The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[rookzie]

Oh no, difficult left turns. what will we ever do!  What's the difference between a median which might serve as just beautification as opposed to a transit lane which serves more?  Making U-turns is how it is done in FL.  Which is where I will be moving at the end of March, bittersweet .

 

 Not much time for UP for me.

 

 

Would like to have interacted with you in person, a second time, Mr. Tim, but I reckon you have a "sudden-death" notice for taking on a position down with the oranges (new land of citrus slushee, you think? [hard freeze]).

 

We'll miss your dramatization spoofs:

 

Oh no, difficult left turns. what will we ever do!

Oh nooooooo, not mass transit everywhere!!!!

[REF:] "If we do something like this for Nashville, we're going to have projects pop up in Memphis, Knoxville, etc." [beth Harwell, Speaker of the House, R-Nashville, opposing putting state money into a mass transit project benefiting a single city.

 

________

 

It's curtain-call for Tim, everyone!

[][:sad:][]

 

-=ricky-roox=-

Edited February 8, 2014 by rookzie

[FrankNash]

Going to the AMP debate tonight? If so maybe have a beer next door at Pinewood Social? Anyone? Jeff

[rookzie]

Going to the AMP debate tonight? If so maybe have a beer next door at Pinewood Social? Anyone? Jeff

 

I just arrived on the bus in the hills, from the other side of downtown, so now I'm too phreakin' lazy to trek back into that quagmire by car.  I know that as an expression of concern, rather than mere lip service, is attending that meeting.

 

I just don't want to drag back out, now exactly an hour before...

[my bad..]

[TMcKay9]

I'm about to head over.  I would have taken you up on having a brewski had I saw your post earlier.

[TMcKay9]

Well they were filled to capacity about 5 minutes before 6 and are not letting anyone else in. There are many disappointed people outside. This fiasco reminds me why I usually sit these things out.

[timmay143]

Would like to have interacted with you in person, a second time, Mr. Tim, but I reckon you have a "sudden-death" notice for taking on a position down with the oranges (new land of citrus slushee, you think? [hard freeze]).

 

We'll miss your dramatization spoofs:

 

Oh no, difficult left turns. what will we ever do!

Oh nooooooo, not mass transit everywhere!!!!

[REF:] "If we do something like this for Nashville, we're going to have projects pop up in Memphis, Knoxville, etc." [beth Harwell, Speaker of the House, R-Nashville, opposing putting state money into a mass transit project benefiting a single city.

 

________

 

It's curtain-call for Tim, everyone!

[][:sad:][]

 

-=ricky-roox=-

I'll still be around on the forum!

[rookzie]

I just arrived on the bus in the hills, from the other side of downtown, so now I'm too phreakin' lazy to trek back into that quagmire by car.  I know that as an expression of concern, rather than mere lip service, is attending that meeting.

 

I just don't want to drag back out, now exactly an hour before...

[my bad..]

 

 

Well they were filled to capacity about 5 minutes before 6 and are not letting anyone else in. There are many disappointed people outside. This fiasco reminds me why I usually sit these things out.

 

Reckon I had a subliminal hunch worth heeding, by not setting out after all.

 

Being trapped inside or out could have added insult to injury (hopefully it would not have been the black-eye type).  Some good that can be gleaned from this, from what I see, is that this particular discussion further "barometerizes" the climate of passion in the polarity of sentiment.  Perhaps this trolley-barn debate is (was?) well attended by the east, considering its location.  The event might have been better served had the MTA provided multiple shuttle arrangements from LP Field via Gateway Bridge, rather than for people to have to clog up an already snailed-paced 3-lane  1^st /Hermitage Ave.

[rookzie]

Now chew on this:

 

 

[from Mid-Tenn. RTA Web site:  http://www.rtarelaxandride.com/pdf_News/n232.pdf, 2014-0213]

MTA/RTA CEO Paul J. Ballard accepts Dallas/Fort Worth position

Paul J. Ballard, chief executive officer of the Nashville MTA and Regional Transportation Authority of Middle Tennessee, is leaving the MTA to become president and CEO of the Fort Worth Transportation Authority.   

“My recruitment by Fort Worth was an unexpected career opportunity with the challenge of starting a new commuter rail line while growing ridership on an already thriving transit system with dedicated funding,” Ballard said. “The Dallas/ Fort Worth area is one of the largest urbanized areas in the U.S. and they are initiating some significant changes in which I will enjoy participating.” 

Ballard said it was a tough decision to leave a growing and vibrant city such as Nashville with the tremendous progress that has been made.

 

 

Another chapter closes in transition to another.  Interesting to watch at ring-side the next event....

 

-=ricky-roox=-

[MLBrumby]

Can't blame the guy... to chose between a city that can't even get consensus on a glorified bus or a city that is embracing its inevitable urban structure with light rail transit.  Geesh, all career choices should be so easy. His statement does (more than a little) stick it back in the face of Nashville's tepid steps at "mass transit". Sorry, but I will never understand messing up West End in such a linear fashion as the city's introduction to rapid transit. 

Edited February 13, 2014 by MLBrumby

[nashvylle]

These people are such clowns. Jim Tracy gets an amendment to stop state funding for The Amp, and what do you know, Lee Beaman donated to his reelection campaign....

 

Tracy even was quoted to say "highways build the economy". Tennessee has enough highways.

Ramsey was quoted to say "Nashville is not ready for a METRO anything"...

 

Tracy and Ramsey have lost my vote. Harwell is very close.

 

http://nashvillepost.com/blogs/postpolitics/2014/2/13/ramsey_not_this_year_for_amp_funding

[UTgrad09]

I'm not surprised that the state isn't jumping on the Amp bandwagon, but I really dislike that it's not just that they don't support it, but seem to be completely against it.

 

Honestly, what business does a Shelbyville Senator have in determining what the infrastructure needs of a city like Nashville are?

 

What does the amendment accomplish? What is so dangerous about mass transit that you can't even discuss it, but just block any sort of state funding?

 

This isn't shocking or anything, but it seems to me that if we are going to get this done, we will have to figure that there will be no state support at all.

 

That sort of funding gap is one of the reasons why I wish Dean wasn't pushing all of his other pet projects. If we shifted the focus towards mass transit, we might actually get some headway.

[samsonh]

Best legislature in the nation guys!!

[BnaBreaker]

Disgusting. Honestly, I'm sorry, but this is what you get when you have a state legislature that is so unabashedly, extremely conservative. Note that I'm not by any means saying there aren't other potential problems that could arise with one that goes to the opposite extreme, or that all conservative principles are bad by any stretch.  But when things like funding education and public transit are put on the back burner behind passing amendments to ban the teaching of evolution and banning gay atheists from getting gun licenses (sarcasm), then you know it's too far to one extreme.  Basically what I'm saying is that there needs to be a balance, so neither extreme feels that they can get away with things like this without push-back. 

Edited February 14, 2014 by BnaBreaker

[fieldmarshaldj]

The question here is WHOM is going to be paying for this ? If it is state taxpayers and you're a fiscal Conservative, you trying selling that to your constituents (whom already believe are overtaxed) when they live far away from Nashville. Even if it were just exclusively Davidson County taxpayers, you have divisions here. I'm not sold on it myself.

I'd love to have trains, trolleys, you name it. Bring 'em all back. But you just tell me precisely how you're going to pay for it all (nevermind if it is worth the cost, or if there will be enough users to justify it).

[UTgrad09]

The question here is WHOM is going to be paying for this ? If it is state taxpayers and you're a fiscal Conservative, you trying selling that to your constituents (whom already believe are overtaxed) when they live far away from Nashville. Even if it were just exclusively Davidson County taxpayers, you have divisions here. I'm not sold on it myself.

I'd love to have trains, trolleys, you name it. Bring 'em all back. But you just tell me precisely how you're going to pay for it all (nevermind if it is worth the cost, or if there will be enough users to justify it).

 

 

For the folks elsewhere in the state, perhaps they could take a step back and realize that Davidson County is one of the few counties in the state that contributes more to the state tax coffers than it takes away. The problem with the spending argument is that it can be applied to every county and city across the state.

 

Why should Chattanoogans have paid for State Route 840? Why should Knoxvillians have paid for State Route 385 (Memphis bypass)? Why should Nashvillians pay for various rural highways to be widened? 

 

I don't see why there is a separation in ideology between spending on highways and public transit. Why do we consider them to be separate? Are they both not related to transit infrastructure? 

 

For some reason, the elected officials seem to be convinced that highways are always the solution (widening or building them). But it's getting to the point where investing in new or wider highways in Nashville will cost far more money than any positive effect it will bring. How many lanes wide will I-24 have to be before it becomes more expensive than building a commuter rail line? How do you address increasing traffic on our cramped secondary corridors when it isn't feasible to increase the ROW?

 

So when you say "who is going to pay for it?" I say the highway fund! Why isn't all transportation funding in the same pool?

[rookzie]

I'm not surprised that the state isn't jumping on the Amp bandwagon, but I really dislike that it's not just that they don't support it, but seem to be completely against it.

 

Honestly, what business does a Shelbyville Senator have in determining what the infrastructure needs of a city like Nashville are?

 

What does the amendment accomplish? What is so dangerous about mass transit that you can't even discuss it, but just block any sort of state funding?

 

This isn't shocking or anything, but it seems to me that if we are going to get this done, we will have to figure that there will be no state support at all.

 

That sort of funding gap is one of the reasons why I wish Dean wasn't pushing all of his other pet projects. If we shifted the focus towards mass transit, we might actually get some headway.

 

Dean shot himself in the foot, if not having driven nails in the coffin, by not having pursued initially announce ambitions to develop a dedicated BRT along Gallatin Road during 2009, the year that those new articulateds started to arrive from NABI of Anniston, Ala. as part of the BRT-lite start-up.  Dean then had proposed working on acquiring r.o.w. along that path for eventual dedicated-lane operation and ultimately transitioning to LRT.

 

If was as if he had dropped the "sweet grapes" already in his mouth at that time, for sweeter ones along the way (MCCntr, et.al.) and then found out that the dropped ones had soured (or rottened) upon return.  This not to say the the MCC was not a fruitful one (as if has started to become a viable asset), along with the hurried-through Ballpark of late, but with too many "pet puppies" in the litter, there simply may not have been enough "milk" to nurse 'em all to health.

 

Since nashvylle brought up the article on Tracy and Ramsey, there is a rather in-depth blog on a related article

http://nashvillepost.com/blogs/postpolitics/2014/2/12/tracy_derails_state_funding_for_the_amp

While it neither justifies nor vindicates any state action action in this "theater", it does provide s parallel level of profundity of what many of you guys of this forum have show-cased for or against the project.  Some points actually may be deemed as thought provoking, although as a whole the comments are a reflection of the ongoing town-meeting debates.

 

 

-=ricky-roox=-

[RandomHero]

I would be more upset about this if I felt I was going to use the proposed service more. As I sit now I'm 30 feet from the route but I just don't imagine I'd use it all that much. It could be nice occasionally but it just doesn't jump off the page as an obvious winner. I've always been a bit underwhelmed by the proposal, maybe something better will come of this.

 

That being said it is a pretty sad display that someone had to pass an amendment outlawing funding for it. If they didn't want to fund it just vote against that funding when that time comes.  

[UTgrad09]

I've always been a bit underwhelmed by the proposal, maybe something better will come of this.

 

I'm certainly not overwhelmed or even totally satisfied with the proposal, but I think the important thing to me is that it is a starting point.

 

My fear is that, despite Ron Ramsey's comment of 'another year isn't going to make a difference' (paraphrasing) is how long will this opposition to public transit continue? Will something better come? Possibly. I hope so. Or will something better come, only to be received in the same fashion by the state?

 

I'm not crazy about, but certainly not opposed to moving forward without any state assistance, but I get the feeling that we are getting used. Nashville (fairly enough, the whole metro) is what is driving this state's growth right now. We are the premier city in the state, and we are at a point where we can rise so much higher, but sometimes I feel like the state officials are not riding the same wavelength. I don't think they are deliberately trying to sabotage anything, but I don't think they know what is best for Nashville. And with the current state of affairs in Tennessee, they need Nashville to continue to be strong.

[RandomHero]

I'm certainly not overwhelmed or even totally satisfied with the proposal, but I think the important thing to me is that it is a starting point.

 

 

I actually had the opposite thought. If this got built and was only so-so that might hurt the chances of future transit projects. I would prefer the first major attempt to be something more of a can't miss.Not that I know what that is but I don't think it's the AMP.

[fieldmarshaldj]

For the folks elsewhere in the state, perhaps they could take a step back and realize that Davidson County is one of the few counties in the state that contributes more to the state tax coffers than it takes away. The problem with the spending argument is that it can be applied to every county and city across the state.

 

Why should Chattanoogans have paid for State Route 840? Why should Knoxvillians have paid for State Route 385 (Memphis bypass)? Why should Nashvillians pay for various rural highways to be widened? 

 

I don't see why there is a separation in ideology between spending on highways and public transit. Why do we consider them to be separate? Are they both not related to transit infrastructure? 

 

For some reason, the elected officials seem to be convinced that highways are always the solution (widening or building them). But it's getting to the point where investing in new or wider highways in Nashville will cost far more money than any positive effect it will bring. How many lanes wide will I-24 have to be before it becomes more expensive than building a commuter rail line? How do you address increasing traffic on our cramped secondary corridors when it isn't feasible to increase the ROW?

 

So when you say "who is going to pay for it?" I say the highway fund! Why isn't all transportation funding in the same pool?

It matters little to someone elsewhere which county puts more into the coffers (except to the ones putting in more money, of course). The AMP is NOT a necessity, it is a want. You're not going to be able to sell that to the residents of Shelbyville. Yes, you can make the similar argument as to why Nashville residents should not be footing the bill for a 4-lane highway from Bumblefart to Gobbler's Knob.

Since many on the left tend to reside in cities, their interests tend to lean more towards public transit, which is not an inexpensive prospect. As a result, they tend to be anti-car and prefer coercive policies to get people out of their cars (such as drastically increasing the price of gas and opposing drilling). But again, with the exception of a handful of cities, you don't have enough density to justify the costs of such projects. Most people prefer to use their cars to get where they need to go and don't want to wait on the bus/trolley/train, et al. You're never going to get more than a fraction of folks to favor the latter with their transportation needs at present.

Unless you get overwhelming numbers of people to densely re-pack cities again, big and small, (as they used to be until the 1950s) which would justify an emphasis on public transportation spending locally, highways will remain the top need and priority. The AMP, again, will just be an expensive "want."

[Paramount747]

It matters little to someone elsewhere which county puts more into the coffers (except to the ones putting in more money, of course). The AMP is NOT a necessity, it is a want. You're not going to be able to sell that to the residents of Shelbyville. Yes, you can make the similar argument as to why Nashville residents should not be footing the bill for a 4-lane highway from Bumblefart to Gobbler's Knob.

Since many on the left tend to reside in cities, their interests tend to lean more towards public transit, which is not an inexpensive prospect. As a result, they tend to be anti-car and prefer coercive policies to get people out of their cars (such as drastically increasing the price of gas and opposing drilling). But again, with the exception of a handful of cities, you don't have enough density to justify the costs of such projects. Most people prefer to use their cars to get where they need to go and don't want to wait on the bus/trolley/train, et al. You're never going to get more than a fraction of folks to favor the latter with their transportation needs at present.

Unless you get overwhelming numbers of people to densely re-pack cities again, big and small, (as they used to be until the 1950s) which would justify an emphasis on public transportation spending locally, highways will remain the top need and priority. The AMP, again, will just be an expensive "want."

I am one of those on the left, and I would love to have a modern mass transit system. It is funny though that you make this a political argument. When I spent time in The UK or Canada, everyone of every income and political persuasion rode public transportation. Simply put, cars are just part of that fallacy of the American Dream which is baseball,  apple pie, grandma, the suburban house,  the white picket fence, a dog, 2.5 kids, and the big car in the driveway.

 

That is a dream I want no part of. I want dense, rich, vibrant, diverse cities the way civilizations were designed to be with interdependency, cooperation, and self actualization.

 

The AMP is not a want, but a need, and it is understandable that a Tea Party guy like yourself Davy would be against the AMP. The Tea Party would be against a vaccine to fight the plague if the rich were taxed too much to pay for it!

 

Love you my brother, but although some of your argument has merit,  it is old school thinking. The car will be gone in 30-50 years. It is an unsustainable model. It is a rotary dial phone doomed to failure. The next car, if you will, is a product like the Google car. I just don't understand America's love for the automobile. I just don't get why we put up with traffic, car repairs, car insurance, and all the other issues surrounding cars.

[UTgrad09]

It matters little to someone elsewhere which county puts more into the coffers (except to the ones putting in more money, of course). The AMP is NOT a necessity, it is a want. You're not going to be able to sell that to the residents of Shelbyville. Yes, you can make the similar argument as to why Nashville residents should not be footing the bill for a 4-lane highway from Bumblefart to Gobbler's Knob.

 

The Amp itself may not be a necessity, but mass transit most certainly is. Nashville is reaching the size where the practicality of every resident in the metro driving their car to everything. I myself have noticed a considerable increase in travel time to certain locations.

 

Why in the hell should it matter if we can sell it to Shelbyville? Should Shelbyville have to sell us on every transportation project they propose? That's a pointless way of looking at things, because if that was the M.O., then absolutely nothing would get done in this state.

 

 

I guess they might take notice when it starts taking an hour and a half to get here from there...

[fieldmarshaldj]

I am one of those on the left, and I would love to have a modern mass transit system. It is funny though that you make this a political argument. When I spent time in The UK or Canada, everyone of every income and political persuasion rode public transportation. Simply put, cars are just part of that fallacy of the American Dream which is baseball,  apple pie, grandma, the suburban house,  the white picket fence, a dog, 2.5 kids, and the big car in the driveway.

 

That is a dream I want no part of. I want dense, rich, vibrant, diverse cities the way civilizations were designed to be with interdependency, cooperation, and self actualization.

 

The AMP is not a want, but a need, and it is understandable that a Tea Party guy like yourself Davy would be against the AMP. The Tea Party would be against a vaccine to fight the plague if the rich were taxed too much to pay for it!

 

Love you my brother, but although some of your argument has merit,  it is old school thinking. The car will be gone in 30-50 years. It is an unsustainable model. It is a rotary dial phone doomed to failure. The next car, if you will, is a product like the Google car. I just don't understand America's love for the automobile. I just don't get why we put up with traffic, car repairs, car insurance, and all the other issues surrounding cars.

It is a political argument. Almost everything is these days, even paper vs. plastic and lightbulbs. As I must remind, Canada and the UK is not the U.S. I also viscerally disagree that the automobile is a "fallacy of the American dream." It is indeed the very symbol of independence and individualism, two things that are the enemy of the left, which believes all rights flow from government rather than from God.

The kind of city you want is utopian, pie in the sky fantasy. How many times must Socialism be tried before it is finally declared the unequaled failure that it has proven itself to be ? I learned that as a child, one reason I left that silly ideology behind.

Look, I have no problem if you want to build the AMP, trains, trolleys, aerial tram cars, monorails, even Star Trek transporters if you want, so long as you folks are willing to pay for it (or find a way to make it financially sustainable). Until such time, cars will remain the premier transport model and where the majority of funds must be spent. I know you don't like that, but that's just how it is. Claiming the car will be gone in 30 years is also silly. How do you think people will get around ? Horse and buggy ? The new Communist Mayor of New York City got rid of that. 30 more years of that ideology in this country and we'll be Bartertown.

Anyway, you'll be happy to know that I favor 100% taxation on all of those of the liberal bent on incomes over $100,000. It's expensive to pay for big government and Socialists need to pay up, especially since they made it and that $17 trillion debt. :-) (No, I'm not joking)

And now we rejoin the AMP debate, already in progress...

Edited February 14, 2014 by fieldmarshaldj

[fieldmarshaldj]

The Amp itself may not be a necessity, but mass transit most certainly is. Nashville is reaching the size where the practicality of every resident in the metro driving their car to everything. I myself have noticed a considerable increase in travel time to certain locations.

 

Why in the hell should it matter if we can sell it to Shelbyville? Should Shelbyville have to sell us on every transportation project they propose? That's a pointless way of looking at things, because if that was the M.O., then absolutely nothing would get done in this state.

 

 

I guess they might take notice when it starts taking an hour and a half to get here from there...

Building the AMP won't change that time for probably 99% of county residents, either. Won't it even be shrinking the number of lanes where it is built, hence increasing congestion and the time it takes to get through that area ?

As for "nothing getting done", right now a large number of Americans would like that precisely from government. Stopping the rush to spending madness and control over every aspect of our lives. If anything, we need to roll it all back 100 years.

[UTgrad09]

Look, I have no problem if you want to build the AMP, trains, trolleys, aerial tram cars, monorails, even Star Trek transporters if you want, so long as you folks are willing to pay for it (or find a way to make it financially sustainable). Until such time, cars will remain the premier transport model and where the majority of funds must be spent. 

 

Are all road projects built in this state financially sustainable? 

 

Does that road to Bumblefart pay for itself?