the morning is secondary to the needs of the communities the road passes through. This is a three-lane city street, not an interstate.
Absolutely. The people who live in the area must be given primary consideration with respect to the streets in their community. Nobody's got a right to come barreling through your neighborhood because they failed to get up in time to travel at a lawful and respectful speed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 07:19 AM
 
Location: Kirkwood
22,177 posts, read 16,180,310 times
Reputation: 4903
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
Absolutely. The people who live in the area must be given primary consideration with respect to the streets in their community. Nobody's got a right to come barreling through your neighborhood because they failed to get up in time to travel at a lawful and respectful speed.
^^^This all day long. Instead of developing our city for cars and commuters, we should focus on the thing that makes it a city... THE PEOPLE who live in it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 07:23 AM
 
Location: Kirkwood
22,177 posts, read 16,180,310 times
Reputation: 4903
Quote:
Originally Posted by red92s View Post
So the last guy was a fan of reversible lanes, the new guy isn't, and that invalidates the research that was done back then? Point is, someone at the top of all of these projects is steering the conversation towards solutions they favor, on Dekalb and Memorial. It's got less to do with finding solutions that make sense for everyone (not just everyone who attends meetings) and more to do with justifying a heavily biased future vision.

Here's the rub: it's seemingly impossible to be critical of any of these projects without being attacked as an outdated, subburban-gobbling, automotive worshiper who hates progress and safety.

Some of us are reasonable people who just need to get to work on time, and can't spend 90 minutes doing it on MARTA each way. Some of us are realists about the neighborhood cut through traffic this is going to create and want to see that given real consideration instead of just lip service. Some of us don't have jobs where showers or lax hygiene standards make bike commuting a reliable alternative, even if distances are manageable. Some of us have jobs that require short notice travel to other sites around the city, and need flexibility to do that. The default answer for criticism of this project is just to yell "OMG but there is a train right there if traffic is bad just use that train LOL!", and that's where people tune out. You aren't going to brow beat people into riding marta, and being unwilling or unable to doesnt make them the dregs of society.

MARTA simply isn't a solution for a lot of people. Saying that out loud seems to offend some transit fans to their very core, for some reason. Like they take personal offense to the fact that my life does not fit into the neat little box that is their personal ecosystem, and can't picture a job environment that doesn't accommodate their desire to ride a bike to work. I'd love to not drive; really. But thems the breaks. We can talk about transit improvements and expansions that might be viable in the coming decades with recent funding increases and offer some relief, but that's honestly a totally different time scale than the pain these projects will create.
You are still focused on this project being about removing a lane for bike lanes, but that is not what it is about. It is about operational and safety improvements that will make the corridor safer for all modes of transportation. Years of research has shown that removing a general travel lane for a center turn lane and/or protected left turn lanes will improve the traffic flow on the remaining thru lanes. In fact we have Ponce as an example right here in Atlanta. The road design of having 4 thru lanes is outdated and professional traffic engineers agree, that removing 2 thru lanes and creating a turn lane will make the road safer and operate better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:24 PM
 
560 posts, read 307,602 times
Reputation: 1817
I'd like to build an elevated roadway for bicycles only above all the Marta tracks where possible. Make the Marta stations be access points. The footprint at ground level should be small enough that the elevated part could continue in places where the train goes underground. Maybe combine it with the power/phone/cable distribution poles and run that stuff below the track.
Won't have to buy right-of-way like paved solutions would require.
There could be spur lines for access to downtown buildings and places such as Lenox mall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
22,177 posts, read 16,180,310 times
Reputation: 4903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thulsa View Post
I'd like to build an elevated roadway for bicycles only above all the Marta tracks where possible. Make the Marta stations be access points. The footprint at ground level should be small enough that the elevated part could continue in places where the train goes underground. Maybe combine it with the power/phone/cable distribution poles and run that stuff below the track.
Won't have to buy right-of-way like paved solutions would require.
There could be spur lines for access to downtown buildings and places such as Lenox mall.
And where do you propose getting the millions needed to do this idea?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 08:51 AM
 
560 posts, read 307,602 times
Reputation: 1817
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
And where do you propose getting the millions needed to do this idea?




Here's a couple of ideas.
Redirect 1% of the existing transportation budget for 5 years to build above road bicycle infrastructure in urban areas.
Or suspend the 180 million dollar 10-mile HOT lane by I-85 that's being proposed and use that money.


Build main routes above existing Marta and roadways to avoid purchasing land. Then re-evaluate usage. If the bicycle ridership expands enough to merit continuing, then expand. If ridership does not appear, then cancel the project.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top