ATLANTA TRANSIT (Marta, Beltline, Peachtree Streetcar, LovJoy Commuter, etc...)

[dirtybird]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Now all we need is light rail or a street car line along it and it would be perfection .

What I'm wondering now is are they going to eventually put light rail on it with all that crowd?

[Libertarian]

I'm saying it, there will be light rail in Atlanta, east west and south of downtown and midtown but never on the Beltline. Yes, never is a long time.

[smArTaLlone]

Originally Posted by dirtybird

What I'm wondering now is are they going to eventually put light rail on it with all that crowd?

Why wouldn't they? Because its popular when the weather is nice?
The right of way is there specifically for transit.

I actually think that as more of the Beltine is developed and the city in general becomes more walkable, the Beltline won't always be as crowded. At this point, the Beltline is pretty much the go-to destination for a warm sunny day in February. In the future there will be more of the Beltline and (hopefully) more of the city worth exploring.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by Libertarian

I'm saying it, there will be light rail in Atlanta, east west and south of downtown and midtown but never on the Beltline. Yes, never is a long time.

Why don't you think there will be transit on the Beltline? It would be cheaper building it on the Beltline than on city streets because you wouldn't have to tear up the street, bury power lines, and it would have it's own right of way. Beltline transit should be a priority IMO. Plenty of people would take it to work from their Eastside neighborhood to Midtown. Hell, even at night, people would take it from the various bars and resturants along the Beltline.

[Libertarian]

For the best cost and user effectiveness, I say build out lite rail spokes from the two Marta lines and keep lite rail off the Beltline. I agree they have to find a cheaper way to tear up the streets than how it was done on the loop downtown, and without those huge space hogging Siemens mother ships. But keep the Beltline for now as a pedway and greenspace amenity. I don't personally know anyone, other than maybe a handful here on this board, who are heavy breathing for light rail there. Show me the cost-benefit.

[(four 0 four)]

At a recent speaking engagement, Mary Norwood (one of the more likely winners of the mayoral race) expressed her enthusiasm for the Beltline but felt light rail was too expensive. She's proposing some sort of bus option or at least something that runs on tires instead of rails. Seems worth investigating.

[L41A]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Why don't you think there will be transit on the Beltline? It would be cheaper building it on the Beltline than on city streets because you wouldn't have to tear up the street, bury power lines, and it would have it's own right of way. Beltline transit should be a priority IMO. Plenty of people would take it to work from their Eastside neighborhood to Midtown. Hell, even at night, people would take it from the various bars and resturants along the Beltline.

Agreed

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by (four 0 four)

At a recent speaking engagement, Mary Norwood (one of the more likely winners of the mayoral race) expressed her enthusiasm for the Beltline but felt light rail was too expensive. She's proposing some sort of bus option or at least something that runs on tires instead of rails. Seems worth investigating.

Is she talking about light rail on the Beltline or light rail in the city period? If she means for the city period, she's not getting my vote.

[Street Advocate]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Is she talking about light rail on the Beltline or light rail in the city period? If she means for the city period, she's not getting my vote.

I'd rather see BRT on city streets (Northside, North Ave, pretty much the all crosstown streeetcar proposals), light rail on the beltline, and some HRT expansion of the green line either up toward Cobb or to Lindbergh.

[Martinman]

Originally Posted by Libertarian

For the best cost and user effectiveness, I say build out lite rail spokes from the two Marta lines and keep lite rail off the Beltline. I agree they have to find a cheaper way to tear up the streets than how it was done on the loop downtown, and without those huge space hogging Siemens mother ships. But keep the Beltline for now as a pedway and greenspace amenity. I don't personally know anyone, other than maybe a handful here on this board, who are heavy breathing for light rail there. Show me the cost-benefit.

As convincing as this sounds, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this is probably not the ideal basis for transportation/city planning. [/sarcasm]
Yes transit expansion in the city should begin with east-west connections as is planned. Still the Beltline's popularity while its still in its infancy makes transit on the corridor even more compelling. Not less.

[Libertarian]

Maybe democracy isn't important, but cost-benefit is.

[Libertarian]

Maybe I'm wrong. Are there any purported studies that project CPM (cost per passenger mile)(buildout/operation) and opportunity costs for upgrade to 22-mile light rail loop?

[trainiac]

Originally Posted by Libertarian

Maybe I'm wrong. Are there any purported studies that project CPM (cost per passenger mile)(buildout/operation) and opportunity costs for upgrade to 22-mile light rail loop?

For what it's worth, Gravel's original thesis is for rail only -- no walking path included at all. ROW is typically 50 feet

[dmbolp]

Take an existing railway, rip out the rails, put down wide concrete path, add new railway next to it

[ATLswede]

And for whatever else it's worth, they already put in all of the underground infrastructure necessary for light rail in the corridor. SOME form of transit will absolutely be ON the BeltLine in the next 7 years, because BRT and other "solutions" that navigate surface streets still get stuck in traffic. They may reduce the total number of cars, but they still add to the traffic nonetheless. And it's a tough sell to convince someone to pay for a bus/streetcar that moves just as slowly as sitting in your own car.

And with the November MARTA referendum passing and providing $2.5 billion in bonding capacity, it seems fairly obvious that planners would first go with low hanging fruit, i.e., transit in an area where a) the ROW has already been acquired, b) the underground infrastructure is already in place, c) there is demonstrated demand, and d) there significant congestion on the surface streets.

Wait, remind me again why some of the others think there WON'T be BeltLine transit?

[robertjhajek]

Originally Posted by ATLswede

And for whatever else it's worth, they already put in all of the underground infrastructure necessary for light rail in the corridor. SOME form of transit will absolutely be ON the BeltLine in the next 7 years, because BRT and other "solutions" that navigate surface streets still get stuck in traffic. They may reduce the total number of cars, but they still add to the traffic nonetheless. And it's a tough sell to convince someone to pay for a bus/streetcar that moves just as slowly as sitting in your own car.

And with the November MARTA referendum passing and providing $2.5 billion in bonding capacity, it seems fairly obvious that planners would first go with low hanging fruit, i.e., transit in an area where a) the ROW has already been acquired, b) the underground infrastructure is already in place, c) there is demonstrated demand, and d) there significant congestion on the surface streets.

Wait, remind me again why some of the others think there WON'T be BeltLine transit?

Amen.

[Frankster87]

Originally Posted by ATLswede

And for whatever else it's worth, they already put in all of the underground infrastructure necessary for light rail in the corridor. SOME form of transit will absolutely be ON the BeltLine in the next 7 years, because BRT and other "solutions" that navigate surface streets still get stuck in traffic. They may reduce the total number of cars, but they still add to the traffic nonetheless. And it's a tough sell to convince someone to pay for a bus/streetcar that moves just as slowly as sitting in your own car.

And with the November MARTA referendum passing and providing $2.5 billion in bonding capacity, it seems fairly obvious that planners would first go with low hanging fruit, i.e., transit in an area where a) the ROW has already been acquired, b) the underground infrastructure is already in place, c) there is demonstrated demand, and d) there significant congestion on the surface streets.

Wait, remind me again why some of the others think there WON'T be BeltLine transit?

• Video Link

[Libertarian]

2017 not promising for MARTA rail expansion

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

Westside trail 02/27 construction update: http://beltlineorg.wpengine.netdna-c...te-2.27.17.pdf

Again this presentation also reiterates that underground transit infrastructure is included in the process of building out the trail

[Street Advocate]

Anyone attending these meetings? A lot of the write-ups lately are about the I-20 West HRT and Clifton Corridor LRT. Maybe just biased journalism?

While I wouldn't mind these projects in conjunction with LRT/BRT/streetcar dedicated lane expansion criss-crossing the city, I will absolutely raise hell if more inner neighborhood cross-town expansion is not funded through this approved tax.

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/n...expansion.html