ATLANTA TRANSIT (Marta, Beltline, Peachtree Streetcar, LovJoy Commuter, etc...)

[RobMidtowner]

Originally Posted by AtlMidtowner

I will make a bet that all of those against freeways on this forum have a limited lifestlye that have no real need to enter in the real commercial activity of Atlanta or that they emotionally are afraid of entering a highway with 4 to 8 lanes of packed traffic moving 40-80mph. Every city in the USA, including those cities mentioned by any anti-highway forumers such as Detroit, WashingtonDC, SanFran, NYC and Chicago all have limited access highways (not just interstates) right into the downtown areas. It is totally untrue that these cities do not have highways to the center....I have not only used these highways in my life, but now you can even see them on mapquest. I absolutely loved the convenience on my trip to DC driving almost directly to the Potomac, or taking a taxi from LaGuardia directly to lower Manhattan on limited access highways, or driving to my brother at the University of Chicago almost exclusively on highways....

I will also make a bet that those actually involved in Atlanta's commerce not only wholeheartedly support quick access to all points in the city via limited access highways, but also would support more light rail and public transportation for employees. When I lease out office space ( currently have just under 100 office tenants), the main questions are the following: cost, office layout, building appearance and neighborhood, accessbility to highway, accessbility to public transportation. Those are unquestionably top 5 factors of leasability of office space........

Dorey's CLC maps every single office building in Atlanta, and it will be VERY obvious that succesful office buildings and office parks are located near easy access points from limited access highways (within 1.5 miles of an exit).

Even Atlantic Station never would have been built without the 17th Street Bridge and ramp.

(On another note, I drive home from Marietta/Cumberland area to 14th STreet every day. It takes me about 11 minutes, and then another 10 minutes on the surface streets from the 14th street bridge to my condo. Now if I took Cobb Parkway to Northside Drive to 14th STreet, which I have taken me before, the trip would take me about 45 minutes, somtimes even more, as Cobb Parkway, Northside Drive, Huff Drive and Howell Mill areas are living nightware during traffic times. These suggestions to take surface streets simply do not come from people that actually have used the surface streets during.)
If the congestion on the 2 or 3 miles downtown connector slows to 20 miles per hour, which it actually rarely does, then the users are only losing a less than 3 to 4 minutes driving time!! If you take surface streets, each red light will last anywhere from 30 seconds to one minute!! As I stated on a previous post, it takes about 1.5 hours during low traffic time to travel on surface streets from Vinings to Lilburn, but about 23 minutes on the highways.....there is no real intelligent debate, the limited access highways system is a real asset to continue economic prosperity of Atlanta. Of course it is not perfect.......

I am just shocked that I actually have agreed with MarketsWork on something......LOL
I am also shocked that people claiming to be intelligent actually think ridding the city of limited access highways would improve traffic.

If we want all the proposed highrises in downtown and midtown to be cancelled, shut down the connector!! (Lets actually have someone interview Jim Borders, Tom Cousins, Mark Randall, Donald Trump and other developer on their opininions on development and limited access highways in the Atlanta market).

Maybe a compromise would be to turn the connector into a lake, and redirect the highway over Piedmont by I-85 (getting ridding of the strip clubs) , then over Monroe and Boulevard (getting rid of the highest crime area in Atlanta) and then back to the current connector south of the downtown city area......LOL Downtown and Midtown would have a beautiful Lake, and Virginia Highlands wont have to worry about the Beltline.....LOL

For someone who said he came on here wanting to have intelligent conversation, this is pretty childish. I drive the connector all the time too but mostly to visit family on the weekends since I live and work in midtown. I don't think anyone is arguing that an interstate should not connect to the city in some way so it's not like the city will be cut off from civilization. People will still be able to drive to the city, so developers wouldn't necessarily scare away from the idea. The argument is to not let the interstate go through the city because people going through the city should be using 285, not the connector.

The connector also violates GDOT policy for interchange spacing by not providing a "Minimum spacing of one (1) mile in urban areas with an average spacing of two (2) miles". I got that from GDOT's website so I'm not just making it up from my own opinions. If you want to argue with engineering principles be my guest, just don't expect me to listen to you.

[dante2308]

Curious, why is no one suggesting burying the highway? Can everyone have their cake and eat it too? Why focus on the them or us scenario?

[sabino86]

IMHO, the big screw-up with the Connector came during the "Freeing the Freeways" widening phase (1981-1988) by not implementing the original HOV lane concept (with barriers) and not covering parts of it.

Go figure...

[fisp]

Originally Posted by AtlMidtowner

I will make a bet that all of those against freeways on this forum have a limited lifestlye that have no real need to enter in the real commercial activity of Atlanta or that they emotionally are afraid of entering a highway with 4 to 8 lanes of packed traffic moving 40-80mph.

i'm with the group that has a real need to get around the city and i am definitely not afraid of driving on the highway... it's like a video game sometimes ... but i've pretty much found a surface street way to get anywhere inside of 285 faster than by using a highway. the only time i feel i need to get on the highway is to go to areas around 285 and outside. also, i'm not sure if anybody else has noticed, but it can take 20 minutes or more just to enter the highway from access points in midtown. if you add that time to the actual time on the highway, you should be able to get anywhere in the city faster on a purely surface route.

[Rail Claimore]

While I don't disagree with some of what AtlMidtowner is saying about cities with freeways that lead into, scoot by, or plow directly through their cores, I must mention something about Chicago's expressways that lead and go next to downtown. Three of the four major expressways were built adjacent to (or sandwiched between) pre-existing major rail corridors. The Kennedy Expressway was built next to the UP NW line, the Stevenson Expressway was built next to the Sanitary and Ship canal and sandwiched between two existing rail corridors, and while there was some neighborhood interference in the building of the Dan Ryan Expressway, that road too, is sandwiched between two major rail corridors that are about half a mile apart. The only expressway in Chicago that did massive damage to pre-existing neighborhoods throughout its entire route within the city limits is the Eisenhower Expressway, and I've even pondered the need for this expressway.

The point of all this is that though Chicago has major expressways that go to downtown, two of the four had moderate to minimal impact on existing neighborhoods and one had practically no impact because of where they were built. Now compare this to the Connector or I-20 in Atlanta. The Connector could have been built the proper way, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks and yards west of Downtown and Midtown, but it wasn't. Instead, it was built about a mile away, needlessly and expensively cutting through the heart of pre-existing neighborhoods and a definable street grid. And I'm sure a better routing of I-20 was possible.

I don't necessarily have a problem with building limited-access roads into or through central cities, so long as existing transportation corridors are used. What I think is outright idiocy is needlessly (and more expensively) destroying pre-existing neighborhoods only to get what is, or was perceived at the time, a more desirable routing in the name of "progress." And that was too often the case in many American cities between WWII and the 1970's.

[Andrea]

Originally Posted by Rail Claimore

The point of all this is that though Chicago has major expressways that go to downtown, two of the four had moderate to minimal impact on existing neighborhoods and one had practically no impact because of where they were built.

Chicago's downtown was also vastly more developed. It already had a tremendous and stable network of urban streets and arterial roads. So it was much better situated to withstand the freeways that were imposed on it.

[sabino86]

Some of you may have been to the awesome site www.nycsubway.org. Here are some cool pictures I found of MARTA in it's infancy:


MARTA train on the bridge over the Downtown Connector (only 6 lanes too) between Georgia State and King Memorial Stations on the East Line (August 10, 1979).


Westbound train at Omni Station on the West Line (December 1981).


Train at Avondale Station on the East Line (August 9, 1979).


Train in the Avondale Yard Shop (December 1981).


Train at North Avenue Station (December 1981).

Only wish there were more...

[Andrea]

There was an interesting editorial in the AJC the other day about how Atlanta has fallen behind other Sunbelt cities with respect to investing in transit:

Get on transit bandwagon, metro Atlanta

JAY BOOKMAN
MY OPINION
Published on: 12/21/06

As a sprawling Sun Belt city built around the automobile, metro Atlanta — like Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, San Jose and similar places — is ill-suited for mass transit, and Atlanta commuters would never park their cars to ride rail or buses.

That's the story, anyway, and it has taken such a hold at the state Department of Transportation and the Legislature that it threatens the major new investments in transit the region will need as it tries to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

As you look around the country, though, you see a narrative of a different sort taking hold in Atlanta's sister Sun Belt cities. While metro Atlanta dawdles, other regions are aggressively remaking themselves, adapting to changing times, trends and needs. It hasn't been easy, but they're overcoming obstacles and betting heavily that the future will differ from the past.

Just as Atlanta used to do.

Full article: http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/o...edbookman.html

[Tombstoner]

Originally Posted by Andrea

There was an interesting editorial in the AJC the other day about how Atlanta has fallen behind other Sunbelt cities with respect to investing in transit:



Full article: http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/o...edbookman.html

I think Bookman is exactly right. Many Atlantans are patting themselves on the back because the Beltline is limping along when other cities are really getting their asses in gear on multiple transit fronts. When I mentioned this before, another forumer jumped on me saying that "Atlanta has nothing to learn" from the likes of Dallas and Houston. Such unwarranted self-congratulations and feel-goodism is really the poison that holds Atlanta back.

[Andrea]

Originally Posted by Tombstoner

I think Bookman is exactly right. Many Atlantans are patting themselves on the back because the Beltline is limping along when other cities are really getting their asses in gear on multiple transit fronts. When I mentioned this before, another forumer jumped on me saying that "Atlanta has nothing to learn" from the likes of Dallas and Houston. Such unwarranted self-congratulations and feel-goodism is really the poison that holds Atlanta back.

From what I've heard they're saying it will likely be decades before the Beltline or the Peachtree start running. Why does it take so long to do stuff like that here whereas other cities already have their systems going? Is it just what Bookman says, i.e., the lack of funding from our DOT and state legislature?

[CityFan]

Originally Posted by Andrea

Is it just what Bookman says, i.e., the lack of funding from our DOT and state legislature?

I think lack of true leadership which is dedicated to build Beltline is the key factor in its delay. It seems no body really cares when the Beltline is up and running. We need hire those people who have track records in successfully bringing light rail system into reality in other cities to manage our Beltline project.

[Chris Creech]

One of my concerns about the push for the Rights Museum, is that focus will be taken off the beltline. I think before Shirley was seeing the Beltline as her "legacy" project, her big push may well be the Museum now though.

I really wish Cathy Woolard hand't lost her election, or had decided to stay as Pres. of the City Council, she was one of the big early champions of the project.

[MidtownMile]

In a "just trying to be positive" move, I think this may prove to be a self fulfilling prophecy. While I agree the leadership has retargeted itself to building-oriented projects, these are also projects that will require bodies to be successful. I think some of the cultural projects and commercial development projects are necessary. Atlanta has a transportation problem, but people get around it. If these new elements come in, the problem will worsen. Then, we will have to look at it. As long as some eyes are turned toward it, I think it will get done sooner rather than later. To develop into the metropolis Atlanta is striving to be, it really has no choice, especially since its fire is fueled by local economy and business rather than a major tourism or transitional crowd. Those people need to get home.

[Andrea]

Originally Posted by CityFan

I think lack of true leadership which is dedicated to build Beltline is the key factor in its delay. It seems no body really cares when the Beltline is up and running. We need hire those people who have track records in successfully bringing light rail system into reality in other cities to manage our Beltline project.

That may be part of it but I would also have to guess that public support for these projects is lukewarm at best.

Another factor may be that MARTA has turned out to be something of a disappointment. I was living elsewhere when it was built, but I remember the excitement about Atlanta getting a subway. When I moved back, however, I found that it actually only went to a handful of places that were of interest to me, and that most of the stations were isolated and extremely unfriendly to pedestrians.

Additionally, by the time MARTA was built, the bulk of the city's business, commericial and residential growth had largely moved away from the areas served by the train system.

We know from the experience of other cities that light rail is a popular and affordable alternative in developed urban areas. We also know from the experience of other cities that it can be rapidly implemented. But this requires a public will. A year or so ago I recall reading that they were talking about having the Peachtree streetcar running within a couple of years, and I heard several officials say the same thing. This fall I went to a meeting of the Peachtree corridor task force, however, and they were saying 25-30 years is a more realistic assessment.

Atlanta is an automobile town through and through. If there was a genuine public outcry for rail transportation, then we'd have it, just like other cities do.

[Chris Creech]

Originally Posted by Andrea

Atlanta is an automobile town through and through. If there was a genuine public outcry for rail transportation, then we'd have it, just like other cities do.

But don't you think a lot of people in transit-friendly cities, are sort of forced into it?

I've always thought the driving force behind Atlanta and transit, isn't so much proactive urban-minded people saying "gee, it sure wouldn't it be better for the world if I took the train."

But people kinda forced into it, when the combination of aggravation, commute time, parking fees finally tip the scales.

I think at some point too so much of it's psychological. Just like there was a tipping point in midtown with people moving intown and all the condos being built - when for a number of reasons (traveling, expense, etc.) suddenly it made sense -- then voila! it was suddenly "cool" to be in midtown.

Hopefully, not too far down the road, people will realize that a good wellrun MARTA system makes sense, and makes life a lot easier, then similiarly, taking MARTA will one day suddenly become "cool".

I really wish people would drop this whole "Atlanta is a car town, always will be thing" though I know it's true - I think we've sort of brainwashed ourselves into thinking things will never change.

[smArTaLlone]

The reason the beltline will take so long is money. For one thing they are seeking federal funds for the transit which is a lengthy process in itself.

Other cities moving forward with plans either went through these steps years ago or are funding the expansions through local taxes.

The Peachtree streetcar on the other hand is not seeking federal funds and can be up and running much sooner.

[Fiorenza]

From ncpa.org:

RAILROADING TAXPAYERS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flush with oil and gas revenues, New Mexico has joined the nationwide
rush to embrace expensive rail projects, with little regard for cost
and even less consideration for utility, says Paul Gessing, president
of the Rio Grande Foundation.

Among the boondoggles:

o A "Rail Runner" commuter train system connecting
Albuquerque and Santa Fe with two towns with only 7,000 people
each, estimated to cost more than $500 million, and 90 percent
funded by taxpayer subsidies.

o A "modern streetcar" system in Albuquerque that
will cost at least $28 million per mile, but serves a
population of less than 2,500 people per square mile.

New Mexico's infatuation with costly rail projects will continue to
burden the state's economy with wasteful spending into the distant
future. The reality was made clear earlier this year when $1.5
billion in federal money was secured for Washington's Metro rail
system, contingent on local governments raising taxes on their citizens
to create a "dedicated revenue source" for that system.

While New Mexico's Rail Runner and streetcar systems will be nowhere
near the size and cost of DC's Metro, the federal government is not
going to bail the state out, says Gessing. In other words, big
tax hikes will be necessary to pay for operating costs, upkeep,
inevitable expansion and cost overruns.

Source: Paul Gessing, "Richardson Railroads Taxpayers," Rio
Grande Foundation, December 4, 2006.

For text:

http://www.riograndefoundation.org/n...&ArticleID=112

For more on State and Local Issues:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?Article_Category=40

[Tombstoner]

As much as I'm a HUGE fan of mass transit, I have to say that I think Andrea is right. There is just not enough public pressure for transit projects and there probably never will be (that last sentiment is my own). Although Chris Creech suggests that the public will be forced to confront it at some point, I just think that Atlanta's pattern of residential areas makes it unlikely. I think that a grid layout is condusive to/necessary for buses to connect with rail stations, and Atlanta just doesn't have that. I live in-town, but there are so many pockets of houses far from a major thoroughfare, probably 50% of my neighbors would never make it over to DeKalb Ave. or Ponce no matter how frequent the improved bus service or how extensive new light rail lines might be. The farther you move out, the greater the percentage of folks living deep in the subdivision (I think about those bizarre fish at the bottom of the ocean that have evolved to deal with total darkness...). Hell, they need a car to get to a sidewalk no less a bus route!
Rather than be forced to deal with transit, I think we're seeing Atlanta develop into a series of mediocre satellite cities that will have their own catchment areas. That's a shame because I think a real cultural identity can only come about if there are a limited number of institutions that cater to the entire metropolitan area. But I digress...
The Beltway is good insofar as any transit and greenspace is good. Is it brilliant? Hardly. I think it's going to be a hard sell in the long run but whatever happens--even if the city just buys up right-of-way and puts some parks in--it will be positive.
The more I hear about the Human Rights museum, the more I think it's going to disintegrate into another Museum of Black Victimization (and I don't mean that to be offensive to African-Americans--I just think that the political leadership in that community is incapable of thinking beyond their immediate political needs). I wouldn't have thought Shirley would go for that, but she's thinking about her legacy and she wants to get on the good side of that leadership.

[Chris Creech]

Originally Posted by Fiorenza

From ncpa.org:

RAILROADING TAXPAYERS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flush with oil and gas revenues, New Mexico has joined the nationwide
rush to embrace expensive rail projects, with little regard for cost
and even less consideration for utility, says Paul Gessing, president
of the Rio Grande Foundation.

I think pretty much what you'd expect from them. Especially with Paul Gessing's background.

I love how today there's all these thinly veiled "independent" think tanks trying to advise policy.

[Andrea]

Originally Posted by Chris Creech

I really wish people would drop this whole "Atlanta is a car town, always will be thing" though I know it's true - I think we've sort of brainwashed ourselves into thinking things will never change.

Chris, I don't think acknowledging that Atlanta is a car town is equivalent to saying it always will be. Of course people here are influenced by circumstances like traffic, wasted time, fuel costs, etc., just like they are everywhere else. (In fact, most people in Atlanta are from somewhere else).

It's clearly feasible *right now* to have a viable rail system at least inside the city limits of Atlanta. The Beltline and the Streetcar would be terrific adjuncts to MARTA. What I'm voicing is my frustration over the fact that many other cities have been able to get their light rail systems up and going in relatively short order. By contrast, what I'm hearing is that it's still decades away here.

That's where I think the public will comes into play. If people really want it, then they find a way. It's done all the time in other cities.