The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[rookzie]

Ron, great find. who ever made this needs to join us at a meet. 

i like how every time RR tracks were in a picture there was a passenger train on them.

 

That IS funny, isn't it?  Even to critics like me who sees inconsistencies in the types of psngr trains with the concept.

-==-

[Jamie Hall]

So much posted on this thread and I am not sure if the below link has ever been posted. This document deals with bridge enhancements and there is actually a rendering of a interstate cap.

http://www.nashvillempo.org/docs/MovingTNFoward/enhancing_bridges.pdf

 

I've been wishing for bridge enhancements around the downtown loop for years -- they bridges are ugly, uninviting and prone to horrible traffic backups and congestion. With the continued development of downtown, the bridges could be a well-designed gateway for tourists, but sadly, they just aren't. But if I read that document correctly, the introduction says it's a four-year bridge enhancement program that launched in 2009. Does that mean TDOT doesn't have any plans to extend this project, or is there still work to be done?

[rookzie]

I've been wishing for bridge enhancements around the downtown loop for years -- they bridges are ugly, uninviting and prone to horrible traffic backups and congestion. With the continued development of downtown, the bridges could be a well-designed gateway for tourists, but sadly, they just aren't. But if I read that document correctly, the introduction says it's a four-year bridge enhancement program that launched in 2009. Does that mean TDOT doesn't have any plans to extend this project, or is there still work to be done?

 

I didn't really peruse the report, but I did give it some critique about not having enough "Nash Bridges" overall.  I posted a segment of concern sometime last year on a serious lack of river crossings in general along the surface roads in Davidson Co. (as opposed to the freeways).  Just today I was on Cleveland St. and Douglas Ave. and had to go east to the Two Rivers area.  So I had to thread my way to either cross one of the downtown surface bridges and fishtail my way to Hermitage Ave/ Lebanon Road and then to McGavock Pike, or to take Ellington Pkwy or I-24 and do a Silliman Bridge path to I-40 to Briley (or take the opposite way on Ellington to Briley in Madison).  Other than those who have to use the bridges just to get to the freeways, and crowding out the bridges to boot, surface-only drivers destined for crosstown or relatively near-town points have no choice except to hit the freeways just get almost anywhere around town. Why?  Too few river crossing points.

 

Freeways should not have to be the primary paths of conveyance within the county, but they are, and for the last 55 years, it seems to have been planned that way.  Even though the freeways (except for portions of a parkway here and there) may have been intended primarily as a means of moving people into and out of town (the transportation specialists here correct me as needed), local travelers often are forced to interact either with the freeways themselves or the interchanges passing under or over the freeways, thus "adding" to the woeful experience.of congestion that you mention.

 

But that notwithstanding, there simply are way too few bridges, period, across the meanders of the river, and I am convinced that a few good new bridges could go "miles" in enhancing the experiences of locals and tourists alike.  Otherwise one has to go "way out of the way" as the fastest but agonizing path to somewhere.  If the river hadn't formed naturally with the resulting bends and instead had been a giant canal, then perhaps the suburbanized sprawl would have precipitated more crossings along the way.  But with consolidation of the county and city, and the "inheritance" of country (rural) with the city (urban), with no foresight or induced planning and management of constraints to better integrate the haphazard colonization of disparate, unrelated activities around all these creeks, hills, and dales, most of the harm already had been done even before the freeways had set firm root.  So I'm a bit less than impressed with little if any reference to constructing additional bridges, rather than enhancement with improved or replacement bridges.

-==-

Edited May 12, 2015 by rookzie

[MidTenn1]

Technically, that's not entirely accurate. If you were trying to secure funding for Interstate widening projects while minimizing your 10% match for facilities you don't want to build, then the bare minimum is the way to go.

 

In fact, were it not for their latest efforts to beef up the signage and pavement markings, I would have said that was TDOT's plan all along, to give HOV lanes the ol' college try just to get the feds to write them a check for the projects they really wanted.

 

 

 

Early on, after they were first built, there were efforts to use strong police enforcement to encourage proper usage of the lanes. But after a while, I was told Judges became more and more reluctant to levy fines for violations and thus, the police became reluctant to enforce the law. And even though the highway was built exactly to Federal standards, there was little room for police to stop violators on the left-side shoulder on write the ticket. It was very unsafe. So, there were double incentives for law enforcement to pull back from administering tickets to violators. If you cannot get the police and judicial system to cooperate in making the system work, what can you do? But, it was a problem that we (as a TDOT employee) were very concerned about and sincerely wanted to fix. We wanted to give it more than just the ol' college try'.

 

I once attended a workshop that looked into the issue fairly closely and saw a presentation from a CIA contractor who revealed development of equipment that can peer into a vehicle with the darkest windows to see if there are multiple riders. Pretty creepy. But incorporation of such equipment begins to place TDOT in the position of being some form of law enforcement agency. It is not TDOT's mission to become a law enforcement agency. TDOT's mission is to build a facility and operate it from a traffic efficiency and safety standpoint and let the public safety arm of government provide the proper enforcement and judicial process.

[Nathan_in_DC]

Early on, after they were first built, there were efforts to use strong police enforcement to encourage proper usage of the lanes. But after a while, I was told Judges became more and more reluctant to levy fines for violations and thus, the police became reluctant to enforce the law. And even though the highway was built exactly to Federal standards, there was little room for police to stop violators on the left-side shoulder on write the ticket. It was very unsafe. So, there were double incentives for law enforcement to pull back from administering tickets to violators. If you cannot get the police and judicial system to cooperate in making the system work, what can you do? But, it was a problem that we (as a TDOT employee) were very concerned about and sincerely wanted to fix. We wanted to give it more than just the ol' college try'.

 

I once attended a workshop that looked into the issue fairly closely and saw a presentation from a CIA contractor who revealed development of equipment that can peer into a vehicle with the darkest windows to see if there are multiple riders. Pretty creepy. But incorporation of such equipment begins to place TDOT in the position of being some form of law enforcement agency. It is not TDOT's mission to become a law enforcement agency. TDOT's mission is to build a facility and operate it from a traffic efficiency and safety standpoint and let the public safety arm of government provide the proper enforcement and judicial process.

 

It would certainly not be up to TDOT to write the tickets. It would be up to local and state law enforcement to pursue methods of enforcing the regulations set out by TDOT, and working with them to establish enforceable regulations in the first place. To discover that judges and police are complicit in allowing the flagrant violation of laws and rules of the road is maddening. Unfortunately, most law enforcement agencies don't go very far beyond writing tickets for speeding and running red lights. They're violations that are much easier to prosecute (if it ever even comes to that), because it's such a black-and-white scenario. Wreckless driving, not following lane restrictions, travelling too far below speed limits, and other just general forms of poor driving simply do not receive the attention needed to curb the behavior in this country.

Edited May 11, 2015 by Nathan_in_DC

[rookzie]

Perhaps in the manner that invisible fences (or even electric ones) discourage boundary breaching from learned and example/observation-inducing behavior, it just goes to show, then, that HOV as is practiced in Metro Nashville. arguably has limited effectiveness, only because as yet most motorists have remained overridden with the fear-factor of HOV.  Unlike invisible fences though, drivers can’t be (legally) shocked or buzz-spanked into compliance.  There are far more drivers out there who perceive no compelling reason to not jump the lanes, than there are those who do.  Stepped up enforcement in outlying counties probably has only negligible effect on driver behavior, once the county line is crossed.

After the recent somewhat searing report on the arbitrarily rationalized, deprioritized enforcement of HOV-lane compliance, a revised comprehensive transportation plan almost has to be in order, to be in earnest.  All implementations of HOV require some monitoring for “quality control”, but voluntary compliance alone makes single-occupant-vehicle drivers feel more confident that their intent will be condoned.

The fact that the state has given HOV Smart Passes to qualifying hybrid cars does nothing material in aiding the movement of occupants (it just moves cars themselves, however “qualified” might be designated).  TDOT officials say it makes sense to add more HOV lanes, as the federal govt. can assume up to 90 percent of the cost roadway projects with HOV.  It is that such standalone reasoning and justification that perhaps needs rethinking, as it does particularly little to realize the objective without regular enforcement.

True barrier-restricted, entry-regulated HOV reversible lane pairs cost considerably more to construct and to maintain, but you get what you pay for.  Without escalated enforcement, either with detection technology or by observation, then those lanes might as well be made bus-only.  That would make it very easy to spot an infraction, I would think (unless everyone goes and buys a Dodge Ram 3500 stretch limo as they have in Las Vegas - rather awesome and "boss" looking).
-==-
 

Edited May 13, 2015 by rookzie

[Hey_Hey]

I was driving around Belmont-Hillsboro the other day and came across the Brightwood Ave bridge over 440. It looks like Nashville already has a capped interstate!

 

[rookzie]

I was driving around Belmont-Hillsboro the other day and came across the Brightwood Ave bridge over 440. It looks like Nashville already has a capped interstate!

 

 

Built in the '80s to appease those specific locals, who fought and felt bereft with the 440 intrusion.  Real short when driven under.  On-bridge parking had been allowed until perhaps some 10-15 years ago.

 

It will be interesting to find out the long-term effectiveness of materials and methods for corrosion control of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures ─ how moisture barrier and drainage techniques of that construction practice period, including corrosion resistant admixtures and coatings, can withstand the extreme combinations of constant wetting, high temperature and high humidity and how it will endure in the long run.  Even without the deck stresses subject to bridges like those of DT I-40 at Charlotte, Church, and B'way, it seems that this would be a primary concern with capping the Brightwood Ave location, when it entails such a broad coverage, including varying depths and thickness of paving and curbing, soil and sod, and other surface details associated with solid land.  Unlike a true tunnel bore, which provides a monolithic, natural network of load-stress reinforcement and stabilization, bridge decks under landscape do not have such redundancy and dissipation of impulse and static loads characteristic of bores  This long-term endurance is my primary concern for any broad-range capping project, including the Big Dig of Boston.

-==-

Edited May 13, 2015 by rookzie

[troyboytn]

Here's a great article concerning how the Koch brothers are continuing their personally vendetta against public transportation across America, especially rail. Article also has a section about the AMP, in which we already knew of their involvement.

 http://www.attn.com/stories/295/how-two-billionaires-are-destroying-high-speed-rail-america?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=stories-295

 

It's sad that these two disgusting megalomaniacs virtually control this country.

 

Sorry, should have placed this in the mass transit thread...

Edited May 18, 2015 by troyboytn

[fieldmarshaldj]

Here's a great article concerning how the Koch brothers are continuing their personally vendetta against public transportation across America, especially rail. Article also has a section about the AMP, in which we already knew of their involvement.

 http://www.attn.com/stories/295/how-two-billionaires-are-destroying-high-speed-rail-america?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=stories-295

 

It's sad that these two disgusting megalomaniacs virtually control this country.

 

Sorry, should have placed this in the mass transit thread...

 

Oh, boy, it's the anti-Koch Bros. hysteria again. Two disgusting megalomaniacs ? Successful businessmen and patriotic Americans who know a colossal waste of taxpayer money when they see it. George Soros and Tom Steyer, on the other hand...

[troyboytn]

Oh, boy, it's the anti-Koch Bros. hysteria again. Two disgusting megalomaniacs ? Successful businessmen and patriotic Americans who know a colossal waste of taxpayer money when they see it. George Soros and Tom Steyer, on the other hand...

I personally will agree that "some" projects are a "colossal" waste of tax payers money....however, that doesn't change the fact that the Kochs' are exactly what I said they are... "patriotic" my ass! Only if you think the definition of patriotic is to have 50% of all politicians in your pocket and against anything that won't directly help you and your own personal interests....If that's the case, then yes, the Koch brothers are super patriotic! lol We'll agree to disagree on this and that's all I have to say on the subject.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Blaming the Koch Bros is the usual boogeyman argument of the left. Given the plethora of rich leftists out there buying politicians and offices (and funding crackpot causes), they are barely one small bulwark against that. If they were responsible in the least for stopping Karl Dean's half-baked AMP boondoggle, we all ought to get down on our knees and thank them (especially since I've heard more than a few lefties say it was a bad plan).

[Bezoar]

God, take it to the comments section of The Tennessean.  

[37206dude]

I dislike the Koch brothers and in general think there needs to be more transparency in campaign finance for political office.

Back to Nashville traffic:

 

Communism results in distortion of supply and demand, inefficient use, and long lines.  That's what we have on the highways now in Nashville.  It’s not surprising that when you hand out something for free that there is demand that overwhelms the supply.  Since there is no way to substantively increase the supply of road space very much (and even if you did it would then induce even more demand), we need to figure out some ways to influence demand.

 

Atlanta (and many other cities) are using good ol' capitalist free market solutions to allocate road use to relieve gridlock:

http://peachpass.com/peach-pass-toll-facilities/i-85-toll-rate-pricing

Toll rates on the I-85 Express Lanes are based on the concept of dynamic pricing.

The pricing for use of the Express Lanes varies between .01 cent and .90 cents per mile based on traffic flow. Ultimately, the price of the I-85 Express Lanes at a specific location and point in time is determined by consumer demand. As demand for use of the Express Lanes increases, the toll amount will rise to ensure that motorists using the Express Lanes will experience a more reliable trip time. As traffic in the Express Lanes decreases, the toll price will also decrease. Rates are recalculated at a configurable time period (minimum of every 5 minutes), 24 hours a day.

 

Would this work in Nashville?

I know it would work, my question is really is it politically possible in the near future?

 

Tolls would be a tough sell at the state level, but I don't think increasing the gas tax would be any more popular than tolls and we need money from somewhere.

At least with market rate pricing there is predictable travel throughput for those who are willing to pay for it instead of everyone stuck in the transportation equivalent of a soviet bread line.

 

I'm being intentionally provocative with the language here but we need to start thinking of road space as a public commodity and transportation infrastructure as a public service.  There is a lot of outcry that we don't want too much government handout or socialist-style control over for example health care, but somehow this same mindset does not carry over to transportation where everybody expects something for nothing and then is surprised when there is overwhelming demand for it.

[samsonh]

I dislike the Koch brothers and in general think there needs to be more transparency in campaign finance for political office.

Back to Nashville traffic:

 

Communism results in distortion of supply and demand, inefficient use, and long lines.  That's what we have on the highways now in Nashville.  It’s not surprising that when you hand out something for free that there is demand that overwhelms the supply.  Since there is no way to substantively increase the supply of road space very much (and even if you did it would then induce even more demand), we need to figure out some ways to influence demand.

 

Atlanta (and many other cities) are using good ol' capitalist free market solutions to allocate road use to relieve gridlock:

http://peachpass.com/peach-pass-toll-facilities/i-85-toll-rate-pricing

Toll rates on the I-85 Express Lanes are based on the concept of dynamic pricing.

The pricing for use of the Express Lanes varies between .01 cent and .90 cents per mile based on traffic flow. Ultimately, the price of the I-85 Express Lanes at a specific location and point in time is determined by consumer demand. As demand for use of the Express Lanes increases, the toll amount will rise to ensure that motorists using the Express Lanes will experience a more reliable trip time. As traffic in the Express Lanes decreases, the toll price will also decrease. Rates are recalculated at a configurable time period (minimum of every 5 minutes), 24 hours a day.

 

Would this work in Nashville?

I know it would work, my question is really is it politically possible in the near future?

 

Tolls would be a tough sell at the state level, but I don't think increasing the gas tax would be any more popular than tolls and we need money from somewhere.

At least with market rate pricing there is predictable travel throughput for those who are willing to pay for it instead of everyone stuck in the transportation equivalent of a soviet bread line.

 

I'm being intentionally provocative with the language here but we need to start thinking of road space as a public commodity and transportation infrastructure as a public service.  There is a lot of outcry that we don't want too much government handout or socialist-style control over for example health care, but somehow this same mindset does not carry over to transportation where everybody expects something for nothing and then is surprised when there is overwhelming demand for it.

 

Actually anyone using the roads is paying for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund

 

We need to raise this tax for a variety of reasons: 1. Cars are becoming more fuel efficient but still driving the same number of miles and putting the same wear and tear on the roads. 2. The cost of building and maintaining transportation infrastructure increases similar to inflation. 3. The tax has not been raised for years.

 

It ought to be raised now when gas taxes are low. I know FMJ will have some problem with the above, but those are kind of facts and cannot really be argued.

 

As cars becoming increasingly fuel efficient and electric cars become more of a "thing", this problem will become exacerbated unless we elect politicians who are willing to act.

[PruneTracy]

I know it would work, my question is really is it politically possible in the near future?

 

I recently talked with some folks from the Transportation Coalition of Tennessee, who are pursuing a gas tax increase, indexed to inflation, at the state level. Their general feeling regarding HOT or express lanes was that while legislators are generally against tolling anything in Tennessee, they also seemed very ignorant of the details of such schemes (I recently heard one who I won't name, in a separate forum, go on for several minutes against HOT lanes but admitted later she didn't actually know what HOT lanes were). Granted, state legislatures are sideshows, but if lawmakers can't be bothered to learn the minutae, the general public certainly won't.

 

As I noted earlier in this thread, I do think variable-tolled express lanes, built alongside free general-purpose lanes, are an excellent solution to both congestion and funding problems. But the Coalition is not pursuing them (among others superior to a gas tax increase, such as VMT taxes) because they find it politically infeasible. Baby steps.

Edited May 19, 2015 by PruneTracy

[fieldmarshaldj]

Actually anyone using the roads is paying for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund

 

We need to raise this tax for a variety of reasons: 1. Cars are becoming more fuel efficient but still driving the same number of miles and putting the same wear and tear on the roads. 2. The cost of building and maintaining transportation infrastructure increases similar to inflation. 3. The tax has not been raised for years.

 

It ought to be raised now when gas taxes are low. I know FMJ will have some problem with the above, but those are kind of facts and cannot really be argued.

 

As cars becoming increasingly fuel efficient and electric cars become more of a "thing", this problem will become exacerbated unless we elect politicians who are willing to act.

 

The last thing we need to be doing is raising taxes. We need to be cutting taxes and drastically curtailing spending. If you leftists adore taxes so much, how about you voluntarily pay more ?

[samsonh]

The last thing we need to be doing is raising taxes. We need to be cutting taxes and drastically curtailing spending. If you leftists adore taxes so much, how about you voluntarily pay more ?

 

Eh this is where I cut out of this thread. There is no discussion or compromise to be had. Left and Right for you. White and Black. No shades of gray. Good luck with that mindset.

 

I am curious as to why you go to a forum for urban development. It seems antithetical to everything you believe in. But whatever.

[PruneTracy]

The last thing we need to be doing is raising taxes. We need to be cutting taxes and drastically curtailing spending. If you leftists adore taxes so much, how about you voluntarily pay more ?

 

I think even the most hardcore libertarians agree that, of the handful of things the government should be doing, building and maintaining roadways is one of them.

 

If you want to cut taxes, pick one of their million other unnecessary endeavors.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Eh this is where I cut out of this thread. There is no discussion or compromise to be had. Left and Right for you. White and Black. No shades of gray. Good luck with that mindset.

 

I am curious as to why you go to a forum for urban development. It seems antithetical to everything you believe in. But whatever.

 

Compromise, by your definition, can only be had in one direction: increasing taxes and the role of the federal government via endless spending (especially an incredulous position to take when we're close to $20 trillion in debt with unfunded liabilities many times that amount). You also seem to want to have it both ways by making a declaration that your point above (on increasing taxes) is/are "kind of facts and cannot really be argued."

 

Why do I come to a forum for urban development ? Because I live here. Because I'm interested in urban development and side issues such as historic preservation. What I oppose is the leftist agenda for urban areas that have inflicted far more harm than good for decades. This also includes opposing expansionist federal government spending or intervention into areas it has no business in (or fleecing of taxpayers at any level of government). I prefer free market and private sector solutions to problems.

[fieldmarshaldj]

I think even the most hardcore libertarians agree that, of the handful of things the government should be doing, building and maintaining roadways is one of them.

 

If you want to cut taxes, pick one of their million other unnecessary endeavors.

 

I'm not a "hardcore Libertarian", I'm a Constitutionalist. I don't believe the government is doing a particularly good job with respect to transportation (let alone much else). Way too much wasteful spending (and corruption to go along with it). I'm of the belief that privatization may go a long way into restoring sanity, accountability and efficiency to the transportation industry.

[samsonh]

FMJ,

 

This discussion would probably be more suited for coffeehouse, since it would be easy to derail talk on transit here(I acknowledge you didn't bring up the Koch brothers)

[ruraljuror]

Here's a short article from Business Insider about how tax rates and spending levels have changed over the last century for anyone who's interested in some more facts:  http://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-tax-rates

 

Here's a couple highlights from their conclusions:

 

• Today's income tax rates are strikingly low relative to the rates of the past century, especially for rich people.  For most of the century, including some boom times, top-bracket income tax rates were much higher than they are today.

• Contrary to what Republicans would have you believe, super-high tax rates on rich people do not appear to hurt the economy or make people lazy: During the 1950s and early 1960s, the top bracket income tax rate was over 90%--and the economy, middle-class, and stock market boomed.

• Super-low tax rates on rich people also appear to be correlated with unsustainable sugar highs in the economy--brief, enjoyable booms followed by protracted busts. They also appear to be correlated with very high inequality. (For example, see the 1920s and now).

[fieldmarshaldj]

^Well, you can ask the mods to move it there, although once it is, the discussion usually goes nowhere and we get the usual lecture about "politicized" debate and then the closed thread. You know the drill.

[fieldmarshaldj]

 

Here's a short article from Business Insider about how tax rates and spending levels have changed over the last century for anyone who's interested in some more facts:  http://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-tax-rates

 

Here's a couple highlights from their conclusions:

 

• Today's income tax rates are strikingly low relative to the rates of the past century, especially for rich people.  For most of the century, including some boom times, top-bracket income tax rates were much higher than they are today.

• Contrary to what Republicans would have you believe, super-high tax rates on rich people do not appear to hurt the economy or make people lazy: During the 1950s and early 1960s, the top bracket income tax rate was over 90%--and the economy, middle-class, and stock market boomed.

• Super-low tax rates on rich people also appear to be correlated with unsustainable sugar highs in the economy--brief, enjoyable booms followed by protracted busts. They also appear to be correlated with very high inequality. (For example, see the 1920s and now).

 

 

Off-topic to the transportation thread, but it is a truly hilarious voyage into cognitive dissonance. "High taxes = good; low taxes = bad."