MARTA transit plan includes 21 miles of light rail (Atlanta, Marietta: train station, design)

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by bu2

Dallas has 93 miles of light rail and a 2.5 mile streetcar, all built from the 90s on.
Atlanta has 47 miles of heavy rail and a similar streetcar with only the streetcar built in the last 18 years and little of the HRT built since the 80s.
They've done a lot while Atlanta has done next to nothing.

Dallas has built LRT to the burbs. And as you noted, they do have very low ridership. It raises serious questions about the rationale for building rail to the low density suburbs.

I'd be interested in hearing how Dallas comes up with the money to build all this.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I'd be interested in hearing how Dallas comes up with the money to build all this.

Same way as Atlanta. Sales tax with federal matching. There are some state funds, but they are pretty limited.

[bu2]

Dallas is pretty much spent out. Their long range plan has had some conflict between commuter rail and a subway downtown (they have street level light rail downtown and it is causing problems with traffic and it limits the number of trains they can run). They are worried they don't have enough to do both. Houston got delayed on their westside line and doesn't have any money to build it right now. The 1% sales tax just doesn't seem to be enough anymore with construction inflation. Hence, Atlanta voted in their extra %.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by bu2

Same way as Atlanta. Sales tax with federal matching. There are some state funds, but they are pretty limited.

They must be pretty durn efficient with their spending. Don't they have a lower sales tax than we do?

[primaltech]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

They will be announcing a study of the effectiveness of a future study to begin in 2025, which will decide whether it's viable to organize a committee by 2030 to determine the steps needed to work on a 2035 design for a 3.5 mile light rail line between East Point and Rosedale Heights, which would then be presented to vote, with a ground-breaking sometime in 2043, and completion in 2057, with overall study costs of $638 million, construction costs of $9.7 billion, and an expected ridership of 376 per day.

And then in 2043 a few months before groundbreaking, the mayor of Johns Creek will block most of the whole thing, and send it all back to the drawing board for more studies, while insisting he's not anti-transit.

Let's face it, people. This metro will always be all about cars. Cars, cars, cars. By the time we're in our 80's and 90's, the only real changes will probably be in the various advancing technology of the world of cars. And the ownership model of cars, probably fewer % of people will own them, and less % parking will be needed than today probably, but most everyone will still get around via cars in Metro Atlanta. It's just so inherently built for vehicles.

There might be a little more streetcar/light rail, but that won't make much of a dent in much of anything. There might be a couple new heavy rail stations at most, for minimal overall impact. There will be more buses and more frequent buses I guess, but their impact on overall transportation will still be small. And commuter rail of some kind will probably exist at some point, maybe 1 or 2 lines of it, but it still won't change the overall cars-based culture. Won't even make a scratch. I mean if Cobb had commuter rail to downtown starting on Monday, some people would take the train, but most people would not. The majority of commuters would not. Not because of a lack of willingness, but because of it not being a better option.

I doubt if in my lifetime transit usage in Metro Atlanta (% of total trips taken by traditional public transit and not a vehicle), will surpass 10%. It might gradually edge closer to 10% by the time I'm older, maybe. With maybe 15% in the city, maybe 20% in the most urban core areas of the city. Which would be a dramatic increase vs now.

And there's nothing wrong with all that, IMO. Cars are awesome, for a ton of reasons. And I'm excited about the technological advancements on the horizon. It would be great if we could completely get rid of exhaust, and if autonomous technology significantly reduces accidents/fatalities and improves the general flow of traffic. Even if total self-driving takes a long time to fully take over (or even if it never does.)

Honestly the biggest transit-related future revolution that we could potentially have around here (and one that I personally hope for), is if an autonomous, public tax-subsidized version of Lyft, became our transit system. Like, let's say, $5 flat-rate fare, within a certain given area, such as within the 5 core counties.

That would be like having most of the best aspects of cars and transit, without most of the worst aspects of cars and transit. And the more we moved away from stupid human drivers, the less congestion and better smart traffic management, and the faster we'll all get to our destination. And big tax projects could be for creating tunnels for these 'pods' to zoom around the metro. Like a personal rapid transit, or transit for 4 people in a small compact vehicle or whatever. We already have the infrastructure built out for it.

Then, transit usage would probably be 50% or higher. It wouldn't be packed-in-like-sardines Tokyo style of transit, or the Manhattan style of transit, but I believe vehicles can still be transit, particularly with whatever the future brings in the world of AV. Like right now we think of cars in a lane and we think of spacing, but with computers running the whole thing, they could be inches apart. The lanes on I-75 might someday look like 10 super long trains. That's extreme/exaggeration, but still, we don't know what to expect. Nobody 30 years ago knew what 2018 would look like, and we don't know what 2048 will look like. But I don't think it will be what we can imagine in our current 2018 worlds of thinking and knowledge.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I'd be interested in hearing how Dallas comes up with the money to build all this.

Maybe they just do it instead of drafting 17 different studies and designs.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by arjay57

They must be pretty durn efficient with their spending. Don't they have a lower sales tax than we do?

Houston is 8.25%-6.25% state, 1% city, 1% transit.

There are different exemptions. Don't really remember off the top of my head.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by primaltech

[Edited for brevity]Then, transit usage would probably be 50% or higher. It wouldn't be packed-in-like-sardines Tokyo style of transit, or the Manhattan style of transit, but I believe vehicles can still be transit, particularly with whatever the future brings in the world of AV. Like right now we think of cars in a lane and we think of spacing, but with computers running the whole thing, they could be inches apart. The lanes on I-75 might someday look like 10 super long trains. That's extreme/exaggeration, but still, we don't know what to expect. Nobody 30 years ago knew what 2018 would look like, and we don't know what 2048 will look like. But I don't think it will be what we can imagine in our current 2018 worlds of thinking and knowledge.

Excellent post, primaltech.

The key to effective mass transit is to make it convenient, so you can get where you need to go on your own schedule. That's why most people choose the personal transportation pod. It also gives you more privacy, comfort, and room to carry other passengers and cargo.

[SEAandATL]

Originally Posted by bu2

Dallas is pretty much spent out. Their long range plan has had some conflict between commuter rail and a subway downtown (they have street level light rail downtown and it is causing problems with traffic and it limits the number of trains they can run). They are worried they don't have enough to do both. Houston got delayed on their westside line and doesn't have any money to build it right now. The 1% sales tax just doesn't seem to be enough anymore with construction inflation. Hence, Atlanta voted in their extra %.

Is everywhere in the DFW metroplex within 1 mile of a train station like Tokyo? Or is it like here where even if there was a commuter rail line to Cumberland, Marietta Square, Kennesaw; many residents in East Cobb would still be too far from it so they are still better off driving.

Originally Posted by primaltech

And then in 2043 a few months before groundbreaking, the mayor of Johns Creek will block most of the whole thing, and send it all back to the drawing board for more studies, while insisting he's not anti-transit.

Let's face it, people. This metro will always be all about cars. Cars, cars, cars. By the time we're in our 80's and 90's, the only real changes will probably be in the various advancing technology of the world of cars. And the ownership model of cars, probably fewer % of people will own them, and less % parking will be needed than today probably, but most everyone will still get around via cars in Metro Atlanta. It's just so inherently built for vehicles.

There might be a little more streetcar/light rail, but that won't make much of a dent in much of anything. There might be a couple new heavy rail stations at most, for minimal overall impact. There will be more buses and more frequent buses I guess, but their impact on overall transportation will still be small. And commuter rail of some kind will probably exist at some point, maybe 1 or 2 lines of it, but it still won't change the overall cars-based culture. Won't even make a scratch. I mean if Cobb had commuter rail to downtown starting on Monday, some people would take the train, but most people would not. The majority of commuters would not. Not because of a lack of willingness, but because of it not being a better option.

I doubt if in my lifetime transit usage in Metro Atlanta (% of total trips taken by traditional public transit and not a vehicle), will surpass 10%. It might gradually edge closer to 10% by the time I'm older, maybe. With maybe 15% in the city, maybe 20% in the most urban core areas of the city. Which would be a dramatic increase vs now.

And there's nothing wrong with all that, IMO. Cars are awesome, for a ton of reasons. And I'm excited about the technological advancements on the horizon. It would be great if we could completely get rid of exhaust, and if autonomous technology significantly reduces accidents/fatalities and improves the general flow of traffic. Even if total self-driving takes a long time to fully take over (or even if it never does.)

Honestly the biggest transit-related future revolution that we could potentially have around here (and one that I personally hope for), is if an autonomous, public tax-subsidized version of Lyft, became our transit system. Like, let's say, $5 flat-rate fare, within a certain given area, such as within the 5 core counties.

That would be like having most of the best aspects of cars and transit, without most of the worst aspects of cars and transit. And the more we moved away from stupid human drivers, the less congestion and better smart traffic management, and the faster we'll all get to our destination. And big tax projects could be for creating tunnels for these 'pods' to zoom around the metro. Like a personal rapid transit, or transit for 4 people in a small compact vehicle or whatever. We already have the infrastructure built out for it.

Then, transit usage would probably be 50% or higher. It wouldn't be packed-in-like-sardines Tokyo style of transit, or the Manhattan style of transit, but I believe vehicles can still be transit, particularly with whatever the future brings in the world of AV. Like right now we think of cars in a lane and we think of spacing, but with computers running the whole thing, they could be inches apart. The lanes on I-75 might someday look like 10 super long trains. That's extreme/exaggeration, but still, we don't know what to expect. Nobody 30 years ago knew what 2018 would look like, and we don't know what 2048 will look like. But I don't think it will be what we can imagine in our current 2018 worlds of thinking and knowledge.

30 years ago we thought cars would be flying by now. But AV's will become more common soon, if people can trust them.

[2Easy]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Over 100k per day ridership. I wouldn't call that "very low". Light rail is fairly slow, and not really good for longer distances.

That’s about 1,000 passengers per mile and on the low end in comparison to its peers.

Denver is slightly higher at 1,100 per mile. Houston is much higher at 2,500 per mile. San Diego, Portland, and LA are all quite a bit higher but have been around longer. MARTA is heavy rail so not necessarily a fair comparison but it’s 4,500 per mile.