The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[Hey_Hey]

The other plan that I have been a fan of is an interconnected system of skytrams/gondolas each holding 4-8 people. They would use existing right of way over roads, they would not be affected by pedestrians/trains/cars/road closures/etc, they would run continually with a transit vehicle never more than a minute or so from picking you up, and they are a fraction of the cost of light rail.  They don't have quite the capacity of light rail, but I don't foresee a situation in which Nashville will push the capacity limits anytime soon. Another important benefit is that it would offer an immediate branding identity for Nashville, similar to the Chicago L, San Francisco trolleys, or the NYC subway. 

Here's a video of one in Bolivia: https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/americas/100000004701170/traveling-through-the-sky-in-bolivia.html

Here's a television piece on one proposed for Austin: http://kxan.com/2016/09/28/funding-approved-to-study-gondola-cable-car-system-in-austin/

Here's a video of one in London that is fairly short: http://www.mystatesman.com/news/local/wear-austin-gondolas-surface-again-alternative-rail-buses/oz3c9hDVFdzidb6xPK6BcK/

 

[Neigeville2]

That Austin page also has a link to a proposal for a personal rapid transit system that looks interesting.  My brother in law spoke admiringly of such a system in Morgantown WV.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgantown_Personal_Rapid_Transit which has operated since 1970.  The technology has improved a great deal since then according to Wikipedia and the Austin system is proposed to go 100 mph, thumbing its nose at the stalled cars below.

[titanhog]

I do like the idea of some type of system with constant movement...something that every few seconds / minutes, another "car" pulls up and people can board and keep moving...similar to a "ski lift" or gondola.  It doesn't necessarily have to be above ground...but needs to be almost constant movement without having to wait on traffic.

[VSRJ]

And then there's always this:

 

[titanhog]

^^I can't help but imagine that thing sucking up cars as it goes along! 

[Guest]

Just an update on how the California high-speed rail project if proceeding ...

First Leg (the easiest leg)  -

7 years behind schedule (so far)

$3,600,000,000 over budget (so far) ... only 50% more that esitmated

Bullet Cost Overruns

 

[dmillsphoto]

40 minutes ago, nashville_bound said:

Just an update on how the California high-speed rail project if proceeding ...

First Leg (the easiest leg)  -

7 years behind schedule (so far)

$3,600,000,000 over budget (so far) ... only 50% more that esitmated

Bullet Cost Overruns

 

Yeah this is one that is definitely a boondoggle. Elon Musk had a couple options that would have cost significantly less but this was still chosen as their path.

[BnaBreaker]

Is that supposed to be a reason for not doing anything?

[grilled_cheese]

20 minutes ago, BnaBreaker said:

Is that supposed to be a reason for not doing anything?

The real boondoggle is spending transit money in counties that literally give nothing back to the state and where a few thousand live.  He's trying to distract and divide.  That's their game plan.

[titanhog]

12 minutes ago, grilled_cheese said:

The real boondoggle is spending transit money in counties that literally give nothing back to the state and where a few thousand live.  He's trying to distract and divide.  That's their game plan.

Yeah...let's only provide services for the rich, elite urbanites. 

[SoundScan]

2 hours ago, nashville_bound said:

Just an update on how the California high-speed rail project if proceeding ...

First Leg (the easiest leg)  -

7 years behind schedule (so far)

$3,600,000,000 over budget (so far) ... only 50% more that esitmated

Bullet Cost Overruns

 

Is this where we're supposed to reply with 10 examples of transit projects that are/were successful and then mention bridges to nowhere?

[BnaBreaker]

1 hour ago, titanhog said:

Yeah...let's only provide services for the rich, elite urbanites. 

I dont think anyone is arguing that.  But generally speaking, on a per capita basis people in rural counties get far more transportation dollars spent on them than folks in densely populated counties do.  I mean, these figures being tossed around for this transit proposal seem big, and they are, but nearly a third of the people in the state live in metro Nashville, so it makes sense that the pendulum of funding swings more in the direction of Nashville than it currently does.

I mean, whats more important?  A mass transit system serving two million people in the state's capital and main economic engine, or a six lane highway in Smith County serving a few thousand people?  I suppose one could argue that that is perhaps an apples to oranges comparison, but I tell ya what, that six lane highway in Smith county is being approved immediately and without question.

Edited January 14, 2017 by BnaBreaker

[grilled_cheese]

55 minutes ago, titanhog said:

Yeah...let's only provide services for the rich, elite urbanites. 

Livingston Highway in Pickett County (pop 5k) has a bridge that goes over Dale Hollow Lake.  How much did that cost to build and maintain?  How many people use it annually?  What's the ROI?

[titanhog]

3 hours ago, grilled_cheese said:

Livingston Highway in Pickett County (pop 5k) has a bridge that goes over Dale Hollow Lake.  How much did that cost to build and maintain?  How many people use it annually?  What's the ROI?

So you're saying the state should be able to come in and construct a huge lake, cutting off all state highways in the area, and not put in one bridge over a thin portion of the lake to allow residents and other travelers in that part of the state to actually travel without having to go all the way around the lake?  We're talking adding hours to a drive in some instances.  It's not as if they put a bridge over the lake at every location they cut off a highway.

I realize much more money needs to go to the cities...but that doesn't mean you can just tell the other "smaller" counties to go "jump in the lake."  Working together and compromising goes a lot further than looking at these rural areas as "giving nothing back to the state."  

Edited January 15, 2017 by titanhog

[Guest]

I have never said we should do nothing.

In this thread, I have attempted to provide a rational voice to counter the groupthink from many on this board that proclaimed, "Build it Now!" at the first $6 billion dollar headline, without knowing many of the specifics of the plan. I have demonstrated in many of my news posing, a pattern of governmental / transportation-authority propaganda that 'sells' a pie-in-the-sky vision to garner support and then delivers massive cost-overruns, decennial delays, and lower than estimated usage.

So if I am going to be asked to support a mass-transit project of this magnitude I want acts and not sophistry.

6 hours ago, BnaBreaker said:

Is that supposed to be a reason for not doing anything?

 

Edited January 15, 2017 by Guest

[Guest]

No one could take my posting of over a decade and conclude that I support 'boondoggles' {funny word} 

 

ha, you figured me out...so very smart of you... my 'game plan' is to distract and divide you? {Insert Drug reference to describe his feelings of grandeur} and {eye roll}

 

6 hours ago, grilled_cheese said:

The real boondoggle is spending transit money in counties that literally give nothing back to the state and where a few thousand live.  He's trying to distract and divide.  That's their game plan.

 

Edited January 15, 2017 by Guest

[ruraljuror]

6 minutes ago, nashville_bound said:

I have never said we should do nothing.

In this thread, I have attempted to provide a rational voice to counter the groupthink from the many on this board that have proclaimed, "Build it Now!" from the first $6 billion dollar headline, without knowing many of the specifics of the plan. I have demonstrated in many of my news posing, a pattern of governmental / transportation-authority propaganda that 'sells' a pie-in-the-sky vision to garner support and then delivers massive cost-overruns, decennial delays, and lower than estimated usage.

So if I am going to be asked to support a mass-transit project of this magnitude I want acts and not sophistry.

 

I stopped reading at "groupthink" when my eyes rolled through the back of my head.

[Guest]

Groupthink....too strong for your sensibilities?

how would you describe the phenomenon of so many intelligent members of this forum rushing to support such a large project (by Nashville standards) without any critical vetting of the plan?

[grilled_cheese]

43 minutes ago, nashville_bound said:

Groupthink....too strong for your sensibilities?

how would you describe the phenomenon of so many intelligent members of this forum rushing to support such a large project (by Nashville standards) without any critical vetting of the plan?

trolling

[ruraljuror]

55 minutes ago, nashville_bound said:

Groupthink....too strong for your sensibilities?

how would you describe the phenomenon of so many intelligent members of this forum rushing to support such a large project (by Nashville standards) without any critical vetting of the plan?

I would start by assuming that the many intelligent members of this forum probably have many different reasons for supporting the transportation project, instead of assuming that all the people who disagree with you are doing so as some kind of irrational mob response.  

"Groupthink" isn't too strong for my sensibilities, it's just condescending and provides more insight about you than it does the thought processes of those who have a different perspective on the transit issue. 

[PruneTracy]

23 hours ago, grilled_cheese said:

Livingston Highway in Pickett County (pop 5k) has a bridge that goes over Dale Hollow Lake.  How much did that cost to build and maintain?  How many people use it annually?  What's the ROI?

One can put numbers to this. The current iteration of the Landon B. Hassler Memorial Bridge, carrying State Route 111 over Dale Hollow Lake, was built in 1996 (tragically replacing a graceful six-span Parker truss of vintage 1947). Don't know how much it cost but we can guess about $10,000,000 based on the cost of current comparable spans as well as inflation since then.

AADT over the bridge is currently about 4,600 vehicles per day; the growth rate is a paltry 0.25% with a brutal coefficient of determination of 0.02. These numbers are highly discouraging, indeed, as to the necessity of such a project. Still, we'll run with it.

If we assume that the bridge as a 50-year service life, or perhaps at least that the bridge survives 50 years without needing major rehabilitation, then during that time the bridge will have carried something like 87,500,000 trips over Dale Hollow Lake.

Each trip then, in terms of the construction cost and avoiding all that pesky present value hullabaloo, would have cost the taxpayers of the State of Tennessee... 11 cents.

So can we assume that each trip over that bridge, as opposed to a detour over US Route 27 through Jamestown (35 extra miles, 1 hour longer) or perhaps even Celina and State Route 52 by way of Kentucky (47 extra miles, 1 hour also), provides a net economic benefit to the state of more than 11 cents? Certainly that is a low bar. I daresay we should be more worried about the lost gas tax revenue from the detours, perhaps some impoverished service station owners in Fentress County.

[bmkTN]

On ‎1‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 11:17 AM, Neigeville2 said:

That Austin page also has a link to a proposal for a personal rapid transit system that looks interesting.  My brother in law spoke admiringly of such a system in Morgantown WV.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgantown_Personal_Rapid_Transit which has operated since 1970.  The technology has improved a great deal since then according to Wikipedia and the Austin system is proposed to go 100 mph, thumbing its nose at the stalled cars below.

I'm very interested to see if that proposal for Austin is actually realistic and goes anywhere.  I love the look of it and it sounds like it should be a lot cheaper than the alternatives. 

[Guest]

The bottom line is that no one on this board should be 'all-in' a regional transit plan for which almost none of the details required to implement said plan have been released. Of the 3 offered plans this board exploaded with support of the $6B plan on day one....and some even suggested that the plan go farther. On what basis other that groupthink....{fanboy?} could such a decision be made? And I will note that Not one of the questions I posted on day-one of the headline release has been answered.

trolling? If that is what you call asking questions and sounding a warning then sure, I am trolling.... maybe concert ticket prices should be taxed to pay for the mass-transit plan....who would be trolling then? You guys take everything way too personally....maybe less attacking me and more asking questions of the transit authority...so we can get something built that we can afford, support and utilize.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Guest

[grilled_cheese]

It's obvious that the boomers want no part of transit.  Sad really.  Thankfully the boomers are slowly but surely unable to make it to the ballot box.

[henburg]

10 minutes ago, nashville_bound said:

The bottom line is that no one on this board should be 'all-in' for the regional transit plan almost none of the details required to implement said plan have been released. Of the 3 offered plans this board exploaded with support of the $6B plan on day one....and some even suggested that the plan go farther. On what basis other that groupthink....{fanboy} could such a decision be made? And I will not that I the questions I posted on day-one of the headline have yet to be answered.

trolling? If that is what you call asking questions and sounding a warning then sure, I am trolling.... maybe concert ticket prices should be taxed to pay for the mass-transit plan....who would be trolling then? You guys retake everything way too personally....maybe less attacking me and more asking questions of the transit authority...so we can get something built that we can afford, support and utilize.

I think the reason that people perceive it as trolling is that you aren't really "asking questions" as you put it, you simply linked to a project that has so far been very unsuccessful without any explanation as to why. For one, the California project is really incomparable to our situation because that is a much more expensive, regional project, whereas Nashville's will be restricted to the MSA. The project you linked is also a very rare failure, you could post many more cases that contradict your point while also better applyingto Nashville's situation. As to why people are quick to jump on board with the most expansive plan, I think that many (including myself) think that for a mass transit system to work in Nashville, it needs to be big and well-run in order to sway car-drivers to use it. I also think that if we invest heavily early on, we won't be looking back in the future wishing that we had developed a system that could handle Nashville future growth (which is projected to be quite large).

My point is that while I think that it's definitely important to be skeptical about things in order to balance the discussion, you also have to offer points behind your argument to be taken seriously and not considered a troll (which for the record, I never thought you were)