The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[UTgrad09]

^Yeah, I'll say (126 years of one party controlling the Mayor's office and counting).

How many years has one party controlled East Tennessee?

I'm not suggesting either is right or wrong, but some areas are simply dominated by one party.

[fieldmarshaldj]

You're comparing apples and oranges. I'm explicitly talking about Nashville, which last elected a non-Democrat Mayor in the 1880s. "East Tennessee" is not a defined political entity. If you're comparing similar cities, neither Knoxville or Chattanooga, which have had GOP Mayors, have had absolutely one party control for such a period (indeed, no sizeable city of any sort in the entire country has had one party GOP in power). Both those cities have very partisan left-wing Democrats as Mayors at present (so no GOP "control" there).

Now, if you're talking about state legislative districts, the GOP has tended to dominate there since Reconstruction (indeed, the only Southern state that had a consistent presence from that period to today). Of course, some districts in Nashville have gone even longer without a Republican (in some instances, 140+ years). But Democrats have still won seats in East TN (even ostensibly heavily GOP areas), unlike explicitly in Davidson County (outside of 3 House districts and 1 Senate).

Congressionally, if you merely count the 2 districts entirely defined as the ancestral "East" (the 1st and 2nd districts, not counting Chattanooga's 3rd, which only went GOP under the most gargantuan national GOP political waves prior to 1962 (such as 1894 & 1920)), both have been Republican since the 19th century. The 1st last elected a Democrat in 1878 (future Senator & Governor Robert Love Taylor), contrasting with our district (5th) having last elected a Republican in 1872 (and that only because 2 Democrat candidates split the vote, one running as the regular candidate and another as an Independent).

The Knoxville-based 2nd hasn't elected a Democrat since 1852 (it was, before the Civil War, a Conscience Whig district while Nashville was a Cotton Whig stronghold). I've not fully researched it, but I believe that is one of the longest non-Democrat shutouts of a district in the nation (though I believe there are some areas of Texas that have similarly never voted GOP for Congress since statehood).

[rookzie]

The way Lt. Ramseygot up under that cow and won in a milking contest shows just how confident he is in himself.

Apparently he's milked a mess of cows in his past, and he even came from behind (in the contest, that is) and still won. This alone shows that he has "majik fingers".

[nashvylle]

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2014/03/amp-bill-moves-to-full-house-finance-committee.html

 

I believe this bill is good news for The Amp. Amp Yes told me that they want the House Bill to pass because it doesn't prohibit BRT in the center lanes, like the Senate Bill does.

[dmillsphoto]

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2014/03/tn-senate-passes-limiting-amp-design.html

[Vrtigo]

 

 

The Tennessee Senate passed a bill Thursday that would limit metropolitan governments from building bus rapid-transit systems with a dedicated center lane of traffic, as is called for by the Amp.

 

Not good. I don't understand why the two parties can't come to the table and decide together on a functional solution rather than just trying to scuttle each others' plans...

 

So frustrating.

[nashmoney]

Not good. I don't understand why the two parties can't come to the table and decide together on a functional solution rather than just trying to scuttle each others' plans...

 

So frustrating.

 

I agree. I think the AMP is now doomed. Unless they can reconfigure the design to accomodate right side loading/unloading....its Doomed.

 

Back to the drawing board. It will be another 15-20 years before a new transit proposal is created.

[nashvylle]

The House and Senate bills now have to join together... so it could come out that the final bill could keep the current design, or the house bill could comply to the senate bill and we would have to go back to the drawing board (not sure if the federal funds were specific to center lane). However, even if that does happen, Haslam could still veto this bill as he knows this bill is an overreach and has already said he did not like how it was made.

 

I am fine with having the loading docks on the right side of the road as long as they are on dedicated lanes and we can keep the federal funding and the timeline...

 

 

The dangerous thing that the state has done is set a terrible precedent and is an example of an overreach by government. Even if The Amp could be redesigned to have the loading docks on the right side of the road and could keep the federal money, state senators could on a whim create a bill that says no dedicated lanes... See how dangerous this abrupt bill is? Haslam has to veto.

 

Just like how the state doesn't like the federal government overreaching on them, the state shouldn't overreach on the local municipalities.

[captainwjm]

However, even if that does happen, Haslam could still veto this bill as he knows this bill is an overreach and has already said he did not like how it was made.

Under Tennessee's structure, we have a very weak governor.  It only takes a simple majority of each house to override.  In other words, if they could pass it in the first place, they can over-ride the veto.  So, the battle has to be waged in the Legislature.

[rookzie]

Not good. I don't understand why the two parties can't come to the table and decide together on a functional solution rather than just trying to scuttle each others' plans...

 

So frustrating.

 

 

I agree. I think the AMP is now doomed. Unless they can reconfigure the design to accomodate right side loading/unloading....its Doomed.

 

Back to the drawing board. It will be another 15-20 years before a new transit proposal is created.

 

As contrary-minded and pessimistically disgusted as I have been during the last 5 years about all this, I still have a glimmer that "...it's always darkest 'fo' dawn."  I actually would not be surprised if something totally yet-to-be revealed, much more ambitious but vastly different proposal will be up for formal discussion, sometime when none of us suspects it.

 

But then again, when one considers other "decent-sized" urban areas with no RT in place (Columbus, Louisville, Indy and Detroit [people-movers don’t count], et.al), it also seems next to impossible that Nashv’l will end up in the process of becoming removed from that list in the foreseeable, despite its being a relatively high-ranking core-based- and primary statistical area.

 

-=rr=-

 

Edited March 27, 2014 by rookzie

[BnaBreaker]

Yeehaw.  The good ole boys strike again.  Tennessee is a wonderful place, but it pains me to think about how much more wonderful it would be if there weren't so many people in it that were constantly pushing for it to be 1950 on a permanent basis. 

Edited March 27, 2014 by BnaBreaker

[BnaBreaker]

As contrary-minded and pessimistically disgusted as I have been during the last 5 years about all this, I still have a glimmer that "...it's always darkest 'fo dawn."  I actually would not be surprised if something totally yet-to-be revealed, much more ambitious but vastly different proposal will be up for formal discussion, sometime when none of us suspects it.

 

But then again, when one considers other "decent-sized" urban areas with no RT in place (Columbus, Louisville, Indy and Detroit [people-movers don’t count], et.al), it also seems next to impossible that Nashv’l will end up in the process of removed from that list in the foreseeable, despite its being a relatively high-ranking core-based- and primary statistical area.

 

-=rr=-

 

 

FYI, Detroit has a light rail system planned and due for groundbreaking for, as far as I know, this Spring, while Columbus has a light rail system in the works.  Combine this with the fact that Raleigh, Austin, and Oklahoma City have light rail projects in the works as well while we can't even get a bus system off the ground and it means that, once again, the city of Nashville and the state of Tennessee will be bringing up the rear in an important category, much to the delight of the state's more extreme conservatives.

[FrankNash]

If the AMP project is canceled we will have Winners and Losers. Winners; The folks that couldn't imagine a bus passing them while sitting in traffic. Losers; The same people still sitting in traffic with no alternative. Winners; The urban core neighborhoods full of well educated people that now know they need to have all their amenities in a convenient walkable area. Losers; The people living just outside the city center that need a car for most everything they do. Winners; The cities that are located in progressive states that receive federal money for mass transit projects. Losers; Tennessee!

[rookzie]

...I should have at least qualified Detroit, which gave everyone a big scare not far in the past, when Mayor Bing had been a proponent of a BRT plan instead of a streetcar; and in our East-Midwest heartland, Cincy's streetcar also is underway.

I have long wondered just how the theater might have played out, had Mayor Dean "up" and selected streetcar as the "locally preferred" alternative. While there still would have remained convincing and valid issues of concern, it would have been interesting to see the state's reaction to such a proposal. Just the very nature of a railbound operation, instead of a cordoned-off busway, theoretically could have triggered a markedly different set of "explosions" in the boiling waters (or not).

The center-lane "syndrome" might have been the biggest source of the knee-jerk furor against the AMP, whether or not a curbside streetcar would have made any difference.

-=rr=-

Edited March 27, 2014 by rookzie

[nashvylle]

I would like to reiterate that the House passed a bill that was in favor of The Amp...

 

Hopefully the House version wins out.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Yeehaw.  The good ole boys strike again.  Tennessee is a wonderful place, but it pains me to think about how much more wonderful it would be if there weren't so many people in it that were constantly pushing for it to be 1950 on a permanent basis.

I wouldn't knock 1950, since many places still had streetcars.

[GreenHillsBoy]

We simply have a system in this state, forget the political parties, where the lobbyists and rural legislators look after special interest over the sensible and reasonable needs of the state.  I know a number of local leaders who feel that they cannot win in the state legislature and influence anything positive that is not focused on the wishes of special interests.  If you travel to any rural area, you will see four lane divided interstate quality highways in many rural areas...Jamestown to Crossville, Cookeville to McMinnville, Jackson to Dyersburg, etc....where a solid two lane with a center turn would be more than adequate and much less costly, yet the four major metro areas are falling further and further behind.  We see influence with our Community Colleges opening expensive physical facilities in virtually every county in the state....Motlow from Tullahoma in Symrna, Columbia State in Franklin, Vol State in Livingston and on and on....again lobbyists and rural legislators want to take care of their area even when it does not make sense.  I don't know the answer as the system works for the incumbents and it is very difficult to fight.  As long as the focus is on social issues, guns, abortion, anti-gay bills, censorship of text books, etc....we will continue to fall into the lower 5 in the major categories as a whole while metro areas have to fight against stacked odds to be progressive.

[nashvylle]

The way Beth Harwell has helped draft this anti-mass transit bill is just ridiculous. It was meant to kill The Amp, however, if engineers come back tomorrow and say we can simply move the center dedicated lane to the right side, Beth Harwell would help draft another bill that says, "No dedicated Lanes". If the next mayor comes in and says we need light rail, and I am going to pay for all of it myself, Beth Harwell could draft a bill that says "No lightrail".... she is ridiculous.

 

Some quotes from her:

"I am not an expert on mass transit", but then she says The Amp is not the right solution.

"I do not want to tie the Mayor's hands", after the Senate approves the bill SHE HELPED DRAFT to kill The Amp.

 

This legislation is so dangerous and I really hope The House does not conform to the Senate Bill. I also hope Haslam will veto any bill that overreaches The Amp.

[GreenHillsBoy]

Beth Harwell is heavily tied to special interests with lots of money.  She enjoys being able to put it to a very popular mayor in her city, where she could not be elected to any thing other than the heavily Republican district they created for her.  Haslam is too weak to veto, but if he did, it would be over ridden easily and he is basically powerless within his own party.

[nashvylle]

Well I still hope there is a veto on this bill, but I hope the House bill does not conform.

[Rockatansky]

I have long wondered just how the theater might have played out, had Mayor Dean "up" and selected streetcar as the "locally preferred" alternative.

 

There is no rational reason to support a streetcar over the Amp. The LOS for a streetcar is nearly identical to the Amp and it costs 2x as much.

[rookzie]

There is no rational reason to support a streetcar over the Amp. The LOS for a streetcar is nearly identical to the Amp and it costs 2x as much.

Rockatansky, you keep totally missing the point.  I am, in no uncertain terms, suggesting a streetcar over BRT, nor am I or have I suggested that the state legislature would have as well.  If you had read the context of my statement, rather than just the the phrases containing "streetcar", you'd see that I was making only a theoretical or subjunctive comparison concerning only the possible reaction of the state govt. players, concerning ANY rapid transit.

 

Neither the House's nor the Senate's stand on this has anything whatsoever to do with the level of service on one choice over the other, although even that could be arguable.  Just how rational do you think the legislature's involvement at all with the matter is, period?

Edited March 28, 2014 by rookzie

[fieldmarshaldj]

We simply have a system in this state, forget the political parties, where the lobbyists and rural legislators look after special interest over the sensible and reasonable needs of the state.  I know a number of local leaders who feel that they cannot win in the state legislature and influence anything positive that is not focused on the wishes of special interests.  If you travel to any rural area, you will see four lane divided interstate quality highways in many rural areas...Jamestown to Crossville, Cookeville to McMinnville, Jackson to Dyersburg, etc....where a solid two lane with a center turn would be more than adequate and much less costly, yet the four major metro areas are falling further and further behind.  We see influence with our Community Colleges opening expensive physical facilities in virtually every county in the state....Motlow from Tullahoma in Symrna, Columbia State in Franklin, Vol State in Livingston and on and on....again lobbyists and rural legislators want to take care of their area even when it does not make sense.  I don't know the answer as the system works for the incumbents and it is very difficult to fight.  As long as the focus is on social issues, guns, abortion, anti-gay bills, censorship of text books, etc....we will continue to fall into the lower 5 in the major categories as a whole while metro areas have to fight against stacked odds to be progressive.

With all due respect, social issues ARE important. Because this state hasn't gone full-on moonbat in a national race to the bottom to be "progressive" is why people are moving here from places that have. If you want "progressive", move to one of those other states where it is wholeheartedly embraced. Tennessee has spoken clearly, it doesn't want that. I'm proud of this legislature.

Edited March 29, 2014 by fieldmarshaldj

[grilled_cheese]

With all due respect, social issues ARE important. Because this state hasn't gone full-on moonbat in a national race to the bottom to be "progressive" is why people are moving here from places that have. If you want "progressive", move to one of those other states where it is wholeheartedly embraced. Tennessee has spoken clearly, it doesn't want that. I'm proud of this legislature.

 

No. 

 

 

 

Born and raised here.  This is my state to mold as I choose.  The worst is seeing transplants running my state.

[farm_boy]

No. 

 

 

 

Born and raised here.  This is my state to mold as I choose.  The worst is seeing transplants running my state.

 

disagree

 

I always joke about the California transplants in Williamson County! Hehehehe! But, the truth is, the large majority of people moving here have done so to escape the states/cities they were living in. The transplants here have very high personal qualities (morals/ethics/etc) - unlike other places, like Charlotte (full of Yankees).

 

They may never like grits, but they are warming up to biscuits and gravy!! Hehehehe!!!