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.
if you keep arguing for as much as you want... it will never happen, because it isn't possible.
This issue has been planned to death since the 90s, it has been discussed to death on these forums as well.
I've followed these issues in detail since the they first popped up in the 90s and understand the intricacies and barriers that exist from using existing tracks. The importance of freight to the Southern economy is too great and we are at the overly congested crossroads of that rail freight.
As for using the same right of way.... MARTA does, the Emory LRT planned to use it. There are regulations separating them... they can't be the same tracks, but they can make use of the same buffered right of way. They can't cross each other.
As for costs... the Emory LRT figured includes the cost of 10 years of operations. I would also note the cost of building lots of Class I railroad track is far more expensive than you think. All of the estimates in the past for commuter rail in Atlanta were based on using existing tracks and bringing them up to standard.... not making a whole new track the entire length of a corridor.
And lastly and most importantly... "so do other regions"
No we're actually special. We are one of the top 3 inland hubs; the others being Chicago and Dallas. Dallas has one short commuter train and Chicago is an older city that has hundreds of more tracks laid down than we do, because they were a large city in the pre-car era. A huge advantage we don't have.
If you want to make that argument, you can't just passively say "so do other regions" and think you have made a real point. I've spent too long studying how much freight is going in and out of town, how the junctions work, where the congestion points are, etc... for that argument to mean anything.
We also can't say freight doesn't matter or put it on the backburner. The south is a quick rising manufacturing center dependent on this freight. If we do anything to limit the freight, we increase freight costs more and limit manufacturing job growth in our state and region.
if you keep arguing for as much as you want... it will never happen, because it isn't possible.
Let me be equally blunt. Commuter rail has a lot better chance of happening than any cockamamie "regional light rail" scheme.
Quote:
This issue has been planned to death since the 90s, it has been discussed to death on these forums as well.
I've followed these issues in detail since the they first popped up in the 90s and understand the intricacies and barriers that exist from using existing tracks. The importance of freight to the Southern economy is too great and we are at the overly congested crossroads of that rail freight.
Look at the lines leading away from Atlanta. Most are single-track with passing sidings. Improve on that, and you create capacity. I broke down the amount of single track on just an Atlanta-Acworth line in another thread.
Quote:
As for using the same right of way.... MARTA does, the Emory LRT planned to use it. There are regulations separating them... they can't be the same tracks, but they can make use of the same buffered right of way. They can't cross each other.
Atlanta has grown significantly. Just how much do you expect 30 miles of 50-80ft wide new RoW alongside the existing railroads to cost?
Quote:
As for costs... the Emory LRT figured includes the cost of 10 years of operations. I would also note the cost of building lots of Class I railroad track is far more expensive than you think. All of the estimates in the past for commuter rail in Atlanta were based on using existing tracks and bringing them up to standard.... not making a whole new track the entire length of a corridor.
If you actually read the Clifton Corridor LPA information, you'll see that the capital costs were $1.15 Billion, with O&M costs at $15.3 Million. If whoever did that study didn't look at at least double tracking everything that wasn't, then it was a badly flawed study that didn't reflect the reality. No one seriously looks to build a commuter rail system without any capacity upgrades except the clueless politicians that have no clue how railroads work.
Quote:
And lastly and most importantly... "so do other regions"
No we're actually special. We are one of the top 3 inland hubs; the others being Chicago and Dallas. Dallas has one short commuter train and Chicago is an older city that has hundreds of more tracks laid down than we do, because they were a large city in the pre-car era. A huge advantage we don't have.
If you want to make that argument, you can't just passively say "so do other regions" and think you have made a real point. I've spent too long studying how much freight is going in and out of town, how the junctions work, where the congestion points are, etc... for that argument to mean anything.
We also can't say freight doesn't matter or put it on the backburner. The south is a quick rising manufacturing center dependent on this freight. If we do anything to limit the freight, we increase freight costs more and limit manufacturing job growth in our state and region.
All of this is why you improve capacity before building the commuter rail. No one, especially not me, is advocating limiting freight in any way. Just the opposite in fact as I would like to see the freight improve capacity for themselves independently of any passenger projects, and see the state invest in freight capacity expansion.
Let me be equally blunt. Commuter rail has a lot better chance of happening than any cockamamie "regional light rail" scheme.
Look at the lines leading away from Atlanta. Most are single-track with passing sidings. Improve on that, and you create capacity. I broke down the amount of single track on just an Atlanta-Acworth line in another thread.
Atlanta has grown significantly. Just how much do you expect 30 miles of 50-80ft wide new RoW alongside the existing railroads to cost?
If you actually read the Clifton Corridor LPA information, you'll see that the capital costs were $1.15 Billion, with O&M costs at $15.3 Million. If whoever did that study didn't look at at least double tracking everything that wasn't, then it was a badly flawed study that didn't reflect the reality. No one seriously looks to build a commuter rail system without any capacity upgrades except the clueless politicians that have no clue how railroads work.
All of this is why you improve capacity before building the commuter rail. No one, especially not me, is advocating limiting freight in any way. Just the opposite in fact as I would like to see the freight improve capacity for themselves independently of any passenger projects, and see the state invest in freight capacity expansion.
But in the mean time you're being completely unrealistic about cost, capacity needed for the type of service you're describing. It is why everyting researched in the past is for one-way commuter service.... which incidentally is the majority use of commuter trains.... at peak times when roads are congested. It is the only type of service that would allow the use of mostly existing tracks... even then we can't do it on all RR corridors through town....just some.
if the rail lines are that crowded, they are going to need capacity upgrades, plain and simple. especially with the newly-dredged port of savannah coming on line, they would need an increase even if commuter rail was not on the table. commuter rail can be a byproduct of that capacity increase— get norfolk southern and CSX involved in a public-private partnership to expand rail capacity. they get more room for shipping freight, we get commuter rail, sounds like a good deal to me. i don't know why it can't happen. cwkimbro, it just seems like you're being obstinate.
if the rail lines are that crowded, they are going to need capacity upgrades, plain and simple. especially with the newly-dredged port of savannah coming on line, they would need an increase even if commuter rail was not on the table. commuter rail can be a byproduct of that capacity increase— get norfolk southern and CSX involved in a public-private partnership to expand rail capacity. they get more room for shipping freight, we get commuter rail, sounds like a good deal to me. i don't know why it can't happen. cwkimbro, it just seems like you're being obstinate.
This. And hopefully if these lines get built it will help create density south of Atlanta.
if the rail lines are that crowded, they are going to need capacity upgrades, plain and simple. especially with the newly-dredged port of savannah coming on line, they would need an increase even if commuter rail was not on the table. commuter rail can be a byproduct of that capacity increase— get norfolk southern and CSX involved in a public-private partnership to expand rail capacity. they get more room for shipping freight, we get commuter rail, sounds like a good deal to me. i don't know why it can't happen. cwkimbro, it just seems like you're being obstinate.
bryant, I'm not being obstinate at all. If anything it quite the opposite.
I'm actually a very big long-term supporter of commuter rail in Atlanta and have followed it very closely for a long time now.
I understand the challenges that exist and what the proposed upgrades actually are.
The problem is the upgrades freight needs aren't the type that will open up a single mainline track for passenger service that happens all day long, both directions.
Freight mostly needs new junctions and upgraded railroad crossings. That is where their bottlenecks. Howell junction alone will take a few hundred million to fix...just the junction.
With the exception of Howell Junction, those are the planned upgrades for commuter rail....not creating extra track the entire length of the corridor, which is beyond far more costly.
They are creating capacity to sneak in passenger trains at peak periods going one way just before slower freight trains travel the same track vs.... holding up 50% of potential freight traffic capacity, so that passenger rail can be operated both ways throughout the day.
North Fulton cannot use Commuter Rail since there is no existing rail in the corridor, therefore Red Line extension is the best.
As for running off-peak trains and reverse commute trains, that can come after the commuter rail system is up and going. Let's focus on building a couple corridors first.
The stations don't need to be anything huge at first. A platform, with grade-separated walkway for riders from the tracks, and a parking lot.
A lot of commuter rail stations are nothing more than that. They could go up for a fraction of what a new MARTA station would cost.
if the rail lines are that crowded, they are going to need capacity upgrades, plain and simple. especially with the newly-dredged port of savannah coming on line, they would need an increase even if commuter rail was not on the table. commuter rail can be a byproduct of that capacity increase— get norfolk southern and CSX involved in a public-private partnership to expand rail capacity. they get more room for shipping freight, we get commuter rail, sounds like a good deal to me.
Excellent comments. Public-private partnerships with NS and CSX to expand freight rail capacity and create new passenger rail capacity are the way to go in this political environment of dwindling public funding of transportation infrastructure needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryantm3
i don't know why it can't happen.
You're right. There is no reason why it can't happen, particularly if the very-substantial revenues from distance-based user fees and the lucrative revenues from high-density mixed-use real estate development at and around the future regional passenger rail transit stations are added into the funding equation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by demonta4
And hopefully if these lines get built it will help create density south of Atlanta.
You make a really good point that the implementation of regional commuter rail service can help South Metro Atlanta better compete with North Metro Atlanta in terms of density of development and population.
Though the Southside will likely never have the same overwhelming amount of development that the Northside has, regional commuter rail service can help the Southside be in a better position to benefit from the continuing 'spillover' in development from the Northside that will be caused by continued increasing overcrowding (overdevelopment, worsening traffic congestion, growing peak-hour commutes, overcrowded schools, rising real estate prices, etc) as the Atlanta region's population continues to grow disproportionately north of the I-20.
The Southside areas that seem like they will especially be able to benefit the most from the implementation of regional commuter rail service are the I-85 South corridor through Coweta County and the often severely-congested I-75 South corridor through Henry County...
...Though the greater I-20 East corridor through the City of Atlanta, DeKalb, Rockdale and Newton counties can also benefit greatly to a lesser extent from the implementation of regional commuter rail service.
As for running off-peak trains and reverse commute trains, that can come after the commuter rail system is up and going. Let's focus on building a couple corridors first.
I can most-definitely see your point of wanting to get at least a minimal amount of regional commuter rail service operating in a large metro region in Atlanta that really, really, REALLYSORELY NEEDS the critical transportation investment, but we don't really need to settle for just a minimal amount of commuter rail service on only a couple of corridors.
We can get an entire expansive regional commuter rail system of high-quality implemented (built and operating) in a relatively very-short period of time (within 2 decades or less) if we use the existing regional commuter bus service and the lucrative real estate assets of the future rail transit stations as leverage to attract private funds.
With the existing regional bus service that is already operating we in effect already have our regional commuter rail corridors in place, all that we need to do is implement a distance-based fare structure so that we can begin collecting the proper amount of operating revenue as the regional commuter bus system is converted into a regional commuter rail system funded with distance-based fares and real estate development revenues.
The real estate development component is especially important for funding passenger rail transit because if fully and properly utilized it will allow us to make up a lot of ground in a relatively very-short period time when it comes to building out an expanded regional passenger rail transit network.
Our hopes for an expansive regional high-capacity passenger rail transit network throughout greater Metro Atlanta will also likely get an even larger boost in coming years as the federal government moves towards switching from fuel taxes to user fees to fund the Interstate Highway system.
(...There's a push in Congress to reduce the Federal Fuel Tax from 18.4 cents-per-gallon down to 3.4 cents-per-gallon so that the feds and state governments will be much-less dependent on fuel taxes and will be able to use Interstate Highways as leverage to obtain increased transportation funding from user fees and private investors over the long-term.)
The increasingly-probable future federal conversion to user fees (inflation-indexed variable distance-based tolls) to fund the Interstate Highway system will allow us to use major roads as valuable leverage to attract even more private funds to build-out a regional high-capacity passenger rail transit system...
...That's because in addition to more fully funding road maintenance needs, the variable tolls on expressways will be used to push excess traffic (non-business use single-occupant vehicles) off of major roads and onto transit lines as the fast-growing population continues to dramatically outpace the amount of road infrastructure needed to accommodate it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt
The stations don't need to be anything huge at first. A platform, with grade-separated walkway for riders from the tracks, and a parking lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toll_booth
A lot of commuter rail stations are nothing more than that. They could go up for a fraction of what a new MARTA station would cost.
To fully and properly fund the design, construction, implementation, operation and maintenance of the expanded high-capacity passenger rail transit network, the stations need to be more than just basically a platform and a parking lot...
...The stations need to be a small part of larger high-density mixed-use developments that generate the ridership and revenues needed to financially sustain the system at a high level over the long-term.
Whenever possible, parking should be located underground so that the most of or the entire surface area of the property at and surrounding the stations can be utilized for construction of ridership-generating and revenue-generating high-density mixed-use development.
MARTA increasingly recognizes the importance of building high-density mixed-use development at and around its stations as MARTA CEO Keith Parker recently stated the agency's intention to develop all surface lots surrounding train stations as a way to generate increased ridership and revenues over the long-term.
In addition to generating increased ridership and operating revenues, developing transit stations into high-density mixed-use developments also helps to change land-use patterns around stations for the better by generating more street-level economic and pedestrian activity in areas immediately around stations...thereby decreasing automobile dependence and making automobile use much more of an option than an absolute necessity.
@born to roll: that's why i was advocating the use of existing train stations in downtown areas. the old train stations could serve as a catalyst for development in downtown communities. imagine the city of macon with the train station actually active again!
it's important that new transit stations are located in existing walk-up communities. MARTA has been extremely opposed to this due to the cost, but the benefits really outweigh the cost. if we really want a city where we can get around without having to get in a car, the existing walkup communities need real transit connections. no more building a station on the side of a freeway and hoping someone builds apartments next door.
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.
