MARTA unveils its dream project list for November Referendum (Atlanta: per square foot, employers)

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Okay, let's go ultra conservative.

Take it down to 25 units per acre. (New Brookhaven complexes like Rosewood and @1377 have about 70 DU per acre).

With 2600 developable acres, you get 65,000 new apartments with 1/2 mile of an existing MARTA station.

If average occupancy is 1.5 per unit, you've just provided housing for 97,500 new residents within easy walking distance of existing heavy rail transit within the Atlanta city limits alone. We're not laying a finger on stations like East Point, Dunwoody, College Park, Medical Center, Kensington, Sandy Springs or Decatur.

For perspective, bear in mind that even with the explosive growth of Midtown over the last 20 years, the core population is around 15,000.

I'd still say that that's a highly optimistic target, but if we can hit it, then great!


But that's still only 97,500 out of the 900,000 people expected to come live in the city by 2050, or 11%. That still only represents 5% of the metro's over all new population by 2040.


With low meeting points like that, we will absolutely need to do similar with all of the other stations you mentioned, as well as many of the ones you didn't mention, and plenty of new stations too.


Edit: I'm not sure I'd consider a density twice that of Midtown, or a third of Manhattan island, to be terribly conservative. Not putting down the proposal, but I would be (pleasantly) surprised if we could meet even that goal.

[cqholt]

Good call MARTA, this will help the Atlanta Transit Sales Tax go further.

MARTA expects to save a total of $41.6 million in future interest costs by refinancing $250 million in bonds that were sold in 2009. Part of the money was to have helped pay for a long-envisioned bus that would travel in a dedicated lane.
Terms of the 2009 bond show the $250 million was to be spent on items that could include, but not be limited to: bus replacement; rail car maintenance; a new bus route that would operate in a dedicated lane; train control systems upgrades; fire safety systems; track and struture renovation and rehabilitation.
Specifically, the money was to be in the following categories:
Constrution/maintain a state of good repair: $216.7 million;
Reserve fund: $25 million;
Capitalized interest, through July 1, 2011: $22.2 million;
Cost of issuance: $1.7 million

MARTA saves millions by paying off a debt incurred partly to fund bus rapid transit - SaportaReport

[primaltech]

They saved $41.6 million by switching to GEICO

[bu2]

The Benefits of Light Rail | The Antiplanner
Blog espousing the benefits of buses vs. light rail

"Light rail was supposed to be “all-weather transportation,” which turns out to be true so long as “all weather” means “all temperatures between 32 and 90 degrees.” When temperatures fall below 32, the overhead wires ice up and trains lose power. When they rise above 90, as they are now, the overhead wires sag, and trains have to slow to no more than 40 mph to prevent the wires from breaking. At 100 degrees (which it was yesterday), they have to slow to no more than 35 mph.
TriMet, Portland’s transit agency, offered free rides on the light rail on Wednesday and Thursday. However, this was less as an apology to the riders for slow trains than it was because the system’s ticket machines also stopped working in the heat.
It’s too bad there is no technology capable of moving large numbers of people in hot weather without worrying about overhead wires, and without worrying about one stopped vehicle blocking every other vehicle in the system. Oh wait, there is: it’s called buses. While they don’t relieve congestion any better than light rail, they cost a lot less. If Portland had relied on buses rather than rail, it would have had about $5 billion it could have spent on improving the region’s roadway system to relieve congestion for buses, cars, and trucks alike."

[bu2]

Another from the same author bemoaning Austin's choice of commuter rail over express bus:

The Hidden Cost of Rail Transit | The Antiplanner

"The Texas Department of Transportation, which is building the freeway, needs $18 million from Capital Metro now to buy the extra land needed for the bus stops. But Capital Metro doesn’t have it. Nor does it have the $105 million more needed to actually build the bus stops.
Where could it get the money? The best way would be to shutter the agency’s pathetic, 32-mile commuter-rail line. In 2015, Capital Metro spent more than $20 million operating and maintaining this line, but received less than $2.5 million in fares. The trains carried fewer than 1,500 round trips per day, which means each daily round-trip rider cost taxpayers nearly $12,000."

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by bu2

The Benefits of Light Rail | The Antiplanner
Blog espousing the benefits of buses vs. light rail

"Light rail was supposed to be “all-weather transportation,” which turns out to be true so long as “all weather” means “all temperatures between 32 and 90 degrees.” When temperatures fall below 32, the overhead wires ice up and trains lose power. When they rise above 90, as they are now, the overhead wires sag, and trains have to slow to no more than 40 mph to prevent the wires from breaking. At 100 degrees (which it was yesterday), they have to slow to no more than 35 mph.
TriMet, Portland’s transit agency, offered free rides on the light rail on Wednesday and Thursday. However, this was less as an apology to the riders for slow trains than it was because the system’s ticket machines also stopped working in the heat.
It’s too bad there is no technology capable of moving large numbers of people in hot weather without worrying about overhead wires, and without worrying about one stopped vehicle blocking every other vehicle in the system. Oh wait, there is: it’s called buses. While they don’t relieve congestion any better than light rail, they cost a lot less. If Portland had relied on buses rather than rail, it would have had about $5 billion it could have spent on improving the region’s roadway system to relieve congestion for buses, cars, and trucks alike."

Comparing the climate of Portland to that of Atlanta? WMATA's rails buckled under 90 degree+ heat, yet MARTA's did not. Ever think that there is different material ratios to be used for different climates?

[bu2]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tale-...tury-bill-king

This is by an anti-rail gadfly in Houston (he's been fighting rail there as long as I remember). He has some interesting numbers on Dallas (with a massive investment in light rail) vs. Houston transit (focused more on buses). You can make different conclusions on ridership depending on whether you are looking at 20 years vs. 5 or 10.

He adds an entertaining (and true!) quote by former MTA board chairman and Houston mayor Bob Lanier, who killed a monorail type system that was approved by Houston voters, but several years later implemented Houston's first light rail system.

"But there is something akin to a religious belief in rail that I have never been able to understand.*The late, great Bob Lanier best summarized it:
"First, rail's supporters say 'It's cheaper.' When you show it costs more, they say, 'It's faster.' When you show it's slower, they say, 'It serves more riders.' When you show there are fewer riders, they say, 'It brings economic development. When you show no economic development, they say, 'It helps the image.' When you say you don't want to spend that much money on image, they say, 'It will solve the pollution problem. When you show it won't help pollution, they say, finally, 'It will take time. You'll see.'""

[bu2]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Comparing the climate of Portland to that of Atlanta? WMATA's rails buckled under 90 degree+ heat, yet MARTA's did not. Ever think that there is different material ratios to be used for different climates?

MARTA is heavy rail while Portland has light rail with overhead wires, so its not a relevant comparison.

It is a problem that a city like Portland, heavily invested in this mode of transit, didn't properly consider.

[bu2]

https://www.citylab.com/transportati...m_source=atlfb

Honolulu's $5 billion will cost $10-$13 billion-if it gets completed. The original estimate was $250 million/mile. Now the official estimate is $500 million and other estimates are $650 million/mile. Some are recommending abandoning the line, as the New Jersey subway tunnel and Baltimore Red line were.

[bu2]

Some actual data on HOV lanes working (a common complaint is that they are "always empty"): A city scraps its HOV lanes. Disaster ensues. - Jul. 6, 2017

A new study from MIT researchers, published Thursday in Science, showed the impact on a city's traffic when high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes were removed.

The average speed of Jakarta drivers during the evening rush hour plummeted from 13 mph to 7 mph. In the morning, speeds fell from 18 mph to 12 mph. The impacts weren't felt solely in the HOV lanes, but across the city.
"The magnitude was enormous and more than I would've expected," MIT professor Ben Olken told CNN Tech.

That impact "across the city" is what Atlanta has experienced with various localized problems such as the plane crash on 285, Snowmaggedon (I-75 at I-285 made things worse everywhere) and the I-85 collapse.