Transportation is region's top concern. 91% say transit is important. (Roswell: apartments, construction)

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by DirkMcGirt

Since you love bringing this up...
$1 billion interchange directly impacts 250,000 cars per day through the intersection.
$1.2 billion for Clifton corridor impacts 10,000 transit trips per day by 2030.


There is a cheaper way of solving transportation issues than immediately jumping to the most expensive solution out of some weird 'train envy' of other cities. Build solutions that work and people will use them. Get creative and get more transit even if it is BRT or other cheaper hybrid solutions. Think beyond the juvenile 'I love the choo choo at all cost' mindset.

But the existing interchange handles 250,000 cars so you gain nothing from the $1B in your math. Where as a brand new transit line is going to be all new riders / people that are now out of cars.

A Billion for transit will not only benefit the new riders of the transit but everyone else across all transportation options.

[Hokiehaven]

Furthermore, the city could start recouping some of those losses with fares, which in turn could grow the line further and better functioning. Unless the state is putting up tolls again, it's a loss, but then it slows everything down.

[DirkMcGirt]

Originally Posted by Hokiehaven

Furthermore, the city could start recouping some of those losses with fares, which in turn could grow the line further and better functioning. Unless the state is putting up tolls again, it's a loss, but then it slows everything down.

Are you implying that the 10,000 new riders' fares will be enough to pay for the operating and maintenance costs of the new line?

If so... you are wrong.

[DirkMcGirt]

Originally Posted by jsvh

But the existing interchange handles 250,000 cars so you gain nothing from the $1B in your math. Where as a brand new transit line is going to be all new riders / people that are now out of cars.

A Billion for transit will not only benefit the new riders of the transit but everyone else across all transportation options.

The gain is increased speed through the intersection and increased capacity. This not only helps consumers, but also the transportation of goods through the area. In case you weren't aware, Atlanta is a large distribution hub which directly accounts for tens of thousands of jobs. Keeping the interstates moving has benefits beyond not just local transportation, but also regional economic benefits.

And somehow those 10,000 trips per day in the Clifton Corridor are already being handled via bus and car. So... No net gain other than an additional option for $120,000 per rider. That might seem like good math to you, but to a rational person, it stinks.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I totally agree, fourthwarden. Seriously!

Originally Posted by DirkMcGirt

Since you love bringing this up...
$1 billion interchange directly impacts 250,000 cars per day through the intersection.
$1.2 billion for Clifton corridor impacts 10,000 transit trips per day by 2030.

There is a cheaper way of solving transportation issues than immediately jumping to the most expensive solution out of some weird 'train envy' of other cities. Build solutions that work and people will use them. Get creative and get more transit even if it is BRT or other cheaper hybrid solutions. Think beyond the juvenile 'I love the choo choo at all cost' mindset.

If you're gonna compare ridership, at least use the actual numbers: 17,500 trips. Besides, there're more than just the direct rider / user benefits to consider.

For example, the interchanges upgrade outdated designs, changing the merging patterns to something far more efficient and safe. There's also the fact that those 250,000 cars already use the corridor daily, so it impacts those 250,000 cars, and the inevitable increase in traffic as the Metro continues to grow.

The planned Clifton Corridor bring high-capacity transit to an area where there has been none since the days of Inter-Urbans and streetcars. It will generate 17,500 trips as a base estimate. As others have said before, these estimates are quite often low-balls, conservative estimates. MARTA actually did look at BRT in this corridor, as well as only along surface routes, and they produced far fewer trips. Ridership was not the only metric MARTA was using, however, or else they would have chosen HRT for the corridor.

MARTA considered the impacts of the stations on the surrounding neighborhoods, electing LRT stations for their low-impact profiles that favored walking and biking in from surrounding areas. It is with these low impact stations that we could see developers taking up land around them, right up against them, and bringing more housing, more people, more businesses and buyers to the areas. MARTA is pushing TODs elsewhere, why wouldn't they encourage dense growth around the Light Rail Stations?

So, now you have more people living, playing, working, buying in the corridor. Those are all impacted people beyond the initial 17,500 trips. Not only will the corridor supply transit to existing persons / employees in the corridor, but it will also provide a framework for future growth both in population and economically.

As for the streetcars downtown, it's roughly the same idea. You build rail to concentrate development. Atlanta is a very spread out metro, and that's expensive to maintain. It costs an insane amount of money to maintain our roads. When you give developers and people a backbone of attractive alternatives, they use it. You then use less road (or, at least not as many new roads) to support the new density. The Streetcars will be there as much to serve current needs, as well as the future needs of the city by putting the capacity in place for future generations of developments. More dense developments mean more money for the city in taxes, more business for shop owners, etc. Some of this development would have been made elsewhere, some not.

There are bus routes, yes, but you only have to look at the current streetcar to see what human perception does when considering transit as an option. There are currently two bus routes that serve the Edgewood - Auburn corridor, and yet the streetcar is not empty. In fact it's meeting, if not exceeding, ridership projections. We'll see how that goes with fare, but I have a hunch that we'll at least keep with projected ridership. These bus routes have done little to bring money into Auburn and Edgewood in the past.

You say the existing bus routes need to be made more attractive, and I agree, wholeheartedly, but that again misses the point of the streetcars. They are as much about meeting current needs as they are creating and meeting future ones.

You say BRT should be considered as an alternative. I certainly support employing BRT in the metro, but again you're missing the point of the Streetcars. In a decade or two, when the core city is much more dense, will it show exactly why that mode was chosen. BRT works best when there's less density, the lower cost making it ideal for long range routes. Streetcar works best when there's more density, the higher-capacity and longer lifetimes and lower maintenance costs winning out over the lower initial costs. That's why you see Streetcars being proposed for the inner core of the city, where that density is most likely to accumulate. The fact is, the streetcars will save money over BRT as time goes on, and was one of the reasons the city chose purchasing brand new vehicles over refurbished ones. Everything has to do with the long term. That doesn't even touch on the fact that BRT does not bring in the development or riders quite like a rail vehicle does. Again, more development means more money for the city and the business owners.

Really, the problem comes down to this. Some people are worried about the immediate cost of implementing transit. Others are worried about the future cost if we don't. Building rail, dedicated bus lanes, highways, anything really, will only be more expensive, and far more costly the longer you wait to do so. The Clifton Corridor might seem like a lot of money now, but imagine what it will cost as more and more people move in to the area. Same with the Streetcars. All of this is for the future, and I'm willing to bear the cost so that we may be in a better place in the years to come. It's not train envy, it's planning.

[jsvh]

Dirk- How many additional trips will the $1B make 400 @ 285 able to handle?

[DirkMcGirt]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Dirk- How many additional trips will the $1B make 400 @ 285 able to handle?

Do your own research and post what you find.

Put in your own work around here, son.

[jsvh]

All the things I have seen says it is not about adding capacity that is why I am calling you out to show otherwise.

So $1B for zero additional people is a pretty terrible return.

[DirkMcGirt]

Originally Posted by jsvh

All the things I have seen says it is not about adding capacity that is why I am calling you out to show otherwise.

So $1B for zero additional people is a pretty terrible return.

No added capacity? C'mon son. When out of anything constructive to add to a discussion, making things up is not the way to go. That is just lazy.

Think of the existing off ramp design. Reconstructing that alone will add capacity and flow/merge rate which eliminates the back ups which stop traffic. Increase the speed through collector and merge lanes and flow rate improves. Flow rate improving increases capacity. If you would like this explained further, PM me. No need clogging he board explaining these simple concepts.

[Hokiehaven]

Originally Posted by DirkMcGirt

Are you implying that the 10,000 new riders' fares will be enough to pay for the operating and maintenance costs of the new line?

If so... you are wrong.

By no means, but it would actually make money instead of throwing it down more roads that need constant maintenance and aren't solving any of the issues, actually making them worse as the roads will need to be worked on more, as more people will inevitably be using them.

10,000 more riders a day on Marta would be 12,500,000 dollars or so in the coffers, not bad a year, not a ton, but a start. At least it's making money though.

The very fact is, if the lines went places people needed to go more, work, play, etc. people would use it more and in turn there would be more money to make, particularly for work commuters.