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.
feasible housing around transit stations actually is needed and would help in general.. overall in the METRO would it make a big difference, probably not..but it would put some people "on track with MARTA" so to speak...Primarily, the people who want to be near it to begin with. In a sense I guess it would be to state its a start... but I also must state... I still can't expect everyone to agree and hop on the bandwagon only just because its near MARTA, there are many other factors / variables to consider too. Some people really want a house with alot of land, some people want to be near a specific school district, some people want to live near their doctor, and some people really just like living in the suburb they live in.
feasible housing around transit stations actually is needed and would help in general.. overall in the METRO would it make a big difference, probably not..but it would put some people "on track with MARTA" so to speak...Primarily, the people who want to be near it to begin with. In a sense I guess it would be to state its a start... but I also must state... I still can't expect everyone to agree and hop on the bandwagon only just because its near MARTA, there are many other factors / variables to consider too. Some people really want a house with alot of land, some people want to be near a specific school district, some people want to live near their doctor, and some people really just like living in the suburb they live in.
Yep. And people should certainly should have that option. Not denying that. But every choice comes with pros, cons, costs, and benefits. From a policy perspective if we are going to favor / encourage / subsidize a certain lifestyle it should not be car-dependent suburban sprawl since it is simply not possible to effectively move 90%+ of people around a large city by car.
ATLANTA MASS TRANSIT & BEDROOM COMMUNITIES
FOUR TRACK RAIL (EXPRESS & LOCAL)
Imagine commuter train service connecting Atlanta to:
Duluth, Lilburn, Stone mountain, Forest Park, Austell, Villa Rica, Temple, Smyrna, Marietta, Dunwoody, Roswell, Kennesaw, Jonesboro, Union City, Gainesville, Canton, Buford, Griffin, Carrollton, and Newnan. . .
With four tracks, trains can also utilize intelligent destination routing, so that express trains can bypass stations that have no passengers to drop off or pick up, improving average speed.
A 30 mile trip from Downtown Marietta to Hartsfield-Jackson airport would take 15 to 25 minutes, instead of 50 minutes by car (plus wasted time for parking, etc, etc).
A 45 mile trip from Temple to the North Avenue Transit station might only take 20 to 30 minutes.
100,000 passengers per hour x $10 per fare = $1,000,000 revenue per hour
(Uber charges roughly $1/mile, so a 30 mile trip from Marietta to Hartsfield-Jackson would cost $30)
STAR AND RING
If the robust rail network was designed so that express commuters could change trains at the perimeter, and bypass going into central Atlanta, improved performance and convenience would result.
For example, an airport express running from Kennesaw might need to stop once at the perimeter [Cumberland mall?], pick up / discharge passengers, and then continue to Hartsfield-Jackson airport (along the perimeter ring), avoiding the need for going through central Atlanta, bypassing the yards, and stopping at the many local stations. In addition, the perimeter ring rail could serve the regional airports.
This would mesh well with the Greenbelt, that loops through inner Atlanta. Connecting spurs would radiate outward and provide service to almost every community.
Last edited by jetgraphics; 05-31-2018 at 09:04 PM..
Per capita our surface street network is on par with most everywhere else at the moment.
Most of our streets are tiny two-lane roads. Those are not effective at moving people. Even some heavily-used roads, which should be arterials, are two-lane roads.
Quote:
Oh, mysterious and terrifying... Pray tell what economic consequences will we bring on ourselves by tolling our highways that is so common all over the world?
If people are suddenly forced to pay an additional $1500 a year in tolls (that's only $6 per day for a normal 5-day/week commute with two weeks of vacation), you don't think that would have any adverse effect on their spending, and thus affect the economy in any way? Would you also be prepared for the surface roads to take on the extra traffic by people working their way around highways?
The places that have that sort of tolling almost all have huge, viable transit alternatives. Atlanta does not. MARTA is useless or highly impractical for the vast majority. Few, if any, cities instituted major tolling while they did not have any viable alternatives. I'm sure you have a list to prove me wrong, and I will happily read it. So, if you want to institute some sort of big tolling program after you have a big transit network running, let's talk. Beforehand? Beyond idiotic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics
Forget "high speed rail" and aim for “higher-speed rail” (between 90 mph (140 km/h) and 110 mph (180 km/h)) for passenger, commuter and fast freight to and from the many suburbs. If just 50% migrate to trains, that would end the gridlock.
50%? That's a very, very tall order. Even the most transit-laden cities in the world don't crack 50% rail usage.
Quote:
Simple -
Instead of public subsidy (with its meddling), let us consider granting mass transit rail a better carrot - zero tax liability. Any company 100% involved in the manufacture, installation, operation or maintenance of electric traction rail mass transit and its employees are tax exempt.
Its employees too? That might be a bit much. But, this would mean that all other forms of subsidy should go away...all the sales taxes, etc. That means I'm not on the hook any more if I don't use it.
I might be into this idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh
Otakumaster- I have asked at least a half a dozen times, please tell us all what you are advocating for. There are downsides to everything but I am beginning to think you are only here to hate on other people's posts and not contribute anything yourself.
Well, it seems like he's fighting back against your suggestion that car drivers should pay for their mode 100%, while your transit mode should be almost entirely funded by subsidies and other methods, including those car drivers. Essentially, you want everyone else to pay for themselves AND you, while you see little additional cost.
Reminds me of when I used to go out to eat with friends and we got one bill. Every person "put in extra", yet we were always short. And almost every time, I ended up footing the rest of the bill because the others claimed they had put in their share and wouldn't put in more. So, I stopped sharing bills.
METROS
= = = = = = = =
URBAN RAIL IN CHINA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_...ansit_in_China
By the end of 2016, there are 30 metro systems in Mainland China with a total combined length of 3,586 kilometers. Today China boasts the world's longest, second and fourth longest metro systems. The Shanghai Metro only started operating in 1993 and has since expanded to be the world's longest subway system. Half of the top ten busiest metro systems in the world are in China. As of January 2016, 39 cities have metro systems approved according to the National Development and Reform Commission. China plans to spend 4.7 trillion yuan ($706 billion) on transport infrastructure in the three years following 2016. As of early 2017, China has 5636.5 km of under construction rail transit lines.
Since the mid-2000s, the growth of rapid transit systems in Chinese cities has rapidly accelerated, with most of the world's new subway mileage in the past decade opening in China.
Urban rail growth on fast track - USA - Chinadaily.com.cn
By the first half of 2017, 31 cities in China had urban rail transit systems in operation with 133 lines and a total length of 4,400 kilometers, according to data from the Beijing-based National Federation of Metro Transportation.
The country invested 384.7 billion yuan ($58.29 billion) in the urban rail transit sector in 2016, up 4.5 percent year-on-year, with major cities including Wuhan, Shanghai, Chengdu and Guangzhou investing more than 20 billion yuan.
= = = = = = = = = =
LONG DISTANCE
= = = = = = = = = =
PASSENGER RAIL IN CHINA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passen...sport_in_China
Passenger rail transport is one of the principal means of transport in the People's Republic of China, with rail passenger traffic exceeding 1.86 billion railway trips in 2011.
China is currently redeveloping its entire railway network to produce a modern high-speed network. China is on course to complete its 18,000 km national high-speed rail network by 2015. China
According to Ministry Of Railways, the length of high-speed lines with a design speed of 300-350km/h will be 6700km/h and that with a design speed of 200-250km/h will be 11,300km by 2015.
About 2,522 pairs of high speed trains numbered by G, D or C run daily connecting over 200 cities in China and covering 32 of the country's 34 provinces. Beijing-Shanghai high speed train link the two megacities 1,318 km (819 mi) away in just 4.5 hours.
By 2017, China keeps the world's largest high speed rail (HSR) network with a length totaling over 25,000 km (15,500 mi), including 12,500 km (7,760 mi) of rail routes allowing trains at a speed above 250 km/h (155 mph). The world's longest HSR line, Beijing-Guangzhou High Speed Railway, extends 2,298 km (1,428 mi), and is expected to run to Hong Kong in 2018.
= = = = = = = =
50%? That's a very, very tall order. Even the most transit-laden cities in the world don't crack 50% rail usage.
You're probably correct. However, if you add in other electric powered transit (trolley buses), it can dramatically cut petroleum consumption - and air pollution.
BUS / TROLLEYBUS : 58%
TAXI : 29.36%
METRO / SUBWAY : 12.57% *(but expanding - under construction)
FERRY : 0.1%
INTEGRATED WITH HEAVY RAIL NETWORK https://medium.com/@UrbanResilience/...n-1032687006a9
China has found a cost-effective way to improve mobility without spending more money — by designing integrated transit systems. China’s high-speed rail network and its inter-city transit systems are connected in almost every city. Moreover, many Chinese cities use “smart-cards” that can be used interchangeably on the metro, bus, bike-share and taxi.
= = = = = = =
Combining trolley bus + metro = 70.57% electric power.
54% of commuters in Switzerland take public transport (trolley bus, tram, train, railways) to reach their workplace. A staggering 94%, rate the commute as efficient.
Last edited by jetgraphics; 06-01-2018 at 01:49 AM..
From a policy perspective if we are going to favor / encourage / subsidize a certain lifestyle it should not be car-dependent suburban sprawl since it is simply not possible to effectively move 90%+ of people around a large city by car.
I'm sorry, I don't understand this quote. I've lived in Metro Atlanta my entire life, a pretty large city, and for the entire time I've been alive, every single day, 90%+ of people get around everywhere by car. Effectively. They all successfully reach their destination, and everything.
So when you say "it is simply not possible". I politely point to the evidence and disagree.
But as has already happened once, the disasters from non-existent safety and quality standards will happen.
We cannot build such big infrastructure projects as cheaply as they do, and decent quality & safety standards add a lot of cost, and of course their laborers are expendible while ours come with so much added overhead costs.
I think other developed countries rail-building efforts should be factored in and then we could see what we reasonably can build.
STAR AND RING
If the robust rail network was designed so that express commuters could change trains at the perimeter, and bypass going into central Atlanta, improved performance and convenience would result.
For example, an airport express running from Kennesaw might need to stop once at the perimeter [Cumberland mall?], pick up / discharge passengers, and then continue to Hartsfield-Jackson airport (along the perimeter ring), avoiding the need for going through central Atlanta, bypassing the yards, and stopping at the many local stations. In addition, the perimeter ring rail could serve the regional airports.
This would mesh well with the Greenbelt, that loops through inner Atlanta. Connecting spurs would radiate outward and provide service to almost every community.
BILLIONS of dollars on rail that doesn't stop and serves one or two communities 30 miles away on the other side of the metro?
The fare would need to be priced higher than the flight.
Talk about INEFFICIENT!
Ridiculous, and it makes glaringly apparent that a small domestic-service airport on the Northside is needed.
WHY can't y'all see that heat, inclement weather and laziness prevent people from walking the 1/2 mile from train to their destination?
Not to mention our consumption-based economy has people buying groceries, heavy crap all the time that they can't/won't carry.
Every rail zealot on here shouldn't be living here, you should move to a walking city like NY or Boston.
STAR AND RING
If the robust rail network was designed so that express commuters could change trains at the perimeter, and bypass going into central Atlanta, improved performance and convenience would result.
For example, an airport express running from Kennesaw might need to stop once at the perimeter [Cumberland mall?], pick up / discharge passengers, and then continue to Hartsfield-Jackson airport (along the perimeter ring), avoiding the need for going through central Atlanta, bypassing the yards, and stopping at the many local stations. In addition, the perimeter ring rail could serve the regional airports.
This would mesh well with the Greenbelt, that loops through inner Atlanta. Connecting spurs would radiate outward and provide service to almost every community.
The EXPRESS service still should go through center of town if that is the direct shot for where it's destination is.
For an EXPRESS service to practically double the distance by arcing outward similar to the perimeter would have to be named the "Sunday Afternoon Sight-Seeing Service" that take 3 times as long.
I WANT ALL OF YOU RAIL PROPONENTS TO DRAW YOUR RAIL TRACKS ON A MAP OF METRO ATLANTA which will speak volumes on how realistic it is.
Because there will be 5 and 10 mile gaps between endpoints of even an elaborate network.
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.
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.
