The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[MidTenn1]

Time to get serious about Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) particularly on Murfreesboro Road. It would not only involve the proactive operation of I-24 between Nashville and Murfreesboro, it would also involve management of 41A with regard to real time signal control from a Traffic Center at intersections monitored with cameras and message signs to encourage I-24 traffic to use 41A when appropriate. You look at the entire corridor and utilize all the latent capacity to move traffic more efficiently.

I included such a proposal in a half billion dollar, 10 year Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) plan I worked at the request of the State Legislature before I retired. I also budgeted a similar plan for I-65 to Franklin, Memphis, Chattanooga (which needs to go next) and Knoxville. 

Get this form of infrastructure outreach to the surrounding areas of the county and Metro Area  and maybe they will be a little more accommodating to a transit proposal.

[PaulChinetti]

I asked the Better Transit for Nashville Facebook page when they would be presenting their plans and they gave me these two links.

http://nashvilleplanb.com      416 vans is their answer. 

https://www.intelligenttransitnashville.com       I can't get this page to load. 

 

[volsfanwill]

At least you got that, no tx4tracks hasn't responded to my request for the same info. 

[samsonh]

6 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I asked the Better Transit for Nashville Facebook page when they would be presenting their plans and they gave me these two links.

http://nashvilleplanb.com      416 vans is their answer. 

https://www.intelligenttransitnashville.com       I can't get this page to load. 

 

The intelligent transit plan is so comically bad. Autonomous driving is 10-20 years away.  The city cannot force PSC Metals from their location, plus clean up costs will be high. Double stacking interstates will costs billions and there is no money to maintain current roadways, much less billions to double stack interstates. 

[dmillsphoto]

8 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I asked the Better Transit for Nashville Facebook page when they would be presenting their plans and they gave me these two links.

http://nashvilleplanb.com      416 vans is their answer. 

https://www.intelligenttransitnashville.com       I can't get this page to load. 

 

The ITN site you couldn't get to load is the stacked-interstate loop plan that would cost asinine amounts more than what was just voted down...

[MagicPotato]

44 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I asked the Better Transit for Nashville Facebook page when they would be presenting their plans and they gave me these two links.

http://nashvilleplanb.com      416 vans is their answer. 

https://www.intelligenttransitnashville.com       I can't get this page to load. 

 

Hopefully we can have a medium before 2020. Both of these ideas are pretty bad. The carpooling idea sounds great in theory, but not in actuality.  

[Bos2Nash]

53 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I asked the Better Transit for Nashville Facebook page when they would be presenting their plans and they gave me these two links.

http://nashvilleplanb.com      416 vans is their answer. 

https://www.intelligenttransitnashville.com       I can't get this page to load. 

 

51 minutes ago, volsfanwill said:

At least you got that, no tx4tracks hasn't responded to my request for the same info. 

[Neigeville2]

16 hours ago, nashville_bound said:

Ahem.... are you suggesting a referendum where only a limited part of Davidson County would be able to vote a tax increase on all Davidson County residents? Not a workable solution. Now if Metro created a special district  and they choose to tax themselves to implement transit , no problem.

That's what I meant

[Dale]

Anyone see where the venerable (in these circles) Aaron Renn declared that Nashville is nowhere near ready for the sort of plan that was defeated yesterday ?

http://www.urbanophile.com/2017/10/25/why-light-rail-makes-no-sense-for-nashville/

 

 

 

[Guest]

Great article. He hits it out of the ballpark.

As an aside, I read the article to which he referred.....what a freaking disaster!

https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2017/07/honolulus-rapid-transit-crisis/534150/

 

24 minutes ago, Dale said:

Anyone see where the venerable (in these circles) Aaron Renn declared that Nashville is nowhere near ready for the sort of plan that was defeated yesterday ?

http://www.urbanophile.com/2017/10/25/why-light-rail-makes-no-sense-for-nashville/

 

 

 

[Tennessine]

30 minutes ago, Dale said:

Anyone see where the venerable (in these circles) Aaron Renn declared that Nashville is nowhere near ready for the sort of plan that was defeated yesterday ?

http://www.urbanophile.com/2017/10/25/why-light-rail-makes-no-sense-for-nashville/

 

 

 

This was an interesting read. I like how the author didn't brush off significant infrastructure issues in our area either. For instance:

Quote

Nashville is overwhelmingly a city designed around the car (low density, etc). There’s a very limited quantity of districts designed in a transit oriented way. Basic pedestrian infrastructure is missing in many areas.  I might suggest creating 21st century streets that are humane for pedestrians and bicyclists would be the first priority, and a pre-condition of transit.

 

As a runner and outdoor sports enthusiast, I can affirm it is extremely difficult to jog anywhere but East Nashville. Biking around downtown is arguably more difficult due to the poor condition of our sidewalks. Many of our pedestrian crossings outside of the CBD are faded and in desperate need of repair, and in some cases, they don't even exist where they should. I'm not using this as a talking point against what was voted down yesterday- which I supported, as many of you know- but just a reminder how poor our pedestrian infrastructure is around the city. 

Edited May 2, 2018 by nativetenn

[PaulChinetti]

1 minute ago, nativetenn said:

Many of our pedestrian crossings outside of the CBD are faded and in desperate need of repair, and in some cases, they don't even exist where they should. I'm not using this as a talking point against what was voted down yesterday- which I supported, as many of you know- but just a reminder how poor our pedestrian infrastructure is around the city. 

Who is supposed to pay for these things, and what department has totally fallen down in this regard?

 

I have been happy with the BZA mostly forcing developers to build sidewalks instead of letting them get out of it (and pay into the fund, which I have no idea who controls), which I think really hampered sidewalk construction in the past. 

[Guest]

Agree. Between neglect and construction, downtown is barley navigable for pedestrian or biker.

5 minutes ago, nativetenn said:

. Biking around downtown is arguably more difficult due to the poor condition of our sidewalks. Many of our pedestrian crossings outside of the CBD are faded and in desperate need of repair, and in some cases, they don't even exist where they should. I'm not using this as a talking point against what was voted down yesterday- which I supported, as many of you know- but just a reminder how poor our pedestrian infrastructure is around the city. 

[PruneTracy]

14 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

Who is supposed to pay for these things, and what department has totally fallen down in this regard?

Metro Public Works. But they have the same problem as MTA: they get their money from the general fund, with no guarantee of funding from one year to the next. MPW also has a rather broad range of activities. The same entity that is building roads and bridges across Metro is picking up the trash as well.

[PaulChinetti]

39 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

Metro Public Works. But they have the same problem as MTA: they get their money from the general fund, with no guarantee of funding from one year to the next. MPW also has a rather broad range of activities. The same entity that is building roads and bridges across Metro is picking up the trash as well.

I wonder what would it take for a city wide sidewalk/bike lane build? Say a concentrated 2 year effort to knock it all out in one fail swoop?  Even like 80% of need.

The will of the mayor? City Council?

[PruneTracy]

10 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I wonder what would it take for a city wide sidewalk/bike lane build? Say a concentrated 2 year effort to knock it all out in one fail swoop?  Even like 80% of need.

The will of the mayor? City Council?

Well...

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2017/10/31/nashville-has-allocated-60-million-sidewalks-what-has-city-accomplished/801154001/

The problem is that it's not as simple as paving a new sidewalk. Many of these roadways have deficient stormwater infrastructure, or none at all, which has to be  replaced (with its replacement designed and approved by Metro Water Services) at the same time as the sidewalk is installed. For the stormwater infrastructure to be installed, several underground utilities (not all owned by Metro, e.g., Piedmont Natural Gas) have to be moved from the edge of the roadway where they are often placed. Then comes the issue of what's above ground. Is there sufficient right-of-way or does it need to be purchased? How many utility poles are in the way and where will they be moved? What about fences, mailboxes, driveways, etc.? As noted in the article, it is like a miniature roadway project, with all the same hoops to jump through.

[CenterHill]

16 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I wonder what would it take for a city wide sidewalk/bike lane build? Say a concentrated 2 year effort to knock it all out in one fail swoop?  Even like 80% of need.

The will of the mayor? City Council?

Much of metropolitan Nashville is so far behind in terms of sidewalks (putting aside bike lanes), that it will take a massive investment, and dedicated funding, to establish even basic pedestrian connectivity.      However,  I do think you will see, as part of the next transit plan, many proponents of a plan that prioritizes significant investment in the basics - sidewalks, bike lanes and pedestrian crossings.      Many critics of the plan that was defeated yesterday felt like the plan did not sufficiently address (or really address at all) these basic, major needs of any urban city, which are themselves big dollar projects.   

[grilled_cheese]

When do I get to vote against something the 'no' districts need?

[musiczealot]

In reference to the self driving cars being here before we know it...

In 75 years we will have perfected teleportation.  So why even bother with self driving cars?

[Neigeville2]

9 hours ago, 12Mouth said:

I'm assuming that a local referendum has to be a simple yes/no vote, but it seems to me that this would be far easier to do if we could put four plans on the ballot (one of which would be do nothing) and then have a runoff between the top two. Having one plan allows it to be the source of all criticism from all sides. I think that if people felt that they had options, they would not select the "do nothing" vote, and we would end up with a runoff between two different actual plans. 

But like I said, I'm pretty sure this is not allowed by law.

Problem with this: people won't take 10 minutes to understand one plan, much less 4.  The confusion would be unimaginable.  

48 minutes ago, grilled_cheese said:

When do I get to vote against something the 'no' districts need?

I guess you're kidding, but it really is part of the problem that there's no obvious negative consequence for selfishness and laziness.   Someone like Chicago's Mayor Daley would have said, "It appears North Nashville doesn't believe in transit, so I've decided to close down all their bus lines,"  Brutal, but it worked.  Chicago had great infrastructure, although if your precinct didn't vote right, the snowplows came there last if at all...

[Guest]

^ It did not take this board long to go from touting Polls showing mad support for the plan, to utter defeat, to now.... what? Wishing Nashville politicos were as corrupt and vindictive as the worst of Chicago? Actually seeking retribution? Very telling .... SMDH 

[Neigeville2]

I don't think the responses I'm seeing are nearly cynical enough.  

Will the state allow BRT in dedicated lanes?  One of the main arguments against The AMP was there wasn't enough room for it, and that street's about 100 yards wide.  Most of the anti LRT people would feel the same about BRT.

No tunnel?  Downtown businesses will fight to the death against trains in the street or elevated trains, and a system that doesn't take people close to where they need to be will only be used by the poor and desperate.  They (DT businesses) don't want more buses clogging the streets and a system that makes crosstown riders traverse DT in traffic is a problem time-wise. 

And any talk of too-ambitious, not ambitious enough overlooks the fact that certain spoiled brat trust fund babies will spend vast sums to muddy the waters and rile up the anti-everything crowd at the first whiff of the teensiest little improvement to transit, much less a funding source for it.

The state will oppose anything that benefits Nashville in any way.

The black community/leadership got a free NMAAM space out of the 5th and Broadway deal and were enraged because an entrance directly across from the Ryman wasn't prestigious enough.  They killed the baseball stadium proposal  where the amphitheater is now because they didn't like the minority contractor provisions.  They didn't like this transit plan because the money should be spent on affordable housing, when this plan would have provided tens of millions for affordable housing versus no vote=$0.  I think they are pretty much out of the loop as far as reaching a consensus on transit or frankly anything else.

The absence of a real transit network means our future is more sprawl which will make a transit network even more unworkable,   Short of dissolving metro and establishing a Nashville a little closer to pre-1963 boundaries I don't see any way to pass any dedicated funding source or anything that makes a serious improvement. 

Sorry for all the various people I may have offended with this rant, but if I were younger, I'd be looking to move.

[Neigeville2]

4 hours ago, Dale said:

Anyone see where the venerable (in these circles) Aaron Renn declared that Nashville is nowhere near ready for the sort of plan that was defeated yesterday ?

http://www.urbanophile.com/2017/10/25/why-light-rail-makes-no-sense-for-nashville/

 

 

 

In exactly what circles is he "venerable"?   As someone said about Andrew Sullivan, he's just further proof that the wingnut welfare system is America's most durable infrastructure.  He does put a more polished and respectable face on it than the average Koch-paid shill, but that's the Manhattan Institute's specialty.  Where did he say Nashville isn't "ready"?  It reads to me as if he's saying we should never aspire to anything other than car-centric sprawl, and that transit is only for coastal cities. 

[Tennessine]

8 minutes ago, Neigeville2 said:

Sorry for all the various people I may have offended with this rant, but if I were younger, I'd be looking to move.

First of all, no offense taken by me whatsoever. I enjoy listening to your opinions,  not only because you are older and wiser than I am, but also because regular posters like you are keeping me up-to-date with local politics while I'm away studying at UT. You didn't post an aimless rant, and I think many of your thoughts and concerns are valid and will only be ignored until they are too severe to fix.

Second, I'll start off with my demographics and a little information about myself, because I think it's too important to ignore. I'm a 21-year-old male, born and raised in Middle Tennessee, and now I'm attending UT Knoxville. Soon, I will be graduating with my degree in engineering and will be narrowing down where I should live. That decision will ultimately depend on which companies offer me that first big job, but another major part of that will be the cost of living. As much as I want to return to Nashville for reasons I don't even need to state, I am equally turned off by it due to the insane cost of living. 

I understand this strays from the topic a bit, but since you mentioned it, the pressing issue for young people like myself is not so much the transit debacle, but more about our perceived value of living in Nashville. Many of us won't want to live in areas like this, and will seek other suburbs around Nashville where the cost is significantly cheaper; Hendersonville, Lebanon, etc. Locations like these will contribute further to Nashville being a city built around the car as long as it is so outrageously expensive to live in Davidson County, and this is because young people like myself will not see the value in living in Nashville as long as we can still hop in the car and drive. 

For me, it's not as much the lack of transit that turns us off to Nashville, but the cost of living. With the absence of mass transit, I still believe the hype about Nashville will exist and Davidson Co. will continue to grow, but it will not attract young folks like me except the very wealthy. We'll continue to flood into the middle-class suburbs where it's cheaper, while those who've got the money will retain their interest in moving to Nashville.

 

[Neigeville2]

^It is one of the bizarre things about our current system, how can putting more people in a smaller space make it more expensive?  Part of the issue is that sprawl is subsidized in various ways and costs like loss of farmland, loss of wild animal habitat, etc. are not charged to those who cause them, but still, it's hard to believe it costs more to build a stack of tiny apartments than hundreds of acres of unreasonably large single family homes. And even in the sprawl zone, housing isn't cheap.  In the 50s the average household spent 11 percent of their income on housing.

Thanks for your kind words btw.