I-85 bridge near Piedmont Rd Collapses. (airport, light rail, best)

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Well, we've got a great heavy rail system that isn't even close to being used to capacity. Most stations only get a few thousand boardings a day, if that. There's also a huge amount of land available for TOD around many of these stations.

Before we go off on a tear spending billions on even more underused trains and stations, let's grow the bus system for our core ridership, many of whom don't have a choice about whether to ride transit. We can make their lives remarkably better in a short period of time and for far less money. That's just basic transit equity.

How many times have we been through this Arjay? I mean, seriously, how many times have we literally been through this exact same exchange?

As I have said many, many times...

1. The bus system is ALREADY being overhauled in an evaluated way to do EXACTLY what those cities who are seeing bus ridership increases did
2. Simply increasing buses without properly evaluating HOW and WHERE to increase those services just wastes resources
3. Increasing rail coverage INCREASES ridership, not only for riders from the newly served area, but for riders from the existing area
4. TODs are ALREADY under development at many stations, with more to come
5. Our rail and high-capacity network is, by many accounts, extremely limited for the size of our metro
6. Our city is expected to grow in a way that buses alone will not be able to handle

We need BOTH bus and high-capacity increases, and the bus part is ALREADY happening. The difference is that, instead of just blindly shotgunning buses at the city thinking that'll help, MARTA's actually done the work to see how and where to best increase services. And yet, MARTA is already going BEYOND that plan, and adding MORE service.

We have the bus angle pretty much covered for now, with more coming along in time. We also need the trains.



Of course, all this ignores that, in another thread, you're okay with 'going off on a tear' and spending billions on a giant tunnel project that's had zero legitimate consideration, even going so far as to suggest it use money already allocated and approved by the voters by a massive majority for completely different projects.

[architect77]

I think any new rail should be heavy and an extension of our existing backbone.

I'm not happy that whatever goes to Emory will be light-rail. It's slower, and any transition from one system to another adds time and subconsciously looms in the back of people's minds as an obstacle to quick travel.

Bus travel is a non-starter for probably 50% of potential riders, me included.

It's just a mode of travel that I've avoided completely, as it's perceived to be very slow.

In 10 years in NYC I never set foot on an MTA bus, however I did use the bus service to ferries across the Hudson for work.

MARTA is doing better, as far as public perception goes, and aren't the trains now only 8 minutes apart rather than 15 minutes during recession?

I say the stations are all fine, they just need a power-scrubbing for every interior and exterior surface. They also need bigger, clearer exit signs in case of emergency. Five Points station has signage everywhere, but the only exit to street signs are small, dimly lit standard size signs that are un-noticable in such a large open space.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by architect77

I think any new rail should be heavy and an extension of our existing backbone.

I'm not happy that whatever goes to Emory will be light-rail. It's slower, and any transition from one system to another adds time and subconsciously looms in the back of people's minds as an obstacle to quick travel.

Bus travel is a non-starter for probably 50% of potential riders, me included.

It's just a mode of travel that I've avoided completely, as it's perceived to be very slow.

In 10 years in NYC I never set foot on an MTA bus, however I did use the bus service to ferries across the Hudson for work.

MARTA is doing better, as far as public perception goes, and aren't the travels now only 8 minutes apart rather than 15 minutes during recession?

I say the stations are all fine, they just need a power-scrubbing for every interior and exterior surface. They also need bigger, clearer exit signs in case of emergency. Five Points station has signage everywhere, but the only exit to street signs are small, dimly lit standard size signs that are un-noticable in such a large open space.

I think light rail on the Clifton corridor really cuts into choice riders. Their own initial studies showed half the ridership for the Lindberg to Emory section.

Do it right or don't do it.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by bu2

I think light rail on the Clifton corridor really cuts into choice riders. Their own initial studies showed half the ridership for the Lindberg to Emory section.

Do it right or don't do it.

Well, it depends on your definition of right. The heavy rail options were twice as expensive, just about as fast, with much larger, more disruptive stations. You'd be carving more land out for a shorter route.

Besides, there's a connection that people seem to be forgetting. The Clifton Corridor will be running LRVs that could very likely run on the BeltLine as well, and the two will be meeting at Armor and/or Lindbergh. There are a whole swath of one-seat ride options there that won't be available with the heavy rail network.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Well, it depends on your definition of right. The heavy rail options were twice as expensive, just about as fast, with much larger, more disruptive stations. You'd be carving more land out for a shorter route.

Besides, there's a connection that people seem to be forgetting. The Clifton Corridor will be running LRVs that could very likely run on the BeltLine as well, and the two will be meeting at Armor and/or Lindbergh. There are a whole swath of one-seat ride options there that won't be available with the heavy rail network.

I've never seen any plans for that and the trip would be a V shape and pretty inefficient. There are a lot of one seat ride plans they had with heavy rail. Much of the employment comes from Gwinnett and SE DeKalb, which heavy rail could serve and light rail has zero ability to serve.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by bu2

I've never seen any plans for that and the trip would be a V shape and pretty inefficient. There are a lot of one seat ride plans they had with heavy rail. Much of the employment comes from Gwinnett and SE DeKalb, which heavy rail could serve and light rail has zero ability to serve.

Doesn't mean it's not still an option, especially now that MARTA's potentially, and very much planning on, running the Light Rail lines along the BeltLine. Before it was pretty well split between ABI and MARTA as far as planning was going.

[architect77]

The MARTA trains get up to 75 mph from Lindbergh to Midtown, I've stood up front beside the operator looking at the speedometer.

I've never known light rail systems to go that fast.

I still think any transition to another rail system is problematic if the goal is for people choosing train over driving.

Even sitting at Lindbergh to change trains is 10 minutes more or less, and at night it's even more of a hassle. So I think that's about the limit that people will tolerate before defaulting back to their cars.

This doesn't apply to those that have to use MARTA, of course.

I wonder if heavy rail is priced as underground or elevated tracks, seems like Emory line would be mostly above ground.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by architect77

The MARTA trains get up to 75 mph from Lindbergh to Midtown, I've stood up front beside the operator looking at the speedometer.

I've never known light rail systems to go that fast.

I still think any transition to another rail system is problematic if the goal is for people choosing train over driving.

Even sitting at Lindbergh to change trains is 10 minutes more or less, and at night it's even more of a hassle. So I think that's about the limit that people will tolerate before defaulting back to their cars.

This doesn't apply to those that have to use MARTA, of course.

I wonder if heavy rail is priced as underground or elevated tracks, seems like Emory line would be mostly above ground.

Rule of thumb for the industry is that they lose between 25 and 40% of ridership with each transfer.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by architect77

The MARTA trains get up to 75 mph from Lindbergh to Midtown, I've stood up front beside the operator looking at the speedometer.

I've never known light rail systems to go that fast.

I still think any transition to another rail system is problematic if the goal is for people choosing train over driving.

Even sitting at Lindbergh to change trains is 10 minutes more or less, and at night it's even more of a hassle. So I think that's about the limit that people will tolerate before defaulting back to their cars.

This doesn't apply to those that have to use MARTA, of course.

I wonder if heavy rail is priced as underground or elevated tracks, seems like Emory line would be mostly above ground.

The trains wouldn't get up to that speed along the clifton corridor, though. The travel time differences between heavy rail and light rail in the CC were minimal.

The transfer time at Lindbergh, is only 4 or 5 minutes during rush hour, and 6 minutes during the rest of the day. It's not until later at night and on the weekends that it becomes 10 minutes.

Originally Posted by bu2

Rule of thumb for the industry is that they lose between 25 and 40% of ridership with each transfer.

The question, though, is which transfer are we going to favor? There will have to be some kind of transfer, but who do we want to provide one-seat rides to? Do we want to follow Councilman Hall's 'S' Concept? Or do we want to return to the already dropped, reevaluated and dropped again, heavy rail stub?

[samiwas1]

Ugh. I cannot wait for this damn bridge to reopen. Today was my second-longest commute in the 12 months I've been doing that commute. No traffic is 23-25 minutes. Normal rush hour is about 40-45 minutes. Worst ever was 1:14. Today was 1:09. And, of course, winding through neighborhoods with hundreds of others.