Posted Jan 29, 2015, 10:52 PM
|
|
Nashville born and raised
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chattanooga
Posts: 1,141
|
|
To respond to your points...
The proposal was a disaster waiting to be built.
Pretty strong hyperbole for a project somewhat similar to what many other Cities have built and found to be successful.
West End Avenue IMO is the last corridor I would have recommended. Belle Meade is not a good choice for public mass transit.
It makes more sense than anything else. You want to go where the demand is, and Broadway/West End with its density of hotels, mid-rise residential, office, retail, restaurants, Universities, Hospitals and parks is a perfect route. The selection of Belle Meade as a terminus was made to allow connection with future commuter rail to the west and because of the large St Thomas Hospital complex (in which ST Thomas was going to provide land for building the station).
Madison, Goodletsville, Antioch, Bellevue or North Nashville have a much greater need of efficient access to downtown.
If you are recommending Center lane BRT on these routes, that's very expensive for limited demand. The cost per customer would be far greater than the West End route.
Extensive studies showed that the increase in use of bus transit from present levels would be minimal on the West End route, though it would be the most slick looking and glittering showcase.
Not sure what extensive studies you refer to, but it takes time for the community to respond with transit oriented development which would create a new demand for the convenience of reliable rapid transit.
Designed to grab a big Federal funding bonanza, the Amp proposal was mostly eye candy!
The plan has been progressing since the 80's. It was originally proposed to be light rail (I had a copy of the study), but was eventually proposed as a BRT route. If they wanted eye candy (what ever that is), I suppose they would have pushed for the rail option.
Better to increase residential density in the core as is happening all over the city than ship more commuters in.
Residential density is increasing in the core (including Midtown), hence the need for people to have more dependable options for travel throughout the core.
The disruption to business on West End would have been awful with the vehicular lane reductions.
Not so. While there are a few sections of West End with a seven lane cross section, those additional lanes are seldom accessible due to legally and illegally parked vehicles, bus stops, vehicles stopped in the lanes to wait in the Starbucks line, etc. With the BRT, there would still be a five lane section with turn lanes at intersections. The capacity of the roadway would be reduce minimally with the installation of center lane BRT lanes. The impact to traffic on West End is greatly over-stated by opponents from what I have seen. I doubt most regular motorists in this corridor would notice any appreciable increase in delay.
The other side of the proposal in East Nashville was not so bad. It might have worked if the proposal had been envisioned from Madison to Five Points (East Nashville), terminating perhaps in the Gulch.
|