What would be some Realistic MARTA expansion dates? (purchase, salaries)

[SAAN]

So pretty much, we have to endure 10-15 more years of this growing traffic nightmare until we see some sort of transit relief. 10 yrs if gas went back to $3+ and stayed there. Sucks so many jobs are in Alpharetta area now adays.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by SAAN

So pretty much, we have to endure 10-15 more years of this growing traffic nightmare until we see some sort of transit relief. 10 yrs if gas went back to $3+ and stayed there. Sucks so many jobs are in Alpharetta area now adays.

Our traffic is not bad compared to similar cities. And it's unlikely that public transit would have much impact on it anyway.

The good news is that we've got huge amounts of unused transit capacity already. Both in terms of stations and vehicle carrying capacity.

One thing we could easily do right now is to put another 500 buses on the streets. We just voted in $3 billion in additional transit taxes and that is already generating new funds. By carving out only 2% for buses we could instantly increase frequency and coverage, thereby dramatically and immediately improving life for MARTA's core customer base.

There's absolutely no reason to dilly-dally with that. You still leave intact 98% of the additional funding for choice riders.

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Our traffic is not bad compared to similar cities.

On freeways, maybe. But not on surface streets, where the real traffic nightmares begin.

And it's unlikely that public transit would have much impact on it anyway.

Some people still believe this?

[MikeHonchoATL]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Our traffic is not bad compared to similar cities. And it's unlikely that public transit would have much impact on it anyway.

The good news is that we've got huge amounts of unused transit capacity already. Both in terms of stations and vehicle carrying capacity.

One thing we could easily do right now is to put another 500 buses on the streets. We just voted in $3 billion in additional transit taxes and that is already generating new funds. By carving out only 2% for buses we could instantly increase frequency and coverage, thereby dramatically and immediately improving life for MARTA's core customer base.

There's absolutely no reason to dilly-dally with that. You still leave intact 98% of the additional funding for choice riders.

And perhaps, if you make bus transit reliable and faster, more people would ride it. The idea that many ony here espouse that buses have a stigma that can't be overcome is pure stupidity. If they provide a fast transit option for people, they'll ride it. If it takes significantly longer than driving, people won't. THAT is the stigma of buses. They are slow and unreliable. Fix that and you would be on to something. You could implement high quality bus service for a fraction of the cost of vanity projects like the $100 million 1.3 mile streetcar to nowhere.

[tikigod311]

Other than the knowingly inaccurate streetcar comment, I agree.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

And perhaps, if you make bus transit reliable and faster, more people would ride it. The idea that many ony here espouse that buses have a stigma that can't be overcome is pure stupidity. If they provide a fast transit option for people, they'll ride it. If it takes significantly longer than driving, people won't. THAT is the stigma of buses. They are slow and unreliable. Fix that and you would be on to something. You could implement high quality bus service for a fraction of the cost of vanity projects like the $100 million 1.3 mile streetcar to nowhere.

For buses to become more reliable and faster, they will require dedicated lanes. That is a fraction of the cost of rail-based transit.

[MikeHonchoATL]

Originally Posted by cqholt

For buses to become more reliable and faster, they will require dedicated lanes. That is a fraction of the cost of rail-based transit.

For rail based transit to be successful, it requires its own ROW.

Look at how bad the streetcar has failed because it lacks its own ROW.

Either way you need the ROW and the cost of bus infrastructure is minuscule compared to the massive fixed costs of rail.

[MikeHonchoATL]

Originally Posted by tikigod311

Other than the knowingly inaccurate streetcar comment, I agree.

What is inaccurate? It cost ~$100 million. It provides just around 700 daily rides (WAY below projections). It has a reach of just 1.3 miles from end to end.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

For rail based transit to be successful, it requires its own ROW.

Look at how bad the streetcar has failed because it lacks its own ROW.

Either way you need the ROW and the UPFRONT cost of bus infrastructure is minuscule compared to the massive fixed costs of rail.

Fixed it for you.
In the long run of ops and maintenance, rail will be cheaper.

[primaltech]

Yeah, I do still think it would be pretty great, for MARTA to take $1 Billion of the 1/2 penny expansion tax, and pour that completely into new buses (and drivers), other bus improvements, and new bus infrastructure and related (park & ride centers, and new shelters and signs and whatever.)

In theory, at that funding level they could literally double the # of routes and coverage, and then at least double the frequency of everything, even on weekends. Plus also implement all kinds of 'ART' features like TSP and all that.

Atlanta is so heavily roads-based, that the bus as a form of connective transit is just ideal. But it would also need those operational improvements in order to avoid bus bunching and have an optimal performance.

Plus, things could be up and running within a year or 2, so that's another advantage over rail.

Consider me all for that idea. Then the rest of the money (at least $1.5 Billion), could be spent on a couple new rail stations, and other station improvements and whatever.

But, I guess that's not the plan.