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.
This may in fact slow down any future development beyond what is already in the pipeline for Nashville.
Maybe, but maybe not. This hasn't hurt Austin, which has worst traffic than Nashville and also voted down a city-wide light rail network. And it certainly hasn't hurt Nashville. Corporations have been flocking to Nashville for years even without a light rail system in town. And how ironic that a major New York financial conglomerate announced its relocation of over 1,000 executives from NYC to Nashville the day after Nashville rejected light rail.
---
its - possession
it's - contraction of it is
your - possession
you're - contraction of you are
their - possession
they're - contraction of they are
there - referring to a place
loose - opposite of tight
lose - opposite of win
who's - contraction of who is
whose - possession
alot - NOT A WORD
The difference in the embolden is these other places that are similar size or larger than Nashville is they either have the existing infrastructure in the form of other modes of transport including rail that is being pushed for expansions or have the logistical infrastructure already in placed to absorb this type of growth. Nashville has a problem Raleigh and Orlando has, but the differences are these places have infrastructure or building it current to handle their explosive growth rates. Charlotte, I am sure, is going to try to benefit from this since Charlotte and Nashville are essentially neck-to-neck in most categories. This may in fact slow down any future development beyond what is already in the pipeline for Nashville.
I believe I mentioned this upthread, but part of the issue with Nashville traffic is that there is no true beltway for thru-traffic to go around the city. That thru-traffic of trucks, travelers, and what not, gets mixed in with local traffic in the core city, on roads that probably couldn't even handle the current volume of local traffic. If you look at Nashville as a "clock" on Google Maps, there are no interstates from 12-5 or so. I'm not saying that it would even be possible with the rivers and neighborhoods, but that lack of beltway seems to be a big contributor to the current mess.
I'm not sure about Raleigh and Orlando, but Charlotte has a big, nice beltway in 485. Traffic on 85 or 77 that doesn't need to go into core Charlotte can simply circle use 485 to go wherever they need, and the "inside the beltway" interstates can be reserved for local traffic only.
I've been to Charlotte and Nashville several times each in the past year or so. I've been stuck on 440 at odd times (late evenings, weekend morning) with traffic barely moving and for no apparent reason. Traffic into downtown Nashville is always much heavier than Charlotte. If you need to zip from one side of the city to the other, you often don't have to go through the "interior interstate mixer" like you do in Nashville.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMT
Maybe, but maybe not. This hasn't hurt Austin, which has worst traffic than Nashville and also voted down a city-wide light rail network. And it certainly hasn't hurt Nashville. Corporations have been flocking to Nashville for years even without a light rail system in town. And how ironic that a major New York financial conglomerate announced its relocation of over 1,000 executives from NYC to Nashville the day after Nashville rejected light rail.
I agree. I'm not necessarily convinced that not having a mass transit system is going to be that big of a barrier to growth. All the Texas cities have done very well with awful traffic and relatively minimal public transit. If anything, much of Nashville's boom has been due to an advantageous tax climate, and raising taxes may wipe out more growth than would be from the transit program.
I believe I mentioned this upthread, but part of the issue with Nashville traffic is that there is no true beltway for thru-traffic to go around the city. That thru-traffic of trucks, travelers, and what not, gets mixed in with local traffic in the core city, on roads that probably couldn't even handle the current volume of local traffic. If you look at Nashville as a "clock" on Google Maps, there are no interstates from 12-5 or so. I'm not saying that it would even be possible with the rivers and neighborhoods, but that lack of beltway seems to be a big contributor to the current mess.
I'm not sure about Raleigh and Orlando, but Charlotte has a big, nice beltway in 485. Traffic on 85 or 77 that doesn't need to go into core Charlotte can simply circle use 485 to go wherever they need, and the "inside the beltway" interstates can be reserved for local traffic only.
I've been to Charlotte and Nashville several times each in the past year or so. I've been stuck on 440 at odd times (late evenings, weekend morning) with traffic barely moving and for no apparent reason. Traffic into downtown Nashville is always much heavier than Charlotte. If you need to zip from one side of the city to the other, you often don't have to go through the "interior interstate mixer" like you do in Nashville.
I agree. I'm not necessarily convinced that not having a mass transit system is going to be that big of a barrier to growth. All the Texas cities have done very well with awful traffic and relatively minimal public transit. If anything, much of Nashville's boom has been due to an advantageous tax climate, and raising taxes may wipe out more growth than would be from the transit program.
I can see this, because they are still building in Nashville like crazy and will continue to build. Don't think it will stop anything but before long the City will be begging for some type of additional mass transit relief/ option no matter the cost sad to say! From the feeling of the City, that boom Energy is in the Air and there to stay and I don't see it going anywhere anytime soon. In the mean time i still say improving Metro Bus and existing Commuter rail is the way to go not to mention more regional options...
Maybe, but maybe not. This hasn't hurt Austin, which has worst traffic than Nashville and also voted down a city-wide light rail network. And it certainly hasn't hurt Nashville. Corporations have been flocking to Nashville for years even without a light rail system in town. And how ironic that a major New York financial conglomerate announced its relocation of over 1,000 executives from NYC to Nashville the day after Nashville rejected light rail.
There will not be 1,000 executive jobs. Mostly ops, similar to what we did. So you can pay the new hires much less. Also - there won't be 1,000 new jobs tomorrow.
AB will begin relocating jobs during 2018 and expects this transition to take several years.
And Austin's growth has been super tech heavy, much more than here.
I'm not sure if there was a regional meeting about this plan or not, but if not, there should have been more planning with at least Williamson, Rutherford, Wilson and Sumner counties to come up with something that would have taken the rail to the Davidson county line in the direction of these counties in the 1st phase. That way all the counties included could have had a say in the vote.
Officials from all surrounding counties have been working on this and other plans for YEARS via the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) and RTA (Regional Transit Authority). They had input on this, and they still are working on it.
But any regional plan HAS to start with and in Nashville. It is the hub of a multicounty region. It was to be a first step. Now ... it's a step back.
This was only a vote on FUNDING. It was not a vote on a transit plan. There were ideas offered, yes, but that was to give people an idea of what COULD be done. The plan could and would still have been up for review and input and change.
But to get to that point you need a dedicated funding source.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation
Still, I don't want to see some sort of statewide tax to pay for it.
This was not an option in this referendum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation
I believe I mentioned this upthread, but part of the issue with Nashville traffic is that there is no true beltway for thru-traffic to go around the city. That thru-traffic of trucks, travelers, and what not, gets mixed in with local traffic in the core city, on roads that probably couldn't even handle the current volume of local traffic. If you look at Nashville as a "clock" on Google Maps, there are no interstates from 12-5 or so. I'm not saying that it would even be possible with the rivers and neighborhoods, but that lack of beltway seems to be a big contributor to the current mess.
I'm not sure about Raleigh and Orlando, but Charlotte has a big, nice beltway in 485. Traffic on 85 or 77 that doesn't need to go into core Charlotte can simply circle use 485 to go wherever they need, and the "inside the beltway" interstates can be reserved for local traffic only.
This is really not the problem solver you think it is.
A bypass would be a help, sure, but there are enough local problems that we need an alternative.
There will not be 1,000 executive jobs. Mostly ops, similar to what we did. So you can pay the new hires much less. Also - there won't be 1,000 new jobs tomorrow.
AB will begin relocating jobs during 2018 and expects this transition to take several years.
And Austin's growth has been super tech heavy, much more than here.
The company intends to have 1,050 jobs in Nashville by the end of 2022. If all those workers were here right now, AllianceBernstein would be one of the five biggest private employers downtown. The average salary of those jobs will be between $150,000 and $200,000, the company said — with bonuses and other compensation pushing that dollar amount even higher. The company is investing $70 million in its move and needs more than 200,000 square feet of office space, giving it the potential to kickstart any of a few office towers on the drawing board in the central business district.
---
its - possession
it's - contraction of it is
your - possession
you're - contraction of you are
their - possession
they're - contraction of they are
there - referring to a place
loose - opposite of tight
lose - opposite of win
who's - contraction of who is
whose - possession
alot - NOT A WORD
The light rail voter rejection was a major setback for Nashville, don't kid yourselves. I always hate to hear the "well, other city's are developing successfully with out rail transit, so why can't we?" argument. Any city that is having some modicum of growth without rail transit is an exception to the rule. Moreover, the degree to their success is necessarily limited. Austin btw does have its diesel commuter LRT.
Nashville -- in my mind, long the most diverse, most educated and cultural of Tennessee's major cities -- also has the Music City Star commuter rail line, which is something. But the LRT could have been the foundation for more projected commuter rail lines to serve the region.
From a distance, it does seem the Mayor Barry scandal/resignation had a major negative impact on the initiative. She was a passionate believer, part creator and advocate of this massive, forward-looking transit plan, and without her charisma and voice, esp in the couple months run-up to the vote, I feared the Let's Move Nashville initiative was in deep doo-doo. Sadly I was right.
The bogus arguments in this 8-month old link are so maddening, ...
First, it is patently ridiculous to negative Nashville LRT by citing New York's and Chicago's CBD. First, there is not "rule" or justification that a city need be that large in order to have rail transit. If Nashville wanted to build a New York/Chicago-scaled HRT system, then I could see an argument. But the 26-mile, 5-line rail system (along with an airport line) with the 1.8 mile tunnel under a narrow/dense downtown Nashville street -- along with planned 3 or 4 BRT lines and transit centers made sense for Nashville.
Second, there is no city "designed for automobiles" and if there is one, it's dysfunctional from the gitgo. Los Angeles actually built along interurban streetcar/train lines but expanded into a sprawling freeway-oriented, low-density sprawling mess. But smart planners finally broke through with the locals and now LA has a 100+ mile HRT/LRT network along with a 400-mile commuter rail network -- as well as stop on the SF-to-San Diego HSR line in development currently... LA now continues to remake itself with a denser, more walkable downtown with lots of TOD along its growing rail network. Fortunately Nashville is nowhere near being an LA even along its much smaller scale. Nashville was built along streetcar lines but has some suburban sprawl like all American cities... That doesn't mean it can't be fixed and enhanced with rail traction.
These are fraudulent arguments conservative, anti-transit hit-men come up with all the time. The public should finally catch on and stop buying it.
The bogus arguments in this 8-month old link are so maddening, ...
First, it is patently ridiculous to negative Nashville LRT by citing New York's and Chicago's CBD. First, there is not "rule" or justification that a city need be that large in order to have rail transit. If Nashville wanted to build a New York/Chicago-scaled HRT system, then I could see an argument. But the 26-mile, 5-line rail system (along with an airport line) with the 1.8 mile tunnel under a narrow/dense downtown Nashville street -- along with planned 3 or 4 BRT lines and transit centers made sense for Nashville.
Second, there is no city "designed for automobiles" and if there is one, it's dysfunctional from the gitgo. Los Angeles actually built along interurban streetcar/train lines but expanded into a sprawling freeway-oriented, low-density sprawling mess. But smart planners finally broke through with the locals and now LA has a 100+ mile HRT/LRT network along with a 400-mile commuter rail network -- as well as stop on the SF-to-San Diego HSR line in development currently... LA now continues to remake itself with a denser, more walkable downtown with lots of TOD along its growing rail network. Fortunately Nashville is nowhere near being an LA even along its much smaller scale. Nashville was built along streetcar lines but has some suburban sprawl like all American cities... That doesn't mean it can't be fixed and enhanced with rail traction.
These are fraudulent arguments conservative, anti-transit hit-men come up with all the time. The public should finally catch on and stop buying it.
My thoughts exactly!!!Best post of the day and Agreed!!! Trickery man, Trickery at it's best... Plant a bad, negative seed and it will Grow
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.
