Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
MARTA Statement on the False, Irresponsible Statements by Councilmembers Marci Collier Overstreet, Andrea Boone and Antonio Lewis regarding the Campbellton Corridor Transit Project
Councilmember Overstreet has been closely involved with this project since its inception and is fully aware that light rail was never promised in this corridor..."
MARTA's technically correct, because they always carefully use the phrase "high-capacity transit". That's technically all they promised for the Beltline and for Clayton and etc.
But, I mean, it's still the same bait and switch act they always seem to pull. They show concept images with rail, and garner excitement and support from discussing rail proposals, then before it gets built, they always switch it to a bus.
Woah! I don't think I've ever seen MARTA hit back like that before! I'm definitely going back and forth on it, but I think I'm at least ok with BRT, even though I think my initial preference was LRT. If MARTA builds it right (which I know is a big IF) then bus routes could use the Campbellton busway and branch on/off it, thus extending some of the benefit of the dedicated busway to people beyond just the Campbellton corridor.
My only issue with MARTA's idea of BRT (such as the Capitol Ave project) is that without barrier separation, other drivers will likely treat the BRT lanes like they do the bus-only lanes on 17th street/Atlantic Station. Pretty sure food and package delivery services will also block the lanes without barrier separation.
Any new "high-capacity" transit should be a non-starter without barrier separation.
I'm still wondering what's taking so long to one-way Edgewood and Auburn Ave to give the street car a dedicated lane. It's ridiculous how often I see the street car tracks blocked.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,486 posts, read 15,008,050 times
Reputation: 7334
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtyfygiu
MARTA should honestly get like Dallas with DART and just turn MARTA into commuter rail. Thats pretty much how DART works in Dallas, people use it to go to different suburbs and downtown once in a while. Atlanta doesnt have the population density to support comprehensive public transit. The problem tho is that the job market area is so spread out in ATL. Lots of people commute from suburb to suburb. I dont know...
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech
DART is a light rail, but yes, I do wish that they could convert MARTA heavy rail into equivalent light rail, with overhead electrification instead of third rail.
Then they could actually afford to expand and extend it, with at-grade road crossings, and inexpensive and simple stations like Dallas/Seattle, all the metros with more modern light rail systems are able to do.
And then not only could it function as like a commuter rail for the historic downtowns like Norcross/Marietta/Stone Mountain, etc, but the same lines could run on the Beltline, and to Emory.
MARTA rail's airport connection is great, and the downtown stations are great, and Decatur and Lindbergh and such, but there needs to be like double or triple the number of stations, and with more lines, connecting the metro. And with that heavy rail outdated design they have, they can't even afford a single new station.
You know, I've been on C-D for about 12 years and have seen hundreds of really bad takes. This, my friends, is the Master Chef of bad takes. Let's break it down.
The idea that DART is better than MARTA is so mind numbingly bad I don't even know where to begin, but let's start with ridership since that's a quick data point to determine how useful a transit agency.
Looking back at the ridership data for the last quarter of 2019 (the last "clean" quarter before the pandemic), your first clue pops up immediately.
DART Light Rail average weekday ridership per day: 92,000
MARTA Heavy Rail average weekday ridership per day: 260,000
I could stop right there since even if DART has more miles of light rail track, MARTA carries more people on a daily basis. While certainly a large system is never a bad thing, it really matters what technology you use to move the most people from point A to point B. Part of it is obviously cultural differences between the two cities. There are just more people that are prone to using transit here and we know how Texans feel about their trucks.
Despite all the challenges that MARTA has faced with opposition from suburban NIMBYs, lack of State funding, and generally bad PR it was able to build something from all of that is truly effective for the area it serves. For example, despite Dallas itself have twice the square mileage of the City of Atlanta (350 square miles vs 131 for the City of Atlanta and around 250 for the area that MARTA rail services) and a larger population, MARTA still wipes the floor when compared to DART. Why? Because the MARTA planners had the foresight to know that rather than lament the suburban counties get on board we should make the best of a situation. The system was thusly setup to best feed the major job centers, tourist location, universities, highest density neighborhoods, and the airport all at once which has been a big success.
So, I'm not certain what Atlanta "getting like Dallas" means practically? Is it removing the existing track and rolling stock and replace it with subpar Light Rail instead? The only thing that would achieve than wasting billions of dollars of money already spent to spend another several billon dollars to replace it with subpar transit?
The only thing MARTA needs to do at this point is improve the last mile connectivity in the City and get Gwinnett and Cobb on board with rail transit. The first one is already happened. MARTA is moving to push BRT and Light Rail for the corridors that do not currently have high capacity transit and connect it to the existing rail network. That's a no brainer of a win and very doable, especially since we now have two Senators that would actually help us get federal funding, and perhaps soon a Governor too inshallah.
For OTP, given that the primary reason for someone in that part of the metro to use transit would be to get too and from work (whenever it is we return to normal), the airport, or events in the city, commuter rail would be great at that. Even if ridership would 50k range most likely, that would put a big dent in traffic volumes and provide an alternative for those who want it.
So yeah, not sure what you guys are seeing here as being superior. Even if it goes far in to the Dallas burbs it's not serving them well since only a pittance is riding it.
You know, I've been on C-D for about 12 years and have seen hundreds of really bad takes. This, my friends, is the Master Chef of bad takes. Let's break it down.
The idea that DART is better than MARTA is so mind numbingly bad I don't even know where to begin, but let's start with ridership since that's a quick data point to determine how useful a transit agency.
Looking back at the ridership data for the last quarter of 2019 (the last "clean" quarter before the pandemic), your first clue pops up immediately.
DART Light Rail average weekday ridership per day: 92,000
MARTA Heavy Rail average weekday ridership per day: 260,000
I could stop right there since even if DART has more miles of light rail track, MARTA carries more people on a daily basis. While certainly a large system is never a bad thing, it really matters what technology you use to move the most people from point A to point B. Part of it is obviously cultural differences between the two cities. There are just more people that are prone to using transit here and we know how Texans feel about their trucks.
Despite all the challenges that MARTA has faced with opposition from suburban NIMBYs, lack of State funding, and generally bad PR it was able to build something from all of that is truly effective for the area it serves. For example, despite Dallas itself have twice the square mileage of the City of Atlanta (350 square miles vs 131 for the City of Atlanta and around 250 for the area that MARTA rail services) and a larger population, MARTA still wipes the floor when compared to DART. Why? Because the MARTA planners had the foresight to know that rather than lament the suburban counties get on board we should make the best of a situation. The system was thusly setup to best feed the major job centers, tourist location, universities, highest density neighborhoods, and the airport all at once which has been a big success.
So, I'm not certain what Atlanta "getting like Dallas" means practically? Is it removing the existing track and rolling stock and replace it with subpar Light Rail instead? The only thing that would achieve than wasting billions of dollars of money already spent to spend another several billon dollars to replace it with subpar transit?
The only thing MARTA needs to do at this point is improve the last mile connectivity in the City and get Gwinnett and Cobb on board with rail transit. The first one is already happened. MARTA is moving to push BRT and Light Rail for the corridors that do not currently have high capacity transit and connect it to the existing rail network. That's a no brainer of a win and very doable, especially since we now have two Senators that would actually help us get federal funding, and perhaps soon a Governor too inshallah.
For OTP, given that the primary reason for someone in that part of the metro to use transit would be to get too and from work (whenever it is we return to normal), the airport, or events in the city, commuter rail would be great at that. Even if ridership would 50k range most likely, that would put a big dent in traffic volumes and provide an alternative for those who want it.
So yeah, not sure what you guys are seeing here as being superior. Even if it goes far in to the Dallas burbs it's not serving them well since only a pittance is riding it.
My only issue with MARTA's idea of BRT (such as the Capitol Ave project) is that without barrier separation, other drivers will likely treat the BRT lanes like they do the bus-only lanes on 17th street/Atlantic Station. Pretty sure food and package delivery services will also block the lanes without barrier separation.
Any new "high-capacity" transit should be a non-starter without barrier separation.
I'm still wondering what's taking so long to one-way Edgewood and Auburn Ave to give the street car a dedicated lane. It's ridiculous how often I see the street car tracks blocked.
Its on the city to do it, but they can't win political points for something that's already built.
So, I'm not certain what Atlanta "getting like Dallas" means practically? Is it removing the existing track and rolling stock and replace it with subpar Light Rail instead? The only thing that would achieve than wasting billions of dollars of money already spent to spend another several billon dollars to replace it with subpar transit?
I can't speak for the other guy's post, but I'm not sure if you fully read my post, or if you missed my essential point, which was more hypothetical thoughts on the topic than a real world suggestion.
All I meant to say, yes certainly the third rail based heavy rail system that was popular in the 20th century can be superior in capacity and speed (at least by a little bit), but now in the 21st century, the construction costs of it are just enormous. Much higher than the more modern light rail systems.
While I know they won't convert it to light rail (which yes of course would have its own initial cost associated in doing so), I think if it were, then it would ultimately be better for the system, because it could actually be expanded, with more and longer lines, and ran right on the Beltline (with trains straight from Five Points), etc. Here in Seattle the light rail goes just as fast as MARTA when running in the tunnels and aerial, goes acceptably fast on the surface sections, has plenty of capacity, and capacity can be added by adding more cars.
The Gold Line, for example- if it was light rail, after Doraville they could run it right along the surface where those old unused tracks are around Best Friend Rd, run it on Brook Hollow Pkwy, then run it in the median of Satellite Blvd all the way out to Sugarloaf Pkwy. With simple stations like the streetcar. The cost would be a fraction of a heavy rail extension, and you could connect a ton more riders than the current Gold Line. Also could similarly extend it south of the airport for Clayton County.
I think that would be perfect, except for the fact that you'd have to transfer to the heavy rail just to continue ITP. If the Gold Line were light rail then they could just extend it out, with no transfer required.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
