New lanes on I-285 top-end to cost $11B+. Enough to build 55 miles of MARTA rail. (Atlanta: upkeep, sales tax)

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Indeed, on a 102* F day with full humidity... so we will need to increase the tolls also include air conditioning on said Kayaks and we must make sure that those pesky drivers feel the full cost of water-bound transportation and the full cost of expanding rivers and streams throughout the metro!

If there was full humidity, it would be raining.

[Gulch]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

Not quite correct, but he is also way off on his initial assumptions in the original post that this is the same as 55 miles of rail equivalency by a very, very large margin.

The $11b figure comes from the recently updated regional TIP. Every project along I-285 between I-85 to I-75 and on GA400 up to North Springs Station got rolled into one.

Those TIP line items add up to $11b, but here is the catch, it includes spending up to and beyond 2050 and all of the accounting (matching federal standards) is done as year of the expenditure, so this includes all financing fees and has a built in assumption on inflation.

So the physical construction of the project in today's dollars is not actually $11b, but this becomes a convenient place to go to find sticker shocks for spending on any kind of major project you choose.

This is correct, though still an obscene amount of money.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I feel sorry for folks that think we need to find a way to cram every person in the city into a car on the highway and don't realize that commuting by walking though Piedmont Park & down the Beltline on a beautiful day or paddling down the Chattahoochee are actual alternatives.

That's not what anyone is saying. Only you could twist arguments into this much of a pretzel. It is clear that you simply cannot comprehend the arguments being presented, which is why you just keep responding with unrelated nonsense, and rarely respond to the actual points being made.

You realize they are only "bottlenecks" because we widened the lanes funneling into them, right? And expanding this interchange will not solve it.

If the intersection is built to handle the number of vehicles which transfer to and from 285 and 400, then it will absolutely help. Double exit/merge lanes and removal of left-lane merges will help greatly. Switching from single-lane, cloverleaf-style merges to double-lane, flyover-style merges will do wonders.

Do you think every piece infrastructure should have to be rebuilt after 30 - 40 years? What criteria should be used to decide what piece of infrastructure gets limited funding? Why shouldn't we rebuild it every 10 years instead? Or every 100? 1000?

Stop being intentionally obtuse. Any piece of infrastructure which is not even close to serving the needs of the region needs to be replaced or upgraded. That, in no way, means that every piece needs to be upgraded. For instance, I could go out on a limb and say that since MARTA isn't really serving people that well, it shouldn't be upgraded at all. However, if MARTA was crammed all day, every day with people, then it would most certainly call for an upgrade.

And all this "Why not 10, 100, or 1000 years" BS sounds like the people who say "derp derp, why don't we just make the minimum wage a billion dollars an hour and fix everything?!?" I don't care if it's 10 years or 100 years. In this particular case, the intersection is woefully inadequate. It's obvious. It's a grade-school concept.

Apparently it is that hard. Why didn't our previous highway expansions solve these bottlenecks?

No, it isn't that hard. And I explained it before. Here, I'll repeat it again: We widened the highway leading to this intersection, while the population doubled, but didn't upgrade the intersection. It boggles my mind that this is so difficult to figure out. I know you work in transportation, which makes this even more frightening.

Can you name any city that is free of traffic bottlenecks?

Memphis does a great job at it. Their road network is built to accommodate the population. I don't study many other cities, but I'm not sure what that's even supposed to prove.

Can you give some examples of world cities larger than Atlanta with all these highways cutting through the city that you think we should aspire to?

At the moment, no, because I'm about to head out for the night. But, I have posted it before. I'll look for it again.

Ok, you don't know what I am arguing for and the only thing you are arguing for is the opposite of me. So what do you think I "think" I am arguing for?

Actually, I think you're making most of it up for the jollies.

Originally Posted by cqholt

Chattahoochee doesn't flow thru or border Alpharetta anyway, but Johns Creek, Roswell, Peachtree Corners, Duluth, Suwanee, Sandy Springs, Dunwoody, and Sugar Hills commuters could kayak to Cumberland

That would be a sucky commute for those north of Morgan Falls, having to pull out, walk the half a mile around the dam.

Originally Posted by cqholt

If there was full humidity, it would be raining.

That is not true. You can have 100% humidity without rain.

[samiwas1]

I don’t want to get the thread locked, so I’ll leave my diatribes at the above.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

I don’t want to get the thread locked, so I’ll leave my diatribes at the above.

The fruit of this thread is pretty much over with at this point regardless.

[Huntsville_secede]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

The fruit of this thread is pretty much over with at this point regardless.

It was over on page one...

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

I don’t want to get the thread locked, so I’ll leave my diatribes at the above.

For reference, here are all the things in your last post that are just personal attacks, not related to the topic (which I will continue to ignore):

Originally Posted by samiwas1

That's not what anyone is saying. Only you could twist arguments into this much of a pretzel. It is clear that you simply cannot comprehend the arguments being presented, which is why you just keep responding with unrelated nonsense, and rarely respond to the actual points being made.

...Stop being intentionally obtuse.

And all this "Why not 10, 100, or 1000 years" BS sounds like the people who say "derp derp, why don't we just make the minimum wage a billion dollars an hour and fix everything?!?" .... It's obvious. It's a grade-school concept.

...

No, it isn't that hard. And I explained it before. ... It boggles my mind that this is so difficult to figure out. I know you work in transportation, which makes this even more frightening.

...but I'm not sure what that's even supposed to prove.

But here is my response to the comments related to the topic:

Originally Posted by samiwas1

If the intersection is built to handle the number of vehicles which transfer to and from 285 and 400, then it will absolutely help. Double exit/merge lanes and removal of left-lane merges will help greatly. Switching from single-lane, cloverleaf-style merges to double-lane, flyover-style merges will do wonders.

What do you think it is "helping" exactly? Do you think traffic delays in that interchange will not be just as bad and likely worse in another few decades regardless of the expansion? We could do a lot of things to "help" with the billions planned for this section of road. Why should anyone be convinced this section of highway getting widened is a better use? Heck, we could give every man, woman, and child in metro Atlanta $1,800 to spend on a kayak or whatever transportation options is best for them (or food, or housing). Why should it go towards car infrastructure?

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Any piece of infrastructure which is not even close to serving the needs of the region needs to be replaced or upgraded.

In this particular case, the intersection is woefully inadequate.

And by what measure are you looking at to decide "not even close to serving the needs of the region needs to be replaced or upgraded. / woefully inadequate" compared to any other piece of infrastructure in the world? You don't think widening a road is actually a long-term solution to traffic do you?

Originally Posted by samiwas1

We widened the highway leading to this intersection, while the population doubled, but didn't upgrade the intersection.

So you think highway width must follow population directly? There are a lot of much larger world cities that missed that memo. Infact, many growing world cities are removing and reducing highway sizes.

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Memphis does a great job at it. Their road network is built to accommodate the population. I don't study many other cities, but I'm not sure what that's even supposed to prove.

What is your criteria for "great job" that you see in Memphis? It strikes me a similar situation to Detroit.

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Actually, I think you're making most of it up for the jollies.

And if I weren't "making most of it up", and what I was saying was actually for the benefit of a better Atlanta, how would you know? Will you at least clarify your position on this project? Do you support it as the best use of this $11 Billion?

[jsvh]

And for those of you that think these lanes will be used for BRT:

Tim Matthews, GDOT project manager, said the state would be building toll lane access points but those access points could not be used by any BRT transit system. GDOT would also not construct the BRT stop stations and access points to those stations.

https://www.reporternewspapers.net/2...top-locations/

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by jsvh

And for those of you that think these lanes will be used for BRT:



https://www.reporternewspapers.net/2...top-locations/

What a fantastic opportunity for the business community to finally get involved in helping out with transit funding! They'd make zillions!

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by jsvh

And for those of you that think these lanes will be used for BRT:



https://www.reporternewspapers.net/2...top-locations/

This was already a well known fact.

GDOT is only building the toll lanes themselves and access points respective to the interstate and interchanges as that is within their scope and ROW. it's up to the local munapalities to coordinate where they will install the access points and stops related to transit. GDOT does not coordinate or operate mass-transit.

Also why are they redefining this into a 'tram-system' on a 'rubber wheel's based platform?