MARTA transit plan includes 21 miles of light rail (Atlanta, Forsyth: cost of, air pollution)

[bu2]

Originally Posted by cqholt

If it brings in ad revenue, who cares what people shallow enough to judge based on ads think.

It gives it a trashy appearance so it damages the brand. (although the one with Foy in his shades and windblown tie in front of the fiery auto accident is pretty creative).

[bu2]

Its much like billboards. Orlando has them everywhere and its pretty trashy. They generate revenue. But how much do you want it?
Houston is viewed as trashy in part because I-45 coming from the main airport is filled with billboards. That's the image a lot of people get of the city. You get a totally different view coming in from 288 in the south which was designated a scenic zone when it was first constructed in the early 80s and has no billboards.

Houston's MTA actually totally did away with ads at one point (they still may not have them-I'm not sure). They decided the revenue wasn't worth the trashy look. But there are intermediates between what Houston did and what Atlanta does. I haven't seen anything like Atlanta does anywhere else with the pink buses and fiery buses and few that actually look standard. Its kind of the Olympics mentality-don't let any money making opportunity slip out of your hands. And its why Atlanta got such a negative rep during the Olympics.

Maybe you want to squeeze every dollar out of the transit system to pay for improvements to the system. But there is a cost.

[arjay57]

There's a very interesting article in today's AJC about the continuing decline in transit usage.

As The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported last week, fewer and fewer people are using MARTA and other local transit services. MARTA ridership fell 2.6 percent last year despite the collapse of the I-85 bridge and is down 22 percent since 2008.

In fact, transit ridership is falling across the region and nationwide. Experts say many factors have contributed to the decline. A recent Congressional Research Service report (PDF file) offers a good summary of recent research:

*Car ownership: The cost of owning a car – including licensing, parking fees and other costs – are relatively low in the United States. Over the last several decades, the share of U.S. households without a car has declined, and the number of vehicles per household has increased.

*Cheap gas: Cheap gas often suppresses transit ridership in the short run, while rising gas prices encourage many people to leave their cars behind.

*Ride-hailing services: Some studies show Uber, Lyft and similar services have cut into transit use. Others have shown they complement transit service – by, say, giving people rides to transit stations.

*Telecommuting: One study found 37 percent of workers telecommuted in 2015, up from 9 percent in 1995. With more people working at home, fewer require transit to get to work.

*Bicycling: Public bike-sharing programs and the construction of bike paths have led some people to skip transit for short rips.

*Service variables: Fares, hours of service, service frequency, safety and geographic coverage all affect transit use. In general, the greater the supply, the greater the demand for transit. [Note by Arjay: FTZ]

More....Why are fewer people using transit? A closer look

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by arjay57

There's a very interesting article in today's AJC about the continuing decline in transit usage.

Cheap gas is the #1 reason, what were gas prices in 2008?

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Cheap gas is the #1 reason, what were gas prices in 2008?

Historically high. In the high $3s pg to low and mid $4s pg.

[autolycus25]

Bike and scooter sharing seem like highly complimentary services to transit. Yes, they could take away some short trips, but they should bring a much wider circle of destinations into range of transit stops.

[cqholt]

More MARTA survey: https://survey123.arcgis.com/share/a...12eeaf67cf7ccb

[architect77]

Originally Posted by bu2

It gives it a trashy appearance so it damages the brand. (although the one with Foy in his shades and windblown tie in front of the fiery auto accident is pretty creative).

I don't care about the bus wraps very much, but in this hot climate I think light paint color are better than royal blue, navy blue and black which the older buses use.

I can't figure out whether Atlanta police cars are intentionally hard to spot for stealth purposes or not.

Is high visibility good or bad in discouraging crime?

Raleigh's police cars are iconic and haven't changed in my entire lifetime:


ralpolice by Stephen Edwards, on Flickr

[bu2]

Originally Posted by arjay57

There's a very interesting article in today's AJC about the continuing decline in transit usage.

You can't ignore the trends. Spending billions to build rail far into the suburbs when fewer and fewer people ride is just not a good investment.

They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Atlanta shouldn't do the same thing other cities have done and failed with.

Atlanta should focus on rail close in, not far out. And it should look at where people are and where they are going, not just following some 30 year old college thesis. The southeast beltline is the segment that seems to make the most sense while the northeast seems to make the least sense (do we need rail to take people to Piedmont Park on weekends?) as there are few people and few jobs north of Ponce. But the southeast is not being built at this point.

[Gulch]

Originally Posted by bu2

They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Like billion-dollar highway widening programs that GDOT is currently undertaking (and has done so going back to "Freeing the Freeways")?