Why suburbia sucks (Atlanta, Cleveland: low cost, vehicle, rated)

[wasel]

The bus I rode on Monday was new and spotlessly clean. My only complaint was that the online scheduler stated the bus would be there at a certain time but didnt come until 20 mins later. But overall it was pleasant.

[primaltech]

Originally Posted by arjay57

We should triple the fleet, clean up the routes, increase frequencies, provide signal prioritization and passing lanes, and enhance the stops.

Agreed 100%.

Would certainly be the most cost effective per rider. No need to build roads that already exist. Just buy the vehicles.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by primaltech

Agreed 100%.

Would certainly be the most cost effective per rider. No need to build roads that already exist. Just buy the vehicles.

I'd also like to see some signs that address the issue wasel mentioned. "Next bus arrives in ___ minutes."

I know there's an app for this but not everybody has a smartphone and a data plan.

[sstsunami55]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Our built environment is difficult for rail, but bus mass transit would be awesome for the ATL if people will simply get over their cultural aversion to hopping on the bus.

We should triple the fleet, clean up the routes, increase frequencies, provide signal prioritization and passing lanes, and enhance the stops.

This could be done toute de suite for a fraction of the time and cost of rail lines.

There needs to be more density for that to happen.

[Born 2 Roll]

Originally Posted by sstsunami55

Exactly, the only reason transit doesn't work is because the place is built for cars and isn't dense or walkable enough. And to all you people who have a knee-jerk response, I don't want to take away parking. I want people who drive to pay the full cost. AND, before you say something else. I also want public transit users to pay the full cost of public transit.

Originally Posted by cqholt

Commuter Rail, with downtown's and business districts concentrated around stations could work in Atlanta's suburbs. The historic downtown's and railroads already exist. Something similar to what is found along the Metro-North.

Originally Posted by arjay57

Our built environment is difficult for rail, but bus mass transit would be awesome for the ATL if people will simply get over their cultural aversion to hopping on the bus.

We should triple the fleet, clean up the routes, increase frequencies, provide signal prioritization and passing lanes, and enhance the stops.

This could be done toute de suite for a fraction of the time and cost of rail lines.

Originally Posted by sstsunami55

There needs to be more density for that to happen.

cqholt makes an excellent point that commuter rail could work as a mode of transportation in the Atlanta suburbs with downtowns and business districts concentrated around stations.

Developing walkable TOD (Transit-Oriented Development) around rail transit stations and even along bus lines through lucrative large-scale P3's (Public-Private Partnerships) with property owners and metro Atlanta's aggressive real estate development community is the way that the cost of building and maintaining high quality transit infrastructure can be funded (or subsidized) without making the cost of transit trips too high for potential transit users to pay.

We can basically partner with the private realm to use TOD (or high-density mixed-use Transit-Oriented real estate development along at and around transit stations and along transit lines) to pay the costs of building and maintaining an expanded (bus and rail) transit network.

P3-built transit-oriented real estate development at stations and along both rail and bus transit lines is the way to pay the full cost of public transit while still keeping transit trips affordable and cheap for individual users.

Hong Kong has successfully utilized the P3 TOD approach to funding very high-quality transit service for over 40 years to the extent that the territory's transit agency is worth over a quarter-trillion dollars ($250 billion) in value.

Atlanta obviously is not (and most likely never will be) Hong Kong in terms of density of population and development.

But nevertheless, Atlanta is a major international city/metro (with a severely-constricted road network) that continues to rise in stature and importance (TV/Film production industry is now 3rd-largest on the entire planet, Atlanta continues to be home to the busiest airport on the planet, etc). So with the Atlanta region increasingly being so financially and economically viable on an international scale, the opportunity most certainly exists to build-out a very high-quality multi-modal transit infrastructure with a large infusion of private money that will be able to more than make up for the limited amount of public funding available for transit expansion.

A P3 TOD-funded and financed regional transit authority most likely will not get close to $250 billion in value in the Atlanta region. But a P3 TOD-funded transit authority rising to between $50-100 billion in value is definitely not out of the realm of possibility in an Atlanta region driven by development-happy real estate interests.....An amount of transit value that can be leveraged to provide an ultra-high level of multimodal (rail, bus and rideshare) transit service.

Now to be clear, so that both advocates for higher-density urban and lower-density suburban/exurban lifestyles understand, an expansive large-scale transit expansion throughout the entire Atlanta region (ITP urban core and OTP suburbs and exurbs) does NOT mean that New York-style ultra high-density urban development patterns will be retroactively retrofitted and imposed on every inch of the entire Atlanta region.

What an expansive large-scale transit expansion throughout the entire Atlanta region will mean is that the highest-capacity regional transportation corridors (transportation corridors anchored by major arterial routes and thoroughfares) will become much more multimodal with high levels of bus and rail transit service being implemented through those corridors where more higher-density transit-oriented development will be built to financially support the increased service. It also means that existing lower-density suburban and exurban residential areas outside of those multimodal regional high-capacity transportation corridors will increase in monetary value......That's because when executed properly, transit increases the value of both higher-density properties closest (and closer) to high-capacity regional transit lines and lower-density properties farther away from high-capacity regional transit lines.

[abalashov]

Originally Posted by sstsunami55

There needs to be more density for that to happen.

^ This. Because even if the fleet is tripled and the frequency and scheduling improved, how do you get to the bus? What happens at the end? You get off the bus ... and?

It fundamentally involves walkability and reachable, meaningful destinations on both sides. We don't need to be Hong Kong, but right now we're at the exact opposite extreme.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Our built environment is difficult for rail, but bus mass transit would be awesome for the ATL if people will simply get over their cultural aversion to hopping on the bus.

We should triple the fleet, clean up the routes, increase frequencies, provide signal prioritization and passing lanes, and enhance the stops.

This could be done toute de suite for a fraction of the time and cost of rail lines.

That would be pointless if the buses are stuck in traffic and start bunching up on each other. We need smart transit planning and it starts with better routes, signal priority, and then eventually dedicated lanes.

[abalashov]

Originally Posted by cqholt

We need smart transit planning and it starts with better routes, signal priority, and then eventually dedicated lanes.

Or, in a word, the buses need to become substantially more train-like. :-)

There is a reason trains exist. They are very well combined with feeder buses, but there is a reason successful core transit arteries are rail.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by cqholt

That would be pointless if the buses are stuck in traffic and start bunching up on each other. We need smart transit planning and it starts with better routes, signal priority, and then eventually dedicated lanes.

Well, I said better routes, signal prioritization and passing lanes.

How are we differing?

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Well, I said better routes, signal prioritization and passing lanes.

How are we differing?

MARTA and GDOT tried that plan on Memorial Dr and failed. They installed signal priority and queue jumper lanes (at congested intersections)
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7863...2!8i6656?hl=en
I am proposing entire dedicated lanes, like Euclid Corridor/HealthLine in Cleveland https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4996...7i13312!8i6656