The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[farm_boy]

The word space was too short to get into specific options of BRT, light rail, etc.  My main point was that "free" highways cost everyone and distort supply and demand.  I did briefly advocate for congestion based pricing in the form of HOT lanes similar to Atlanta and other cities.  The Tennessean feed turn that into:

That's a well-stated article. That logic really argues for taking away a lane of interstate traffic and using it for mass transit. It also opens the possibility of using a dedicated lane of the interstate as a revenue generator for the rest of the transit system.  Could we charge express lane prices on our interstates and then use that money to fund mass transit projects? 

Tolls on roads will ALWAYS lower the standard of living and quality of life for low-income families who cannot afford the tolls
 

[rookzie]

Tolls on roads will ALWAYS lower the standard of living and quality of life for low-income families who cannot afford the tolls
 

I see your point, and that had even been concluded many years ago in Richmond (I-85/95) and Va. Beach (SR-44 before it became I-264 extended), when I lived over there.  This was long before Nashville even made way for it's marginal HOV set-ups.  Of course, when they were set to expire and to be removed, lawmakers always fought to enact legislation to delay or suspend the removal.  The issue I see with toll roads in general is that expressway users have no choice but to pay (or get fined).

HOT lanes might work if implemented only as barrier-separated, controlled-access, reversible lanes, with at least 3 standard throughway lanes in each direction, all this, of course, being conditionally based on additional variables.  One variable would be how express toll-lane re-entry from tolled access is handled at points of destination discharge, which in itself can be more problematic than beneficial, if access to these lanes cannot be throttled.  They also might be best suited for extended point-to-point distances, with very restricted intermediate access.  On the other hand, anyone, including those of low-income, can be difficult to dissuade from impulsive "indulgence" in HOT lane charges based on congestion, as it simply becomes yet another convenient and regular temptation toward an increasingly unaffordable luxury (by repetition), established as a premium-pay service, from the perspective of any and all traffic-ensnared motorists.

In any event, HOT lanes at best are revenue generators which provide a limited volume of two-tiered benefit to those who ultimately can daily afford the peak rates without even a wince to the purse, since it essentially becomes an sizable expense added to the use of one's car, an encumbrance not easily defrayed with car-pooling, given the enormity of non-coinciding point-to-point commuting patterns.  Still, with the presently likely maxed-out breadth of expressway RoW in mid-Tenn, such toll express lanes might be best forgone for rubber-tired transit at minimum.
-==-

Edited September 11, 2015 by rookzie

[MidTenn1]

I see your point, and that had even been concluded many years ago in Richmond (I-85/95) and Va. Beach (SR-44 before it became I-264 extended), when I lived over there.  This was long before Nashville even made way for it's marginal HOV set-ups.  Of course, when they were set to expire and to be removed, lawmakers always fought to enact legislation to delay or suspend the removal.  The issue I see with toll roads in general is that expressway users have no choice but to pay (or get fined).

HOT lanes might work if implemented only as barrier-separated, controlled-access, reversible lanes, with at least 3 standard throughway lanes in each direction, all this, of course, being conditionally based on additional variables.  One variable would be how express toll-lane re-entry from tolled access is handled at points of destination discharge, which in itself can be more problematic than beneficial, if access to these lanes cannot be throttled.  They also might be best suited for extended point-to-point distances, with very restricted intermediate access.  On the other hand, anyone, including those of low-income, can be difficult to dissuade from impulsive "indulgence" in HOT lane charges based on congestion, as it simply becomes yet another convenient and regular temptation toward an increasingly unaffordable luxury (by repetition), established as a premium-pay service, from the perspective of any and all traffic-ensnared motorists.

In any event, HOT lanes at best are revenue generators which provide a limited volume of two-tiered benefit to those who ultimately can daily afford the peak rates without even a wince to the purse, since it essentially becomes an sizable expense added to the use of one's car, an encumbrance not easily defrayed with car-pooling, given the enormity of non-coinciding point-to-point commuting patterns.  Still, with the presently likely maxed-out breadth of expressway RoW in mid-Tenn, such toll express lanes might be best forgone for rubber-tired transit at minimum.
-==-

HOT lanes are referred to as 'Lexus Lanes' around the country because of the pricing and the expected usage of those lanes. They are a difficult sell to the public.

[Vrtigo]

Tolls on roads will ALWAYS lower the standard of living and quality of life for low-income families who cannot afford the tolls

Joint UCLA/USC study shows that toll roads are more fair than taxes

Tolls impact low income residents less than tax-based road improvements...

[jmtunafish]

I still don't understand why the city or state can't "confiscate" some CSX property for more commuter rail.  If the state can confiscate land from a private land owner for a road project (imminent domain) why can't they do the same with a railroad company?  Maybe I'm being too simplistic but I just don't understand why the state treats railroads like golden cows while everyone else's land is fair game.

[rookzie]

Joint UCLA/USC study shows that toll roads are more fair than taxes

Tolls impact low income residents less than tax-based road improvements...

The study well qualifies the rationale it claims, and I don't have much if any of a reservation against it.  Farm_boy's premise and the academic study both have merit in reasoning, as I see them, when incorporating exceptions I mentioned above.  We have to be careful, though, in summarily interpreting the title of that that study literally and face value, with the actual content of the article, w/r/t tiered use of expressways compared to absolute-tolled expressways (for all lanes).  Even with that, the value-added benefit purported with the use of tollways of any "species" might never max out the use of highway RoW compared to that of shared-mode transit use, as with the Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Dan Ryan up north.
-==-

Edited September 11, 2015 by rookzie

[rookzie]

I still don't understand why the city or state can't "confiscate" some CSX property for more commuter rail.  If the state can confiscate land from a private land owner for a road project (imminent domain) why can't they do the same with a railroad company?  Maybe I'm being too simplistic but I just don't understand why the state treats railroads like golden cows while everyone else's land is fair game.

Nearly all (but not absolutely all) U.S railroads were awarded land grants by the federal govt. primarily during the 2nd half of the 19th century to companies as incentives to developing internal transportation systems.  These railroad properties establishments are not "rescindable" by eminent domain, which can be summed up as arbitrarily conferable at best.  That's just the plain and stark truth in the U.S., which never had a nationalized (nationally owned and governed) comprehensive network. The Alaska RR (currently owned by the state), the biggest exception to this, does no good for the lower 48, of course.
-==-

Edited September 11, 2015 by rookzie

[PruneTracy]

HOT lanes are referred to as 'Lexus Lanes' around the country because of the pricing and the expected usage of those lanes. They are a difficult sell to the public.

Anecdotally, we have won over smaller groups by pointing out that it does not have to be an all-or-nothing practice.

Maybe some one-percenters use them every day, maybe not. Maybe one day you're running late. Maybe you have a meeting with a potential client, or your boss is a stickler for punctuality, or you have to pick the triplets up from daycare. You get on the Interstate and some inattentive truck driver has lost his cargo of marital aids all over the road, snarling traffic in the general-purpose lanes.

If you have managed lanes, you can pay a few bucks and make up your lost time, winning the client, avoiding getting fired, or saving the $27 per minute your daycare charges after 6:00. You don't have them, you're stuck in traffic, losing time and money while taking photos of the scene and making any number of risqué jokes on Facebook about it to alleviate your suffering.

The bottom line is, how much would you pay to have that option? How much will you lose if you don't have it? You don't have to use it all the time. Maybe some people do, maybe they decide each time they hop on the Interstate whether it's a good deal, depending on their situation. Either way, it gives people another option to get where they're going, and the best part is, it can pay for the maintenance and even expansion of the entire facility, managed and general-purpose. It can raise $4 million per dollar tolled per lane per year, just from peak period traffic, and unlike taxes, you don't have to pay it, if you don't want to. It's capitalism! Everyone loves capitalism, except for Communists. You're not a Communist, are you? Of course not! You're a red-blooded American who wants the choice to pay a reasonable fee to bypass congestion, driving your domestically-manufactured vehicle of choice slightly under the speed limit into the sunset towards your suburban house where your spouse and 2.3 children are waiting with a meatloaf dinner while humming "The Stars and Stripes Forever" and watching bald eagles land on the overpasses as you drive under them. America.

Anyway, I salivate at the thought of barrier-separated, reversible, variable-toll lanes down the middle of every freeway. I like to think I'm not usually the type of person to latch on to various panaceae but this would fix a lot of our highway issues for a very long time.

I still don't understand why the city or state can't "confiscate" some CSX property for more commuter rail.  If the state can confiscate land from a private land owner for a road project (imminent domain) why can't they do the same with a railroad company?  Maybe I'm being too simplistic but I just don't understand why the state treats railroads like golden cows while everyone else's land is fair game.

Keep in mind that the rationale behind eminent domain is that the public uses of a given property would result in a much greater benefit to society as a whole than if it stayed under private ownership. As I noted earlier, CSX et al. provide a critically important service to commerce. It's difficult to make the case that a train full (ideally, anyway) of local commuters is so much more important than another train full of freight goods that the latter's right-of-way should be appropriated to accommodate the former.

[MLBrumby]

The original main rail line in Georgia is still owned by the state of Georgia, which (because of that fact) was able to use much of the city lines as the original path for MARTA rail. I really don't know the details, but NS also uses the lines. 

[rookzie]

The original main rail line in Georgia is still owned by the state of Georgia, which (because of that fact) was able to use much of the city lines as the original path for MARTA rail. I really don't know the details, but NS also uses the lines. 

NC has owned much of its criss-cross network well over a hundred years (in the form of the NCRR company), and that coupled with the fact that NS (Norfolk Southern) leases use of the NCRR and NS' passenger-friendly disposition, is a primary reason that the State of NC (and NCDOT) has been successful in maintaining 8 intercity passenger runs daily, on the NS managed portions alone, with more connections planned.

CSXT operates 34 percent of the State of NC's in-service nearly total 3400 railroad network, while NS operates about 43 percent of that state's mileage.  CSXT also owns the trackage along which it operates within NC, unlike NS.  All but 2 of the 8 daily passenger runs along the CSXT routes were established long prior to the formation of CSXT, and were never lost to red ink or at worst, simple apathy.  On the other hand, all except 2 of the 8 passenger runs along NS managed routes were added during the last 25 years, with the most recent addition of a pair just 5 years ago. Two of these daily state passenger runs share NS and CSXT.  Intercity runs in NC total to 14 serving 2 corridors.  Clearly NC’s state govt. has a marked advantage in the governance and leverage with its NS majority as a Class-I carrier.

While Ga. maintains only 6 passenger trains daily (along 2 non-connecting corridors), it's been in far better position historically to launch into some initiative than has Tenn.  The states of Ga. and NC have held on to what they established through charter "way early" ago.
-==-

 

[rookzie]

On an unrelated note, it seems that an NFL sponsor has offered to fund a limited number of game-day rides which utilize the MCS commuter-rail equipment, the train of which is to be swollen from the standard two cars to five cars.:

[announced to MTA operating staff - Friday, 2015-0918]

"...Attention All Admin Transit Personnel:

As many or you may have heard, we have entered into an agreement with a
corporate sponsor to underwrite the cost for operating the Game-Day Express
for the Tennessee Titans football games. Our sponsor MillerCoors also was
interested in offering FREE RIDES on the train to all games so we may have a
significant increase in people riding. However, we are limiting the FREE
RIDES to 650 people since we will run a five-car set to these games.
Individuals will have to reserve their seats in advance and print off their
tickets at their home computers.

Since we will have more people riding the Game-Day Express, we need
additional personnel to assist with scanning the tickets after the game.

..."

It will be interesting to see just how the RTA/MTA does manage to "play its spread of cards" on this arrangement.  I could only imagine what having multiple rail routes already in place could have ramified into, even with a separate centrally served terminal.  They likely wouldn't need a sponsor to offer freebies in that case.  Riverfront obviously has a singular game-site advantage for the current run.  .
-==-

Edited September 22, 2015 by rookzie

[rookzie]

Well, it's tacky, but it's a start at least...

EDIT: 2015-0923, 1228 CDT -  Now if only the MTA/RTA would make the thing more visible, via the media, preferably by advertising in the free papers and the Tennessean (and perhaps they might not have to be openly urged).  I would think that MillerCoors would underwrite the cost of such to support the other, if they're interested in offering free rides.  Too bad not more of the wrapped-up car can be touted in view along the freeway, or along stretches of open view (like the Briley Pkwy underpass), but perhaps in time, it would catch on, as word spreads.  A second or third car done the same might also help, especially if this control-cab car is foremost on the inbound runs of the daily commuter runs, to permit viewing at the Riverfront station platform canopy (as opposed to the locomotive being foremost).  On game day, though, most likely, the engine will be in the rear, to maximize the use of that stub-track platform for the over-length train.  This is where (and when) they could use two tracks abreast to handle double the capacity on occasion.

-==-

Edited September 23, 2015 by rookzie

[markhollin]

More detail about the two-level addition to the Downtown Library Garage including an overview/inventory of current and proposed CBD parking...

http://www.tennessean.com/story/money/real-estate/2015/09/23/350-space-expansion-downtown-library-garage-planned/72680378/

[Lexy]

I need to vent.

 

I hate Nashville traffic.

 

Our interstates are inadequate and we have NO transit options on the table.  

 

Rush hour starts at 2:30 and goes until 7pm for crying out loud.  Ugh!

 

Okay, I'm better now. 

[Jamie Hall]

I hate Nashville traffic.

I tolerate Nashville traffic for the most part, but on the subject of venting: My biggest complaint is (and has been, and will continue to be) the Broadway interchange with I-65/I-40 downtown. I hate being cut off, nearly hit, frowned upon and cursed at by oblivious out-of-town drivers who can't figure out where to turn because of a horribly outdated interchange and horrible signage. The powers-that-be at TDOT and Metro who continue to drive through this intersection on a regular basis and think "Nah, there's nothing to fix here" should be flogged and forced to suffer through the next Justin Bieber concert at Bridgestone.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Jamie Hall

[RonCamp]

I tolerate Nashville traffic for the most part, but on the subject of venting: My biggest complaint is (and has been, and will continue to be) the Broadway interchange with I-65/I-40 downtown. I hate being cut off, nearly hit, frowned upon and cursed at by oblivious out-of-town drivers who can't figure out where to turn because of a horribly outdated interchange and horrible signage. The powers-that-be at TDOT and Metro who continue to drive through this intersection on a regular basis and think "Nah, there's nothing to fix here" should be flogged and forced to suffer through the next Justin Bieber concert at Bridgestone.

The multiple interchange section of I-40 between 12th Ave and Clinton Street needs an immediate overhaul.  Modernization, simplification, signal coordination, (and though I am generally not a fan of adding lanes due to the concept of induced demand) additional lanes to handle the merging and congestion.  The overpasses need to be redone as complete streets with room for future transit lines.  Thoughtful, thorough investment in completely re-doing this stretch of I-40 and its interactions with the surface street grid has got to be one of the highest-impact potential uses of TDOT road dollars in the state right now.

Too bad TDOT is broke: http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2014/12/tdot-chief-dont-expect-new-projects-in-next-budget.html

[rookzie]

I need to vent.

 

I hate Nashville traffic.

 

Our interstates are inadequate and we have NO transit options on the table.  

 

Rush hour starts at 2:30 and goes until 7pm for crying out loud.  Ugh!

 

Okay, I'm better now. 

...There's solace in knowing you had time standing still long enough to confer that venting via the keypad. -==-

[rookzie]

I tolerate Nashville traffic for the most part, but on the subject of venting: My biggest complaint is (and has been, and will continue to be) the Broadway interchange with I-65/I-40 downtown. I hate being cut off, nearly hit, frowned upon and cursed at by oblivious out-of-town drivers who can't figure out where to turn because of a horribly outdated interchange and horrible signage. The powers-that-be at TDOT and Metro who continue to drive through this intersection on a regular basis and think "Nah, there's nothing to fix here" should be flogged and forced to suffer through the next Justin Bieber concert at Bridgestone.

The multiple interchange section of I-40 between 12th Ave and Clinton Street needs an immediate overhaul.  Modernization, simplification, signal coordination, (and though I am generally not a fan of adding lanes due to the concept of induced demand) additional lanes to handle the merging and congestion.  The overpasses need to be redone as complete streets with room for future transit lines.  Thoughtful, thorough investment in completely re-doing this stretch of I-40 and its interactions with the surface street grid has got to be one of the highest-impact potential uses of TDOT road dollars in the state right now.

Too bad TDOT is broke: http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2014/12/tdot-chief-dont-expect-new-projects-in-next-budget.html

With the state of affairs as it is now, it might be scary to think that over half of the current posters on this forum probably will have at least one foot in the ground, before he gets to appreciate any wholesale relief from this ─ some maybe.  Some of us will have moved away by then, others?  Well, they will have joined me.
-==-

[Will]

This article on a Vanderbilt-designed transit app mentions MTA is finally going to place GPS transmitters in (some) buses to enable real-time trip planning. http://southernalpha.com/vu-designed-bus-app-takes-guesswork-bus-riding-gets-200000-nsf-grant/

[chris holman]

http://m.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2015/09/mayor-barry-pushes-transit-city-investment-in.html

 

Mass transit first agenda

[markhollin]

Good to see area mayors meeting about transit needs across the central Tennessee.  Area County officials, TDOT, and Tennessee State legislature all need to pull their weight as well….it can't all fall on Davidson Metro's shoulders.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/money/2015/10/06/transportation-takes-lead-nashville-area-priority/73468930/

[markhollin]

The Boston Globe published a large investigative piece yesterday linking the Koch brothers to a lot of the opposition for the AMP Project.  Interesting read that is bound to stir up more controversy about what did and didn't happen. Certainly there were shortcomings in the plan and presentation that were not given credence in the article, but it is disconcerting that so much outside money (and resultant influence) was utilized on a distinctly local issue.  And, for the record, I feel the AMP had some merit, but needed much more discussion and integrated strategy for long-term results. 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2015/10/10/nashville-mayor-wanted-bring-two-parts-his-city-together-then-was-crushed-state-legislators/QT91unb8xk4xPBqkTumgMP/story.html

[japan]

Great article.  Doesn't sound like we will be solving the mass transit problem anytime soon.

[PruneTracy]

Certainly there were shortcomings in the plan and presentation that were not given credence in the article, but it is disconcerting that so much outside money (and resultant influence) was utilized on a distinctly local issue.

Thing is, it wasn't purely a local issue. Metro had requested $75 million in federal funds to build the Amp, and had at least $27 million earmarked for it when it was dropped; that money (at least the portion not financed by T-bills) belongs to the Koch brothers, among the other 240-odd-million taxpayers across the country.

To be clear, I was pro-Amp, and not just because I got paid to write reports about it. I'm still in favor of BRT, especially down West End, and the circus we have for a state legislature is blocking probably the most feasible cross-section for it. But if we're going to ask others to split the bill we shouldn't be surprised when they want a seat at the table.

Bar none, the best way to avoid outside influence on a project is to make it self-sufficient.

[nashvylle]

does anyone know if Charlotte ave is considered a state road? I really think the most realistic route is to get some sort of (1) get some sort of dedicated funding source (tax on alcohol, cigarettes, tobacco?) (2) permit buses only to use the emergency lanes on the outermost left and right lanes on the interstate to move past car traffic, and (3) get some sort of BRT on Charlotte first (dedicated lanes only during rush hour?). 

Points 2 and 3 can be done very cheaply, and could be a test to show the people willing to use mass transit... which could enable further transit initiatives in the future.