The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[mirydi]

I think Dean made it a point that while the cost effectiveness pushed him towards BRT, he wants the experience to feel more like LRT. Hence the dedicated lanes, mid block/median of the road stations, and as producer says, modern buses.

 

Well that's good to hear

 

I think most of us would rather have LRT...but if we can add more route miles by doing BRT (because of cost), then that would be the wise choice.

 

Yeah, I guess that makes sense. It's just kind of tough for me to swallow seeing some of our peer cities moving along with LRT like Austin and Charlotte, and we are going the bus route. I'll embrace BRT as long as it's done right. By the way, I just looked at some of the renderings for the Amp. I wasn't too impressed by the looks of them, but I guess it wasn't terrible. Whatever they do they better not plaster advertising signs all over the buses because that is soo tacky.

[MLBrumby]

Nashville officials have never looked at LRT as a true advantage over surrounding municipalities.  Without a doubt, it would make Nashville so much more attractive to potential corporate relocations and the young adults who work there.... compared to Brentwood, Cool Springs, Franklin, M'boro, Smyrna, H'ville and Lebanon that would be a great amenity.  But as usual, the mayor and Council are too afraid of something they don't completely understand... so BRT is the "half step" they can justify it to themselves.

[UTgrad09]

Well that's good to hear

 

Yeah, I guess that makes sense. It's just kind of tough for me to swallow seeing some of our peer cities moving along with LRT like Austin and Charlotte, and we are going the bus route. I'll embrace BRT as long as it's done right. By the way, I just looked at some of the renderings for the Amp. I wasn't too impressed by the looks of them, but I guess it wasn't terrible. Whatever they do they better not plaster advertising signs all over the buses because that is soo tacky.

 

For where we are -- BRT probably makes more sense right now. This line isn't going to involve tunnels, bridges, or elevated roadways where the costs could actually skyrocket past LRT. Our urban center is more dense than we get credit for -- but it is still not really 'high density' compared to most major cities. LRT is better able to handle large ridership...something that likely won't be a big problem initially. I think part of the fear is that Nashville is such a car dependent city as it is, initiating an expensive LRT system might be perceived as a waste of money (at least at first). Nashville needs to ween people off the idea that they have to use their cars everywhere they go. I think BRT is a good compromise there, because it will still serve those that are transit dependent (i.e. those that can't afford cars) yet should attract some of those that want to live a car free or car reduced lifestyle (those that choose not to drive).

 

As the demand increases, the viability for LRT would be much greater. If at some point in the future, LRT would be more effective, then the bus ROW could be converted to rail lines. That might sound like double-work for some people (in reality, it probably is), but if this is 15-20 years down the road, then BRT may have served its purpose (increasing the visibility and desirability of public transit) while the 'rapid' part of it would stay the same.

 

I'm not an expert on the issue...but the reviews to me seem mixed. There are arguably more positives for LRT than BRT, but some of them might or might not apply to our own situation. What needs to be done is find the best solution for Nashville, not just copy what Austin and Charlotte do. The solution for each city's needs may be different.

[timmay143]

Interesting...neighbor to the southeast considering transit options.

 

http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/23116705/new-proposed-transit-plan

[nashvillwill]

You've got to love the innocent optimism in this statement;

"The decision making process takes a few months. The official answer which plan gets approved.....should be finalized by the end of December 2013."

[MLBrumby]

You have to hand it to Chattanooga's civic leaders for this sort of thinking at least... but then again, they saw the potential in their riverfront long before Nashville's leaders even realized they had a river running through their downtown (i.e. Nashville's perennial westward bias). 

[UTgrad09]

Nashville officials have never looked at LRT as a true advantage over surrounding municipalities.  Without a doubt, it would make Nashville so much more attractive to potential corporate relocations and the young adults who work there.... compared to Brentwood, Cool Springs, Franklin, M'boro, Smyrna, H'ville and Lebanon that would be a great amenity.  But as usual, the mayor and Council are too afraid of something they don't completely understand... so BRT is the "half step" they can justify it to themselves.

 

Ah, how quickly some people seem to forget...

 

http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/mtas-16m-mass-transit-study-hitting-stride-midpoint

 

 

By late 2011, the Nashville office of Parsons Brinckerhoff, the New York City-based consulting firm working to determine which of three transit options – bus rapid transit, light rail or modern streetcar — is best suited for the city, will recommend the proposed system’s street alignment and one of the above-mentioned three modes.

 

http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/dean-consultants-favor-bus-rapid-transit-not-streetcar-east-west-connector

 

 

In a report conducted by the engineering consultant firm Parsons Brinckerhoff, planners pinpointed a streetcar and bus rapid transit, BRT, as the two best transit options for future transit investment along the congested Broadway-West End stretch. But the installation of a streetcar –– like those in Portland, Ore., for example –– would cost $275 million. The price tag for BRT is significantly smaller: $136 million.

 

Obviously I think Dean jumped on the fact that BRT would be cheaper to implement...but Nashville did its due diligence in having an outside opinion on the matter. I was hoping for light rail as well, but the study said that it wasn't feasible. It was either electric streetcar, or BRT. If the study had come out and said LRT was the best option, I think Dean would have supported that.

 

Sometimes you can't just blame politicians when you don't get what you want. At least they did a study rather than jump into this blindly.

 

 

 

Furthermore, I have read that the city could face issues finding federal funding for the rail systems, so BRT is likely a surer bet and will get off the ground more quickly.

[mirydi]

For where we are -- BRT probably makes more sense right now. This line isn't going to involve tunnels, bridges, or elevated roadways where the costs could actually skyrocket past LRT. Our urban center is more dense than we get credit for -- but it is still not really 'high density' compared to most major cities. LRT is better able to handle large ridership...something that likely won't be a big problem initially. I think part of the fear is that Nashville is such a car dependent city as it is, initiating an expensive LRT system might be perceived as a waste of money (at least at first). Nashville needs to ween people off the idea that they have to use their cars everywhere they go. I think BRT is a good compromise there, because it will still serve those that are transit dependent (i.e. those that can't afford cars) yet should attract some of those that want to live a car free or car reduced lifestyle (those that choose not to drive).

 

As the demand increases, the viability for LRT would be much greater. If at some point in the future, LRT would be more effective, then the bus ROW could be converted to rail lines. That might sound like double-work for some people (in reality, it probably is), but if this is 15-20 years down the road, then BRT may have served its purpose (increasing the visibility and desirability of public transit) while the 'rapid' part of it would stay the same.

 

I'm not an expert on the issue...but the reviews to me seem mixed. There are arguably more positives for LRT than BRT, but some of them might or might not apply to our own situation. What needs to be done is find the best solution for Nashville, not just copy what Austin and Charlotte do. The solution for each city's needs may be different.

Great post! Like I said above, I'll embrace it as long as it's done right and doesn't look trashy. I think your right about it making sense for Nashville to go with BRT instead of LRT, not just for financial reasons, but because of Nashville being a car dependent city.However, If the buses end up looking anything like the one below, (it appears they could from the Amp renderings, and wouldn't surprise me) I will be pretty disappointed.

 

And the Amp buses.

 

 

Neither one look great to me and to be honest the one on top is awful. It seems the Amp buses look eerily similar and that has me worried. They might look ok while the Amp buses are new, but it woulnd't be long before they start looking like the one on top. That's my biggest concern. There is nothing inviting about either one of those buses that would make me want to start riding one. Know what I mean?

Edited August 13, 2013 by mirydi

[mirydi]

Interesting...neighbor to the southeast considering transit options.

 

http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/23116705/new-proposed-transit-plan

Ok, if Chattanooga gets LRT and we get the buses I'm throwing in the towel Lol!

[dmillsphoto]

In other news that doesn't or wouldn't involve Nashville - Elon Musk released detailed plans for his Hyperloop today...

 

http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-20130812.pdf

[Neigeville2]

Interesting...neighbor to the southeast considering transit options.

 

http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/23116705/new-proposed-transit-plan

 

I like the fact that Chattanooga is considering elevated trains, an idea that doesn't seem to have been considered for Nashville at all.

[nashvillwill]

I like the fact that Chattanooga is considering elevated trains, an idea that doesn't seem to have been considered for Nashville at all.

I think that's more of ignorance in reporting than actual fact. Quote;

"Option 2 - A light rail subway style system that would be called "The Chattanooga Way" This design could be above ground-- like the "L" in Chicago-- or underground-- like the MARTA in Atlanta."

First off, the article references the Chicago MTA and Atlanta Marta as "light rail". These are both heavy rail systems. Also, the article blindly talks about the "L" (not the commonly named "El") as an elevated system and MARTA as a subway, completely ignoring that both systems are actually both. Both systems run above and below ground. As does every heavy rail system I've ever seen in the U.S. LRT, while more likely for Nashville and/or Chatanooga, is a completely different mode.

I applaud Chatanooga for thinking forward, I just don't see one uninformed news article as our state peer somehow having the "upper hand". Do you really think Chat-town is going to be building a subway anytime soon?! Doubtful.

[volsfanwill]

Well that's good to hear

 

Yeah, I guess that makes sense. It's just kind of tough for me to swallow seeing some of our peer cities moving along with LRT like Austin and Charlotte, and we are going the bus route. I'll embrace BRT as long as it's done right. By the way, I just looked at some of the renderings for the Amp. I wasn't too impressed by the looks of them, but I guess it wasn't terrible. Whatever they do they better not plaster advertising signs all over the buses because that is soo tacky.

A side note for comparison, I know we hate comparisons to Charlotte and Austin but sometimes it is necessary.  

first both of them used existing railroad ROW. something that does not exist on the corridor that the AMP is proposed for.

second. both of these cities have completely different types of systems from each other.  

Austin uses light rail like vehicles but theirs acts as more of a commuter rail. with stops few and far between.

Charlotte on the other hand has a light rail that acts more like a metro system with frequent stops that increase closer to the CBD. 

 

From what I have read on the expansion plans of both cities they plan to continue their respective patterns for the future. 

 

I do see BRT as a gateway transit for Nashville.  convince people that it is viable and build other lines to increase usability.

 

I personally grasp things better visually so several months ago I opened up google earth and traced all the transit lines in the US minus regular bus.

that includes commuter rail, LRT, BRT, and even METRO systems. I was shocked at how many cities built LRT in the last decade, especially the number of cities of comparable size to Nashville.  Also, larger cities that have Metro systems are expanding new lines with LRT instead of heavy rail.

 

this leads me to my personal idea.  after seeing what every other city has done. I kinda combined several ideas. this is VERY Long term. like 20 years to build out. 

 

AMP as proposed as a starter line.  

Then build LRT as a north south line.  acting as commuter rail from Murfreesboro to the cbd where stops become more frequent.   (no this is not too long Austin's is over 31 miles and they might extend it another stop). 90% of the ROW follows an existing RR much of which has plenty of room to build dedicated tracks adjacent. 

that would help alleviate the I-24 corridor problem. also, include a spur to the airport.  this would mean more frequent trains operating downtown.

once that works and people see the benefits of rail, more LRT lines could be added to Gallatin and Franklin.  

Traditional heavy commuter rail (Star) to Dickson and Clarksville.

other lines BRT and LRT along Charlotte and into Metro Center. I have it all mapped out.

 

overall the important thing is, although we would all prefer LRT.  The city needs convincing.  so I'll settle for BRT as a starter. convince people that rapid transit is needed, then build more lines and better lines in incremental steps. 

[musiczealot]

I think ideally we would have a large scale mass transit system looking something like this:

 

Heavy/Light Rail From these locations to same Central Business District location (Riverfront Station or the Gulch/Cummins Station Terminal):

Basically these run along the interstates

• Existing Star Line - Lebanon
• Murfreesboro Line
• Spring Hill Line
• Dickson Line
• Clarksville Line
• White House and Gallatin Lines - merging around Hendersonville

 

Then BRT with the fulcrum around the CBD hub location that run down the following thoroughfares:

Not sure where the ending point on these lines would be

• Lebanon Pike
• Murfreesboro Pike
• Franklin Pike
• Hillsboro Pike
• Harding/West End
• Charlotte Ave
• Clarksville Pike
• Rosa Parks Blvd
• Dickerson Pike
• Gallatin Pike

Connectors (I'm thinking a combo of Heavy/Light Rail, BRT, Street Car depending on location)

Also not sure on these locations, but would likely follow the street "connector/circulators" of White Bridge/Briley, Wedgewood/31st, Harding, Old Hickory, etc. that cirlce the city

 

And finally the normal bus routes serving specific neighborhoods off of this hub and spoke system.

 

Nashville is set up pretty perfect for this sort of Hub and Spoke system.  Unfortunately, I think this is a pipe dream.  And even if it were a reality, it would probably be a half century, if we started now, before we saw it fully implemented.  What's unfortunate is it would likely only take about a portion of federal highway funds for the next 20 years or so to pay for.  This type of system would have such a positive impact on all facets of the Nashville economy.

Edited August 13, 2013 by musiczealot

[producer2]

Great post! Like I said above, I'll embrace it as long as it's done right and doesn't look trashy. I think your right about it making sense for Nashville to go with BRT instead of LRT, not just for financial reasons, but because of Nashville being a car dependent city.However, If the buses end up looking anything like the one below, (it appears they could from the Amp renderings, and wouldn't surprise me) I will be pretty disappointed.

 

And the Amp buses.

 

 

Neither one look great to me and to be honest the one on top is awful. It seems the Amp buses look eerily similar and that has me worried. They might look ok while the Amp buses are new, but it woulnd't be long before they start looking like the one on top. That's my biggest concern. There is nothing inviting about either one of those buses that would make me want to start riding one. Know what I mean?

Try looking at the bus from the passenger side...ther are plenty of pics available.

[mirydi]

Try looking at the bus from the passenger side...ther are plenty of pics available.

Are you talking about the inside? I'm not sure what you mean.

[nashvillwill]

I think what is more important than the exterior appearance is the space inside the buses. IMO, these buses should have open floor plans with less seating than a standard bus and wider walkways. Typical buses feel crowded, even when empty because the walkways are so narrow. If you are carrying any sort of bag, you end up banging it on every seat.

I think the AMP should have single rows of seating along each wall facing inward. Near the doorways, there should be handicapped only seating and ample space for loading/unloading as well as room for a couple of bicycles.

Basically, I think the seating should be a little more "train like" than the seating you find on a standard bus. Sure, that means less people get a seat and have to strap-hang, but it also means that you can fit more riders per unit. Additionally, I think it would make a more enjoyable ride for everyone, as well as speed up delays at stops.

[nashwatcher]

I agree. The interior feel is really important. I know they're planning wide aisles(much more user friendly than a standard bus...) but I think your idea of single row seating along the walls (at least for a good portion of the bus) with passenger standing room in these areas would be terrific (assuming it doesn't encourage pickpocketing, etc)...

[bwithers1]

Great post! Like I said above, I'll embrace it as long as it's done right and doesn't look trashy. I think your right about it making sense for Nashville to go with BRT instead of LRT, not just for financial reasons, but because of Nashville being a car dependent city.However, If the buses end up looking anything like the one below, (it appears they could from the Amp renderings, and wouldn't surprise me) I will be pretty disappointed.

 

And the Amp buses.

 

 

Neither one look great to me and to be honest the one on top is awful. It seems the Amp buses look eerily similar and that has me worried. They might look ok while the Amp buses are new, but it woulnd't be long before they start looking like the one on top. That's my biggest concern. There is nothing inviting about either one of those buses that would make me want to start riding one. Know what I mean?

The one on the top is the current Gallatin Road BRT bus, not one of the proposals, and that photo is taken in what sadly is one of the more attractive stretches of Gallatin Road's commercial areas, in this case in Inglewood.  But those are pretty nice buses and they are heavily used.  I use them quite a bit when I am coming downtown for something.  They are no different than the articulated buses that I and 2 million of my closest friends who lived along Chicago's lakefront used to get to and from work everyday.  Remember, even in Chicago, the  majority of CTA riders use buses exclusively or mostly.

[nashvillwill]

The way I would imagine it is like this. The front door would be slightly further back than on a standard bus, thus avoiding the bottle neck of the drivers seat and fare box. This immediate area would have seats lining each wall facing inward with standing room in the center. The 2nd and third doors (in front of and behind the articulating center of the unit) would have wide open spaces with limited seating. This area would accommodate easy loading/unloading as well as providing plenty of room for bikes/strollers/shopping carts. The very rear section of the bus (behind the rear doors) would have more traditional 2x2 seating for a more comfortable ride.

Oh, and to make it a little more train like, I think there should be electronic signage showing you where you are on the route, automatic "next stop" announcements as well as transfer information.

Just my thoughts.

[mirydi]

If we ended up with buses like these, I assure you I wouldn't mind one bit, and I would totally be satisfied with not having LRT. This bus is sexy! However, I think that's highly unlikely.

 

 

Anyway's, I'm happy about Dean looking into some sort of mass transit, and either way it would be a positve thing for the city. I do hope that BRT is successful, and that it ends up being a catalyst for other forms of mass transit as well.

[chelovek]

I think it is time for us to open our transportation firm. We've got it all- Right of way acquisition plans, rolling stock design and interior configuration, network expansion proposals. We just need a name and we can start going in for some big contracts

Either that or we need to start being paid as consultants by the real deal firms. I wouldn't be surprised if they get on here to read the chatter.

[producer2]

All BRT busses are similar in design in terms of wide doors, inside seating, bike racks, etc. They are designed to pull up to the curb using automated sensors and allow for smooth transitions into and out of each coach. they will look something like this:

Edited August 13, 2013 by producer2

[volsfanwill]

threw this together today, one can dream right?

 

metro-blue-line by willfry, on Flickr

[nashvillwill]

Nice! I especially like the Amtrak transfer point!

Maybe you should email that to MTA/RTA for a little inspiration.

Edited August 16, 2013 by nashvillwill