The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[MagicPotato]

We're tired of traffic we need to do something about it! But we're too cheap and not ambitious enough so we're just going to keep complaining.  So 6 billion for a upgraded transit system compared to Charlotte's who is upgrading theirs for about the same amount?  And their light rail looks fairly efficient. 

[smeagolsfree]

3 hours ago, markhollin said:

While I am frustrated by the vote yesterday, it is clear that even though the population agrees there needs to be a solution to our traffic issue, they overwhelmingly said, "This ain't it."

What is curious to me is WHY so many of these folks were not involved in the literally HUNDREDS of public meetings that were held over the past several years.  If they had been, they would realize that dozens of options were thoroughly discussed and mulled over.  This plan was built around consensus from tens of thousands of people who attended these events and and made suggestions, looked at various proposals, and guided the powers that be on concepts that made the best sense out of what reasonable possibilities were available.  Then, once the finalized plans were put out, the vast majority of large businesses, the Chamber, universities, sports teams, council members, civic groups, etc. came out in favor of the plan as they saw that it offered some long term solutions.  These entities studied it, and backed it based on their research and what they felt best for their customers and constituents.

However, it is easier to say "no" to something that you don't fully understand because it either won't render an immediate positive effect for you personally and/or it will end up costing you hundreds of dollars a year (possibly thousands if you owned a business). Folks just didn't seem willing to invest in the future planning and daily flow of the populace in the county.  Lots of disinformation flowed, and ignorance among a large portion of the electorate reigned.  'Tis the bain of a democracy, I suppose.

So, now we're left with nothing, other than knowing that it is going to be quite difficult to find consensus on any sort of reasonable plan that truly addresses the core problems.  And whatever WILL be proposed over the  2, 5, or 10 years is going to, ultimately, be more expensive than this one as inflation continues to grow on the price of construction, materials, land purchases, etc. needed to create vibrant transit solutions.  

I will continue do what I can to assist in finding ways to help our transit challenges...but I have to be honest in saying that overcoming ignorance and varying degrees of selfishness are going to be the toughest parts of the battle.

A good summary of how/why the Transit Plan referendum failed by the Tennessean.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2018/05/01/nashville-transit-vote-davidson-county-mass-transit/564991002/

Unfortunately, a lot of people will not attend the meetings because their minds are made up before anything is shown to them. Yes we are a democracy, but many people in the country are just lazy because they want the easy way out. Its change, vote against it.. Its a tax increase.. vote against it.. its was proposed by a democrat...vote against it.. it was proposed by a republican...vote against it, it will increase crime...vote against it, etc., etc.

 

I can go on but that is the nature of our political system and it is just a sign of the times too, because so many folks are lazy, narcissistic, nimby's, afraid of change or whatever the reason is. Its all about me and no one else. I have watched things go from ho hum to bad to worse and now the nature of things is just plan vicious as far as attitudes go.

 

[12Mouth]

I'm assuming that a local referendum has to be a simple yes/no vote, but it seems to me that this would be far easier to do if we could put four plans on the ballot (one of which would be do nothing) and then have a runoff between the top two. Having one plan allows it to be the source of all criticism from all sides. I think that if people felt that they had options, they would not select the "do nothing" vote, and we would end up with a runoff between two different actual plans. 

But like I said, I'm pretty sure this is not allowed by law.

[Hey_Hey]

I showed up to the meetings regarding Nashville Next and the transit plan.  In hindsight, those meetings are destined to produce an overly ambitious plan because the only people who attend it are people that are transit supporters. If only the most hung-ho citizens plan the system, then it will almost always be more ambitious than the general populous would want or support.  If a transit system requires a referendum to pass then gung-ho supporters can't be the target of the plan. The target of the plan has to be the general voter and those who don't have strong feelings either way.

Which raises the question of, "what do we do next?"  Here's what I would like to happen:

-Start small and build a single transit line (likely BRT with the option of upgrading to LRT later) using existing funds from Metro.  We have an annual budget of over $2 and $3 billion when including both capital and operating budgets.  If this is truly a priority for us then we could fund $50-100 million per year on transit capital expenditures.  It isn't all going to roll out at once, but over the course of 10-20 years we could have a viable system for the urban core.

-Narrow our focus to the urban core first. Clearly there isn't support in the suburban areas of Nashville. 

-Consider radical plans. I want to hear about aerial gondolas, massive partnerships with Uber/Lyft, river based options, and a partnership with a company like Bridj to provide mass transit services with a strong tech component. 

-Go all in on autonomous tech.  Actively seek out companies looking to test autonomous buses.  If we can be the testing ground for autonomous buses then we could also be the beneficiaries once it becomes truly viable.

Edited May 2, 2018 by Hey_Hey

[grilled_cheese]

BRT from the old Kmart on Gallatin all the way down to idk, the court house?

Oh, but then we'll have to get the TN Leg to sign off on that because it uses dedicated lanes.

smh

[Bos2Nash]

9 hours ago, Nashhole said:

Driverless cars will absolutely help congestion as they become more widely adopted. Comparing them to cabs/lyft/uber misses the point. It's easily demonstrated that a machine is much better able to control its speed and flow than humans are, and that driverless cars--even when in the minority on the road--can help prevent shockwave traffic. I am pro-transit and was disappointed with tonight's results. But I think we should be aggressively pursuing all solutions. I've been disappointed to hear many pro-transit people speak anti-technology platitudes with regards to driverless cars because they think it is diametrically opposed to mass transit. 

 

As for the results tonight, it didn't really dawn on me until today how far back this vote may have pushed Nashville. We've now rejected two plans, one for being too conservative and one for being too ambitious. I never felt like this plan was perfect, but it's absolutely impossible for transit to be so. I understand there were legitimate arguments on both sides of the aisle, but it seemed like no matter what, there was no plan that could have pleased a lot of anti-transit people. I wish people took more time to think about what a massive waste in human productivity occurs in transportation. 10 minutes extra per workday spent in traffic is 40 hours a year--an entire extra workweek you throw away on nothing because there's a bottleneck at 65/40 which will never be fixed. 40 hours you could be producing for your job or spending time with your family. 

Majority of the driverless car debate is not so much an "anti-tech" discussion, but rather anti- waiting the next 10 years for autonomous vehicles to be reliable enough for mass transit use. Furthermore, once they become reliable enough and become a mainstream service, putting thousands of more cars on the road will still cause congestion, yes the autonomous nature will help, but there will still be a human component that will have to be relied on. At least for the time being.

1 hour ago, FluffyP13 said:

i would call this an extreme blow to our amazon headquarters shot as well as just being a general let down. 

I would call this the nail in the coffin. Nashville was always a long shot among the final 20 (in my opinion), but without an effective transit system it will not happen. Without an effective transit system, I'm glad it won't happen!

[Rockatansky]

12 hours ago, 12Mouth said:

brt

When you say this are you advocating proper BRT in dedicated lanes? Or the BRT-lite express busses MTA currently operates?

12 hours ago, e-dub said:

but Yellow Dog isn't it.

Blue Dog.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition

[Rockatansky]

12 hours ago, henburg said:

Mayor Berry

For the 9,000th time its Barry, not Berry.

9 hours ago, Nashhole said:

Driverless cars will absolutely help congestion as they become more widely adopted.

In about 50 years, maybe.

[Rockatansky]

As I alluded to earlier, proper BRT won't happen without the State's consent. I just don't see that happening.

[Bos2Nash]

These are good goals, but unfortunately transit will need to be ambitious (overly so) for it to gain valuable traction. 

Dedicated BRT with the promise of evolution to Light Rail, while feel good, is worthless. Once the BRT is operating it will be too costly to convert over and will just never happen. (i've seen this first hand)

Narrower focus could be helpful, but then again you will get the arguement that it is not doing enough for the fringe parts of Davidson County so why will the pay for it.

Please don't mention aerial gondolas lol. Unless its for a small area maneuver like the airport. They are ugly are not worth the cost. Uber/Lyft will still cost bundles and bundles of money because tax payers will still have to subsidize the rides to keep the prices reasonable (we pay low fares now because they are bleeding money and are banking on government contracts). Bridj in Boston already closed down it services once (while growing in Australia) and while this is good on demand service, using it for the masses would still require large government contracts that the tax payers subsidize and still don't go everywhere. Bridj creates routes based on efficient people moving and where they will get the most people right away, they wont get the low-income neighborhood that need transit the most.

Test autonomous. Improve, and make a reliable version of mass transit. But we cannot wait for everything that still has to happen. We need a system now, that is reliable, tested and true. Which autonomous just isnt yet (but will be)

18 minutes ago, Hey_Hey said:

Which raises the question of, "what do we do next?"  Here's what I would like to happen:

-Start small and build a single transit line (likely BRT with the option of upgrading to LRT later) using existing funds from Metro.  We have an annual budget of over $2 and $3 billion when including both capital and operating budgets.  If this is truly a priority for us then we could fund $50-100 million per year on transit capital expenditures.  It isn't all going to roll out at once, but over the course of 10-20 years we could have a viable system for the urban core.

-Narrow our focus to the urban core first. Clearly there isn't support in the suburban areas of Nashville. 

-Consider radical plans. I want to hear about aerial gondolas, massive partnerships with Uber/Lyft, river based options, and a partnership with a company like Bridj to provide mass transit services with a strong tech component. 

-Go all in on autonomous tech.  Actively seek out companies looking to test autonomous buses.  If we can be the testing ground for autonomous buses then we could also be the beneficiaries once it becomes truly viable.

 

[japan]

Can we focus on regional transit now?  Getting CSX outside of the core?

[grilled_cheese]

3 minutes ago, japan said:

Can we focus on regional transit now?  Getting CSX outside of the core?

Sure but you have to be the Brentwood Ambassador and must broker the deal with them.  Good luck!

Edited May 2, 2018 by grilled_cheese

[henburg]

 

27 minutes ago, Rockatansky said:

For the 9,000th time its Barry, not Berry

I actually did know that, I guess I just had a bit of a lapse there. My mistake. 

3 minutes ago, grilled_cheese said:

Sure but you have to be the Brentwood Ambassador and must broker the deal with them.  Good luck!

This is my concern. There have been lots of cries for a regional plan, which is great in theory, except that the surrounding suburbs have been consistently against transit in the past and I don't know if those attitudes have changed much at all. The fact is that many people who live in these communities choose to because they dislike the urban lifestyle, and mass transit often carries these false negative connotations that are hard to shake in a stubborn demographic like this. I can only imagine the difficulty of coordinating a plan with outside counties after how difficult this process has been. 

[PaulChinetti]

16 minutes ago, japan said:

Can we focus on regional transit now?  Getting CSX outside of the core?

Getting CSX to do anything sometimes feel like it would take an act of congress. 

[markhollin]

I received this gracious e-mail from Transit for Nashville this morning.  An tremendous amount of hard work went into this endeavor...



 

[NashRugger]

27 minutes ago, japan said:

Can we focus on regional transit now?  Getting CSX outside of the core?

Literally will never happen.

[12Mouth]

24 minutes ago, Bos2Nash said:

Dedicated BRT with the promise of evolution to Light Rail, while feel good, is worthless. Once the BRT is operating it will be too costly to convert over and will just never happen. (i've seen this first hand)

Why? We don't really have the density to justify the light rail and won't for some time. Even back when they did the amp study, the increase in ridership from BRT to Light Rail was minimal.

 

26 minutes ago, Rockatansky said:

As I alluded to earlier, proper BRT won't happen without the State's consent. I just don't see that happening.

So this is (I think) the brilliance of my Uber/Lyft lease plan. The state law specifically states, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no metropolitan government or any transit authority created by any metropolitan government shall construct, maintain or operate any bus rapid transit system using a separate lane, or a separate right-of-way, dedicated solely to the use of such bus rapid transit system on any state highway or state highway right-of-way unless the project to construct, maintain or operate such BRT system on such state highway or state highway right-of-way is approved by the legislative body of the metropolitan government, by the commissioner of transportation, and by the General Assembly."

If other cars (i.e. Lyft line and Uberpool) are allowed to use the lane, the state does not need to approve it. We can also then regulate their drop off/pick up points on those main roads.

39 minutes ago, Rockatansky said:

When you say this are you advocating proper BRT in dedicated lanes? Or the BRT-lite express busses MTA currently operates?

Yes.

[nashvylle]

35 minutes ago, 12Mouth said:

So this is (I think) the brilliance of my Uber/Lyft lease plan. The state law specifically states, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no metropolitan government or any transit authority created by any metropolitan government shall construct, maintain or operate any bus rapid transit system using a separate lane, or a separate right-of-way, dedicated solely to the use of such bus rapid transit system on any state highway or state highway right-of-way unless the project to construct, maintain or operate such BRT system on such state highway or state highway right-of-way is approved by the legislative body of the metropolitan government, by the commissioner of transportation, and by the General Assembly."

 

I want the exact plan but for BRT with dedicated lanes, but the state/metro can easily change language to fit their agenda. 

Are there any routes that are NOT on state roads but metro, and we could do BRT with dedicated lanes?

 

[Dale]

3 hours ago, MagicPotato said:

We're tired of traffic we need to do something about it! But we're too cheap and not ambitious enough so we're just going to keep complaining.  So 6 billion for a upgraded transit system compared to Charlotte's who is upgrading theirs for about the same amount?  And their light rail looks fairly efficient. 

It's also losing ridership faster than any system in the nation.

 

[PruneTracy]

24 minutes ago, nashvylle said:

Are there any routes that are NOT on state roads but metro, and we could do BRT with dedicated lanes?

Not for the Let's Move Nashville plan, except for short stretches.

There aren't many local roads in Nashville that both serve areas with a high enough density to make transit feasible and have the right-of-way to accommodate dedicated lanes for transit. Church Street is the best candidate that comes to mind, but it's not a very good one.

[12Mouth]

15 minutes ago, nashvylle said:

I want the exact plan but for BRT with dedicated lanes, but the state/metro can easily change language to fit their agenda. 

This can be complicated and takes time. It also requires the governor's approval. It would be ironic if a future Governor Dean got to veto that! 

But you are correct - you could also draw up a transit plan on entirely local roads that still hit key areas, but they are all less than ideal. Some include:

Division, 12th, Shelby, Woodland, Church, Music Row, Wedgewood, Edgehill, Jefferson. I also wonder if you could utilize smaller portions of state roads which which would not be in dedicated lanes, but would have signal prioritization. 

[nashvylle]

I am sure we could start out with dedicated routes (for all cars), then maybe have dedicated times (like 7-9 am), then go to dedicated lanes once it proves to be successful. 

[wmaddbb2018]

As someone who voted against it, and without starting any fights, i simply did I do think that self driving cars in next 5-10 years, will greatly alleviate the need for something like this.  I grew up in Charlotte NC, within blocks of where the initial lines were (Dilworth neighborhood, for those familar).  And I would say there have been many pluses, but in my mind, the costs were so great that I don't know that it should be considered a success.  I think there are some better, more common sense solutions out there imo. Cheers to all, regardless of opinion and I'm glad to learn more from anyone willingly to chat.

[rookzie]

11 hours ago, Rockatansky said:

As I alluded to earlier, proper BRT won't happen without the State's consent. I just don't see that happening.

Right, since we all tasted front-row-seat drama, during the Dean administration with how the State pulled rank on State-*maintained highways ─ primarily US designated routes, although much of Gallatin Pike and all of Main St. has had that designation re-routed via Ellington Pkwy.

Generally, all the BRT dedicated lines likely would traverse these State arteries.  Again it's going to be a steeply uphill battle for buy-in, even for that ─ maybe even a straight-up vertical climb (if not a "vertical stall").  Right now, though, I don't foresee even close to a consensus on even BRT, the effective dedicated type with busways only, or even with Queue jumps and mixed-flow lanes, just as with  Seattle's' King County Metro "Madison Street BRT", which still utilizes some dedicated-lane travel.  The Seattle example is overhead electric, but could the principle could be applied to any propulsion mode.

But I say allow the Cold take its course along with the Harsh Medicine, and let the opponents of the last failed proposal have their hands in BRT before it gets batted down.  We can forget about so-called "BRT-lite" Skip-stop, as a solution pill.  I know first-hand by riding the MTA Nº50 on Charlotte at 5:00PM.

Edited May 3, 2018 by rookzie

[urbanplanet17]

15 hours ago, MLBrumby said:

Unfortunate! But remember... when things get bad enough you guys will find a solution. In the meantime, you're still (by far) the most fun... most interesting... least bland large city in The South!  You are like Austin in so many ways... but you're better. Keep it up! You'll find a solution.

Distant observations.

1. Pro transit should have avoided the whole tunnel segment of the plan. I think that the folks in the outlying areas of the county saw that as a waste.

2. Pro transit should have tied the argument to "if this passes, we're still in the running for Amazon et.al." vs. "if this does not pass, then we're out."  No guarantees if this had passed, but the certainty of not being chosen w/o something specified in their search criteria should have been underscored. That might have brought out more "pro" voters and may have even persuaded some people on the fence. Remember... fully 1/3 of the "no" voters were really just voting for the status quo.

3. The routes for the proposed LRT needed to be stripped down to a more central (Phase 1) location, but balanced by (an overweight) of more rapid transit BRT/interstate lanes. 

4. Someone remarked on the number of Democratic voters. Remember, Davidson County is still heavily populated by what used to be called "Yellow Dog" (aka conservative) Democrats. 

Perhaps some lessons for any future effort. But right now... the powers that be need to digest these results. 

Very well put.

To add with respect to Austin, they're not much better off in terms of transit. They have a grand total of 1 light rail line. Plus, they will always live in the shadow of Dallas and Houston. Nashville, meanwhile, has a ton more upside potential (with or without transit) given its more ideal geographic location and the fact that it's THE big city in Tennessee.

Edited May 2, 2018 by urbanplanet17