Is This Atlanta Streetcar 'The Worst Transit Project of All Time'?
Transit ridership, especially rail, has collapsed post-pandemic, but the Atlanta BeltLine Coalition says now is the time to take federal dollars and build a $2.5 billion streetcar.
HD DownloadTwenty-three years ago, Atlanta-native and architecture and urban planning student Ryan Gravel had an experience that opened his mind to what urban living could be.
"My senior year I spent abroad in Paris and lived without a car for a year and traveled by train everywhere," says Gravel. "And within a month of arriving, I had lost 15 pounds. I was in the best shape of my life because I was walking everywhere, and the role of the physical city was made clear to me in a way it really had never been before."
For his Georgia Tech master's thesis, Gravel sketched out a plan to make Atlanta more like Paris. He proposed redeveloping the land along the city's historic rail lines to create a 22-mile loop called the Atlanta BeltLine. He proposed turning the city's abandoned industrial areas and single-family home neighborhoods into business districts and walking trails. And he proposed connecting downtown to the rest of the city all with a new train running along the entire Atlanta BeltLine.
"I never imagined we would actually do it," says Gravel.
But they did—for the most part. Cathy Woolard, who was president of the Atlanta City Council, read Gravel's thesis and decided to use it as a blueprint to remake much of the city. Today, the Atlanta BeltLine is a walking and biking trail, parts of which are bordered by retail and condos.
But one piece of Gravel's grand vision didn't get built: The train.
Today, Gravel runs a co-working and event space along the BeltLine, which also serves as a gathering place for urbanists interested in making Atlanta less dependent on cars. He says that the train line is essential for improving city life.
"In those early days, when we built the movement behind the [BeltLine] project, it was around transit," says Gravel.
The three COVID relief bills set aside $69 billion in federal funding for local transit agencies to operate and add to their transportation systems, meaning that Atlanta might finally get its train—with many American taxpayers who will never step foot on it picking up much of the tab.
Many American cities have used federal money in the past to build rail transit lines that suffer from dismal ridership, that are expensive to maintain, and that are a major drain on their budgets.
Buses don't have the aesthetic appeal of trains and don't evoke the dense, pre-automobile, 19th-century aesthetic that many urbanists romanticize. But they're far less costly and more convenient, and commuters generally prioritize modes of transit that get them from point A to point B with the least hassle. The sharp decline in the number of workers showing up at an office every day post-pandemic makes building commuter rail an even worse use of public funds, says Baruch Feigenbaum, senior managing director of transportation policy at Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes Reason TV and Reason magazine.
"There's been a major change that we've really not seen since pre-World War II days. And that change is overwhelmingly negative for transit, especially rail transit," says Feigenbaum.
Eleven years ago, Feigenbaum wrote that the proposed BeltLine train was "possibly the worst transit project of all time."
"I think it's amazingly still true. And the reason I say that is because it's very expensive, and it doesn't connect people from point A to point B," says Feigenbaum. "A lot of politicians like rail because they say it's permanent, and we can't change it. That's true. But sometimes you want to change it."
Gravel says that the emergence of restaurants and the thriving Ponce City Market along the BeltLine demonstrates that when you build new permanent infrastructure, commerce gravitates to it.
"Ponce City Market is a major destination," says Gravel. "All these buildings being built across the way [are] some of the best architecture in the city… some of the best companies to work for. You know why? Because of the BeltLine. They're there for other reasons, but also the BeltLine. We're building a future city, and look at it proven by the last 22 years."
Matthew Rao, the chair of BeltLine Rail Now, a group of activists pushing for the completion of Gravel's vision, says that the "best time to build transit was 10 years ago" and "the next best time is now."
"Because it's never getting less expensive," says Rao. "We're talking about one-time investments in the life of the city."
But rail isn't really a one-time investment. While Rao's coalition wants the federal government to foot much of their project's $2.5 billion bill for rail construction, local taxpayers are usually responsible for the majority of operating costs for all forms of transit. In 2020, transit fares for light rail and streetcars covered about 14 percent of operating costs nationwide.
In that sense, getting federal dollars to build rail is kind of like being gifted a swimming pool you barely use and then being left to cover the maintenance costs. It might have sounded like a good idea.
There is some local enthusiasm for the rail project. Atlanta voters approved a half-cent sales tax in 2016 that, in part, was supposed to fund the construction of the BeltLine rail. But the city's public transit agency, known as MARTA, has been using much of that funding instead to improve current operations, especially bus service. The agency's most recent analysis projected that it would cost an estimated $287 million to $448 million to build just the first three miles of track. That's up from $172 million, which was the estimated cost just three years ago.
MARTA's leadership wants Atlanta to emulate the bus service in cities like Los Angeles that have dedicated bus lanes and synchronized stop lights to minimize traffic. Bus lanes cost far less to maintain than rail, and their routes are modified if demand rises or falls. MARTA has determined that people who can't afford cars would benefit more from improved bus service than a new rail line.
"There's nothing wrong with buses," says Rao. "Buses are the core of any city's mass transit system. What we're talking about here [with the BeltLine rail] is a different kind of project that is higher in capacity and creates a beautiful place for everyone in the city to access."
But Atlanta residents don't have to look far for an example of a rail line that didn't live up to its promise. The city already has a streetcar. Its average speed is about 5 miles per hour—about the same speed as the horse-drawn railways that crisscrossed cities, including Atlanta, in the 19th century. The street car stops every quarter mile. Fewer than 1,000 people ride the street car daily in a city 500 times that size, though rail advocates believe MARTA's recently announced plans to connect the streetcar to the BeltLine will increase ridership. The little-used Atlanta streetcar cost more than $52 million per mile to build in 2013.
But Rao says the BeltLine project is different.
"We'll be the first city and only city in the world to have this multipurpose trail, this greenway, and the transit within it connecting to our existing heavy rail system."
But the project is a long way from completing even its beginning stages, much less building connections to Atlanta's heavy rail system. Even if ground broke tomorrow, MARTA estimates it could take five years to complete just the first mile and a half of track.
And there's a good chance that transit ridership will never fully come back post-pandemic because so many fewer people are commuting to jobs. Even in New York City paid bus and subway ridership was only at 55 percent of its pre-pandemic levels, according to a July Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) report. In February, MTA began capping fares for bus and subway riders and has seen a rise in ridership this summer.
Nationwide transit ridership is at about 60 percent of what it was before COVID. Rail transit nationwide has taken a particularly bad hit, with ridership decreasing by about 50 percent between 2011 and 2020, while non-rail transit decreased by about 30 percent.
That trend applies in Atlanta, where MARTA's bus ridership decreased by 39 percent post-COVID and rail decreased by about 62 percent.
Before COVID, only 5 percent of Americans' working days were spent at home. Researchers at Stanford University analyzed poll data and concluded that now about half of Americans work at home at least once a week and about a quarter are fully remote.
The pandemic also accelerated the decade-long trend of Americans moving from cities to lower-density suburbs, including in the area surrounding the city of Atlanta, which saw population loss in its urban core for the first time in a decade between 2020 and 2021.
Rao says it's just a blip and believes that the half-mile-wide transit corridor in which the BeltLine is located will contain up to 25 percent of the population of the city by 2050.
"And that kind of density will only work sustainably if we provide the transit," says Rao.
Gravel says that downtown Atlanta is "booming" and that the rise of remote work actually brightens its prospects.
"If you can telework, you have more options," says Gravel. "I know it's surprising for a lot of people, but people do want to be downtown. They want to be on the BeltLine."
It's true that the Ponce City Market portion of the BeltLine along which Gravel's venue sits is a popular destination. However, much of the 22-mile loop is still an urban nature trail with little but single-family homes surrounding it: a nice amenity, but not a highly trafficked destination packed with commerce and dense housing.
Gravel's master's thesis opens with a history of Atlanta transit, pointing out that streetcars were profitable in many American cities before they were displaced by roads and cars. But he says that building a privately funded streetcar today would come with tradeoffs like accessibility for lower-income riders.
"I think there's a shared good that comes with public investment in transit," says Gravel. "There are things that are good for all of us that we should be investing in collectively. And we'll get more if we do it that way. If we expect a private company to do it… It can happen, but it comes with certain kinds of compromises and caveats."
It wasn't always the case that privately funded rail was a rarity. In the 19th century, many urban transit systems were privately owned and operated. Companies would sometimes lose money at the fare box to encourage ridership but make it back by speculating in land that increased in value because of the new train station. When local governments did build infrastructure, they would sometimes pay for it by levying special assessments on land owners who benefited.
Rao's coalition is proposing just such a special levy along the BeltLine, but it would cover just 10 percent of the projected $2.5 billion construction cost. Federal taxpayers would foot 40 percent of the bill. If the local stakeholders who stand to benefit from increased property values had to foot more of the bill, maybe they would think twice.
While both rail and city buses consistently lose money, buses that move people between cities are still privately owned and operated at a profit. Amtrak, on the other hand, loses close to a billion dollars annually and relies on federal subsidies.
Feigenbaum says politicians seem to care less about whether transportation projects are best serving their constituents and much more about the spectacle.
"If I'm a politician and I'm running for reelection, I get to go to a ribbon-cutting ceremony and say, 'I did this,'" says Feigenbaum. "Whereas, if you're talking about operations or improving service—for lower-income folks, especially—that's not a politically connected group. And so, politicians don't really care."
Atlanta's rail advocates say that MARTA's decision to allocate the money from the tax levy on improving bus operations defies the will of voters.
"What we are about is making sure there's transparency and accountability with what our public officials and public institutions are doing with the money that we're giving them to achieve an outcome," says Rao. "And if the money was going to be used on the front end, primarily for operations and service extensions, everyone should have known that."
But Feigenbaum points out that voters approved a package that included funding the BeltLine rail but also increasing bus service and improving technology on existing rail lines, and they did so several years before the pandemic hit.
"MARTA didn't know that COVID-19 was going happen, and they certainly could not have projected what changes were going to happen as a result of that," says Feigenbaum.
The two COVID relief bills—one signed by former President Donald Trump and the other by President Joe Biden—sent $69 billion in additional funding to America's transit agencies at a time when ridership is falling. While the Biden administration is keen to direct money to rail projects like the one on the BeltLine, Feigenbaum says transit should cater to what customers want, which is fast and convenient point-to-point mobility, and that accomplishing that requires a different approach.
"[It's time for] reimagining what transit is. It's not just an agency. It's services that are provided to your customers," says Feigenbaum, who recommends more emphasis on ride-share technology, "microtransit" that operates on demand and doesn't follow a fixed route, and vanpools.
Paris' walkability is what first inspired Ryan Gravel to reimagine the Atlanta cityscape in the late 90s. Today, Feigenbaum suggests looking to France, which has privatized much of its transit, for a different lesson about mobility.
"I think this is the time we need to start asking those questions because in the wake of COVID, we're not gonna get back to the ridership we had in 2019, and the ridership we had in 2019 wasn't that great," says Feigenbaum.
Gravel says that although he was inspired by Paris, it's obvious that "Atlanta's not Paris" and that the city must grow "into the best version of itself."
"Atlanta's history is railroads," says Gravel. "Its future is also railroads."
MARTA still hasn't committed to building rail on the BeltLine and says the issue still needs two more years of study before the board can vote on it. The rail advocates we spoke to worry that by then it will be too late to qualify for federal funding for a project that's taken more than 20 years already.
Gravel is right that rail lines were good for American cities because they were heavily used and often profitable. But what are the chances that today, a project expected from the outset to operate at a loss during a period of declining rail transit use and that depends on over $100 million in federal subsidies is going to be something that the commuters of Atlanta will actually use?
Produced by Zach Weissmueller; edited by Danielle Thompson; additional graphics by Isaac Reese; camera by David Lyman; production assistance by Addie Mae.
Music: "Sur Le Manège" by Francesco D'Andrea via Artlist; "Poligon" by Crazy Paris via Artlist; "XIII" by Angel Salazar via Artlist; "Manhattan" by Will Van De Crommert via Artlist; "Blink: by Swirling Ship via Artlist; "Sunrise City" by Sebastian Borromeo via Artlist; "Cold War" by Maya Pacziga via Artlist; "cdHiddenDir" by Out of Flux via Artlist; "Attracting Drama" by Rhythm Scott via Artlist; "Always Ready" by Rhythm Scott via Artlist; "The Woodworks" by Jacob Kinstle via Artlist; "Happy on My Own" by Kyle Cox via Artlist
Photos: null/Newscom; Walter Bibikow / DanitaDelimont.com / Danita Delimont Photography/Newscom; DPST/Newscom; Boston Public Library, CC BY 2.0., Via Wikimedia Commons; Abaca Press/Gripas Yuri/Abaca/Sipa USA/Newscom; Richard B. Levine/Newscom; Michael Ho Wai Lee / SOPA Images/Newscom; Michael Ho Wai Lee / SOPA Images/Newscom; Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom; Kent D. Johnson/TNS/Newscom; Vittorio Sciosia/Newscom; Gabriele Holtermann-Gorden/Sipa/Newscom; Josep Suria/Westend61 GmbH/Newscom; Eugenio Marongiu/Westend61 GmbH/Newscom; William Perugini/Westend61 GmbH/Newscom; Rod Lamkey - CNP/Newscom; CNP/AdMedia/Newscom; CNP/AdMedia/Newscom; Rod Lamkey - CNP/picture alliance / Consolidated News Photos/Newscom; TIM SHAFFER/KRT/Newscom; Scott J. Ferrell/Congressional Quarterly/Newscom; Bill Clark/Roll Call Photos/Newscom; TOM GRALISH/MCT/Newscom; Pool/TNS/Newscom; Doug Mills - Pool via CNP/Newscom; Lev Radin/Pacific Press/Newscom; CNP/AdMedia/Newscom; Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA/Newscom; Walter P. Reuther Library/Wayne State University; Aysegul Akturk, Alex Fox, Ivana Rosas, Carrie Sauer, and Manali Sheth; Harris & Ewing Collection, Library of Congress; Detroit Publishing Company, Library of Congress
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Many of democrat talking points seem to come from graduate students with no real world experience and vague dreams. The talking point that red states are takers than leftists use constantly also came from a graduate student and is repeated constantly despite the issues and errors having been pointed out for a decade now (such as not removing SS and Medicare as retirees move to areas w lower cost of living post retirement).
Liberals prefer undeveloped talking points over actual throwing analysis and thought. See Mike and Jeff as examples. As long as something sounds plausible and matches first impressions it becomes their deep established fact base.
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, [aso-05] I found this employment online and I was able to start working from home right away. This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
EXTRA DETAILS HERE:>>> https://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
What is it with central planners and their choo choos?
Not the train but the track it runs on? CPs can't plan for you turning right when you should've made a left, but a train's tracks grant them that control .
Not only that, but a bus line on an existing road is invisible except when a bus is coming thru, while a rail line is a permanently visible legacy of someone's planning and clout. However, so is new road construction, though not as distinctively.
We are adding bus lane only lanes to our streets (in MT)....never underestimate the lollipop dreams.
I've always suspected that buses and trains cause more traffic congestion than they prevent, at least outside of downtown urban cores. I typically see them driving around mostly empty, holding up traffic .
Trains make people adapt to the planners' intentions. They have fixed lines to pick up commuters where the stations are placed and drop them off at another station. Busses can change routes and adapt to what commuters want.
So no contest.
This really stupid Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism pipe dream basically revolves around the idea that EV and public transport in First World nations will be this seamlessly integrated system that will "democratize" transportation and prevent the planet from basting us like a turkey.
Like all marxist-inspired pipe dreams, it has no connection to reality or how human beings actually interact. It's a bunch of overeducated, underdeveloped children who think real life is like SimCity.
It's connected to the reality of a much richer world, which eventually we'll have. Yes, some day you won't need to own a vehicle because there'll be so many automated flying taxis circulating that there'll be no waiting for them. However, that's if teleportation doesn't become feasible sooner.
How great would that be? Everyone could take their own flying conveyance to the obstacle golf course.
"What is it with central planners and their choo choos?"
Energy efficiency. Meters/Joules. Trains will continue to play a part as long as engineers (both kinds) have a role in central planning. Replace those engineers with lawyers and economists, and roads will take priority.
No. Light rail is less efficient than buses and cars. Progressives don't give a toss about efficiency, only about control.
"No. Light rail is less efficient than buses and cars. Progressives don’t give a toss about efficiency, only about control."
Energy efficiency, Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf, energy efficiency. Meters/joules. Progressives caring or not caring doesn't change that.
No, rail freight is more efficient. Passenger rail is terribly inefficient.
"Passenger rail is terribly inefficient."
Really? You ought to try living in a city with a subway. I've lived in several and I found it a terribly efficient way to get around.
Your anecdote trumps real massive datasets? Of course it does.
It trumps your feeble equivocations. That's all that counts here.
Ah, mtrueman. Hadn't noticed, should have expected it.
Progressives are to business people as astrologers are to engineers. Love to bark orders like Hollywood business people, as if that is how real business people operate. Just as astrologers think books full of formulas and tables are a substitute for a real engineering education.
Efficiency my ass. As if any politician even understands the concept. The greenies are a lesson in inefficiency any time you want to look at them.
"Efficiency my ass. "
Energy efficiency, Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf, energy efficiency. Meters/joules.
No, only rail freight is more efficient. Passenger rail is a disaster in every way. It only flourished until airliners displaced it.
"Passenger rail is a disaster in every way."
I've always enjoyed travel by rail. Much more pleasant than bus travel. My favorite mode of transport is by boat. Maybe a journey on a dirigible would be better, but I've never taken one.
I thought efficiency was the only thing that mattered. Ah yes, here it is:
"I thought efficiency was the only thing that mattered. "
Energy matters. Didn't Einstein prove that?
They're just so much like cattle cars.
They despise independence of every kind. You will ride their trains instead of driving yourself. Buses are a poor substitute because people can whine and complain and get routes changed.
Seriously, look at everything Progressives want, and you will notice less independence and more dependence on the State.
(1) They provide large number of government jobs, which translate into a reliable pool of leftist voters.
(2) They can be used to induce people to abandon their cars, which allows government to control when and where people travel.
"They can be used to induce people to abandon their cars, which allows government to control when and where people travel."
You mean government control like forcing people to sit exams to pass a driving test, and line up at a soulless government building to pay for a driver's license? Or laws requiring drivers to carry insurance? Or enforcing speed limits, vehicle safety regulations? That kind of government control?
Yes, we all know what a dumb statist you are. No need to prove it over and over.
"Yes, we all know what a dumb statist you are."
I'm not the one celebrating the government control over all things auto.
No, you're the one who asks questions that either indicate that you are deeply dishonest or that you are profoundly dumb. Which is it?
Both of course, what a rhetorical question 🙂
No, not like that at all. A driver's license or an insurance requirement don't control "when and where I travel". Furthermore, many people simply ignore those requirements when they drive cars. When people have cars, government has a hard time controlling who travels or where they travel.
With trains and public transit, government can shut down travel instantly for anybody and any routes. That is, if the train doesn't go or you aren't let on the train, you can't travel.
That's why authoritarians prefer trains over cars.
This sound really stupid to me. Like that would ever happen.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/1/18246297/china-transportation-people-banned-poor-social-credit-planes-trains-2018
You're just making shit up.
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/government/china-bans-people-with-low-social-credit-from-planes-and-trains/
It's worse than you imagine. The largest annual migration in human history takes place in China at and around Lunar New Year. People are packed like sardines in trains meant to transport cattle!
"A driver’s license or an insurance requirement don’t control “when and where I travel”.
You're a dishonest moron and probably a groomer and a communist to boot. Without the required government issued license, you can't legally drive anywhere at any time. Moron!
"With trains and public transit, government can shut down travel instantly for anybody and any routes."
You honestly think that roads cannot be blockaded by government or anyone else with a mind to do so? You are a communistic moron groomer who is dishonest to boot. I am sick of your lies and blathering.
That is correct. But if I have a license and insurance, the government cannot control specifically how I travel. Furthermore, if I have access to a car, I always have the option of driving illegally. With trains, the government can control for each individual when and where they can travel. That's because trains require individual tickets, sold for individual trips, and checked at each trip.
So, for example, the government can decide that the only trips you are allowed are commuting to/from work, perhaps in order to lower your carbon footprint, or as punishment for not toeing the uniparty line.
Government can block roads, but that difficult and not very effective, compared to simply shutting down train lines or refusing to let individuals board trains.
Those accusations are quite funny. Tell me more!
"But if I have a license and insurance,"
It means you are already under government control, just that you refuse to admit it or don't even realize it. Just the stance one would expect from an idiot groomer reactionary communist such as yourself.
"Government can block roads, but that difficult and not very effective, compared to simply shutting down train lines or refusing to let individuals board trains."
Absolute nonsense. Rails can be blockaded. So can roads, canals, airports, paths, ports and passageways.
They never got one when they were little, so this is them lashing out at the world. 😉
I don't know about worst of all time - the Titanic might have something to say about that.
"My senior year I spent abroad in Paris and lived without a car for a year and traveled by train everywhere," says Gravel. "And within a month of arriving, I had lost 15 pounds. I was in the best shape of my life because I was walking everywhere, and the role of the physical city was made clear to me in a way it really had never been before."
This is the problem-the expectation that your daily life should be like your vacation. People who actually live in Paris have to deal with the issues of public transit in the city-the noise, the inconvenience. If they don't own a car, they have to plan their shopping trips around a train or bus schedule and haul four bags of groceries at least a quarter mile from the transit stop to their lodging. They have to either clear out the homeless people who hang around rail transit or get rid of them. They have to deal with the local crazy who starts ranting at their kids inside the laundromat.
You stayed in a touristy area and visited touristy areas that had lots of tourist money to help support the infrastructure. It gets paid toward keeping the streets clean. The businesses, museums, and tourist destinations have a profit-interest in keeping things looking pleasant and inviting and clearing out the problems so that tourists have a pleasant experience. You want to live in a place where everyone is doing that for you. It doesn't work that way.
That was insightful and articulate. Thank you.
" If they don’t own a car, they have to plan their shopping trips around a train or bus schedule and haul four bags of groceries at least a quarter mile from the transit stop to their lodging."
Ever heard of bicycles?
https://www.archdaily.com/971436/paris-to-become-one-of-the-most-bike-friendly-city-in-the-world-by-2026
Apparently, the number of cyclists in Paris has almost doubled over the last few years.
Yeah, hauling groceries and other shopping purchases on bicycles in the rain or snow, or in hot weather, dealing with short winter days, and from one store to the next, is really practical on a bicycle. So is commuting to work for most people -- get there late and sweaty, a fine way to start the work day.
"Yeah, hauling groceries and other shopping purchases on bicycles in the rain or snow, or in hot weather, dealing with short winter days, and from one store to the next, is really practical on a bicycle."
Depends on the bicycle. If the bicycle is made for racing in the Tour de France, then using it for your daily shopping needs is impractical. A bicycle fitted out for shopping is what you are looking for.
Right. Because everyone wants to pedal a heavy bicycle in the rain or on hot days, everyone is capable of it, everyone has the time to waste, and everyone wants to visit a single store at a time instead of locking previous purchases in a trunk, and everyone wants to rely on bicycle locks for security, especially on their way back from work with a company laptop and confidential documents, or come home and go out again on multiple purchase trips.
What a fucking waste of time. Cars provide incredible productivity and flexibility, and you damned Progressives want to throw it all away for your mythical climate crisis and green wet dreams.
Fuck off, slaver. Get out in the real world.
"Because everyone wants to pedal a heavy bicycle in the rain or on hot days"
Everyone? Probably not. Parisians? Apparently yes.
"Cars provide incredible productivity and flexibility"
Enjoy your car while you can. It seems that self driving electric cars, owned by outfits like Google, are the way of the future.
Today, the city sees almost 1 million bike journeys on a daily basis without proper infrastructure to cater to this amount. The city's existing bike lanes are shared with cars and motorcycles, and are separated by paint markings on the road rather than actual physical barriers, which increases the risk of collision. The city has also promised to ensure the safety of pedestrians by reinforcing driving and road rules, and increasing the amount of police controls.
From the link you shared. There's a problem in that bicycles require their own infrastructure that needs to be maintained and they already don't have enough of it. You've got expand roads and devote extra space for bicyclers. And that's in addition to infrastructure you need for vehicle and rail traffic in a city like Paris.
And I'm back to the same point. When you're in Paris and you don't pay taxes there, you must find it pleasant to imagine how it's such a bike-friendly city. But there are costs associated with that. You're still stuck with the problem of wishing your daily life could be your vacation.
Ehh, tourists do pay taxes. Hotel prices include property taxes. I don't know how VAT refunds are handled for tourists, but I imagine every restaurant meal includes VAT, every taxi ride, bus and train ticket, tourist destination.
The question isn’t whether you pay some taxes, the question is whether you live in the kind of overall tax regime and society that is necessary to maintain European-style cities.
A European-style tax regime and European-style balanced budgets would mean huge tax increases on the lower 60% of income earners in the US. Living standards for “the poor” and the middle class in the US would have to decline dramatically. Not surprisingly, Americans aren’t voting for that.
Americans traveling in Europe experience the benefits of extremely high taxation on the general population while themselves generating their earnings in a relatively low tax country.
I was replying to this: "When you’re in Paris and you don’t pay taxes there". Too many people make that mistake, same with immigrants, who do pay property tax and sales tax.
First of all, legal immigrants pay all taxes Americans pay, so I don't know what you are getting at there.
Secondly, you are equivocating, misusing the term "paying taxes" as if it meant "paying taxes necessary to cover the services people receive". In fact, the majority of Americans at the same time "pay taxes" while still receiving more from the government than they pay.
The fact remains: Americans would not be willing to pay the kinds of taxes necessary to maintain American cities in the same style as Paris.
" There’s a problem in that bicycles require their own infrastructure that needs to be maintained and they already don’t have enough of it."
Why is that a problem for bicycles? Cars need infrastructure. Buses and trains, too. Even walking requires infrastructure. Yet for bicycles it's suddenly a problem.
"But there are costs associated with that. "
There are costs associated with everything. Not just bicycles.
The only costs you see are the ones you don't like.
Costs of duplicating roads, overpasses, tunnels? Invisible!
Costs of all the time and effort wasted on multiple slow bicycle trips? Invisible!
Costs for the elderly or parents with small children who can't make those bicycle trips? Invisible!
You are too cloistered.
"The only costs you see are the ones you don’t like."
There are costs associated with everything. Not only bicycles. You want to live in a city without costs? It doesn't exist. It's a matter of deciding which costs you are willing to pay, and it appears that, despite your disapproval, the people of Paris are opting for the costs of bicycles - rolled up pant legs, the pumps, the bells, the helmets, sun, clouds, rain, snow and hail.
The people of Paris aren't opting for anything; Paris and its infrastructure is heavily subsidized by the rest of France.
Paris has long been built out, too.
God help you if you try to add that infrastructure where I live and you need to buy some property for a right of way.
When you have a system where things build up around the rail lines and stops, putting in the rail or bike lanes, or whatever was done on relatively inexpensive empty land.
When you talk about retrofitting an already expensive city, including having to buy that expensive land... whoo baby does the price go up.
"The people of Paris aren’t opting for anything; Paris and its infrastructure is heavily subsidized by the rest of France."
The rest of France opted for the channel tunnel and the TGV, to name but two examples of extra Parisian rail infrastructure projects. Aside from that, what's your point?
The infrastructure for ICE automobiles is more than paid for through gas taxes.
Except in places, like San Francisco, where the city fathers and mothers go insane.
Is San Francisco still even a tourist destination? I don't know what the heck I'd actually go there to see or do, unless it's an NFL game.
That would be interesting to see, especially broken down by where tourists come from.
The NFL stadium is in Santa Clara, 50 miles south. You would fly to San Jose.
I lived in Paris for awhile. There was no mass transit for errands. Everything needed on a regular basis was within 1/4 mile of either work or home. I don't mean 1/4 mile in all directions where you might have to walk 2 miles to get everything. I mean 1/4 mile total walk. That sort of convenience is ILLEGAL to build anywhere in the US because there is no city where you can mix up commercial/residential zones like that. In the US, those zones are designed around cars as the ONLY possible way to get to the different zones.
For those trips that require car or mass transit, there is one huge difference between Europe and US. In the US, all mass transit nodes are surrounded by massive parking lots. So in effect the trips are from one parking zone to a second parking zone. Of course those will all fail as transit because those are not actual destinations or origins. Even if mass transit in a place like Paris is much more constipated by govt operations than in a place like Amsterdam where mass transit is far less dependent on govt operations and only relies on govt street design/engineering.
"In the US, all mass transit nodes are surrounded by massive parking lots."
I remember reading of the city of Phoenix, Arizona, now apparently the 5th largest city in the US by population. The writer said the city was little more than a series of interconnected parking lots.
"Amsterdam where mass transit is far less dependent on govt operations and only relies on govt street design/engineering."
Amsterdam even managed to build a subway, underground. Quite an achievement for a city situated below sea level.
No. It's the Loop Trolley in St. Louis.
I personally like the sleeping coyote on the Portland train.
https://reason.com/2022/01/05/st-louis-taxpayers-paid-a-lot-to-run-a-money-losing-streetcar-it-could-cost-them-even-more-to-shut-it-down/
On the plus side, so many people in St. Louis are so bad at street parking, that there were numerous incidents of the trolley hitting parked cars. Every time someone complained about that I got a good laugh. What's the trolley supposed to do, move over?
Same issues with the stupid DC trolley.
Passenger rail is always a boondoggle in the US esp if old rails have already been torn up.
But there is a serious problem for the future when public mobility options in the US are limited politically to a corrupt option for public sector unions or a corrupt option for single family homeowners
It's mostly a means for public officials to peacock about their "progressive" urban transit models with other public officials at national conventions and with sympathetic journalists, and provide a means to reward their politically connected buddies. They propose these projects because they get a lot of positive attention, even though study after study shows that expanding bus service would provide far more benefit for far more people. That's not as sexy or fluff their national profile as building a metro-area light rail system, though.
Denver's been held up in the national press as a model for a modern urban light rail system, but all the problems it has, and has had ever since Guide the Ride was proposed, are notably glossed over.
Don't even need to expand bus operations on the public dime. Create transit depots all over town where buses, vans , shuttles, taxis, etc can be known to load and unload. The only government role is similar to airports (before TSA shit) - lease loading and unloading slots and publish schedules. Let a thousand private operators choose routes, times, vehicle. That would work wonders.
San Francisco used to have excellent private jitneys, commercial vans operating at a profit, cheaper than the city buses, more reliable, faster, more flexible. The city literally couldn't tolerate the competition and banned them.
That is only competition if govt is trying to OPERATE the transit. There is no competition re depots/nodes. That's purely a land ownership function.
I'm still amazed that when the current light-rail boondoggle was proposed, that Colfax wasn't included in the system. I took the 15 and 15L downtown for years, and those buses were always fucking packed except for late at night, and it's basically a combat tour of duty for the drivers because Colfax attracts the city's most fucked-up denizens. If there was any street that RTD could have actually justified simply ripping up the whole road from Peoria all the way down to Auraria and making it a proprietary light rail corridor, it was that one.
Everything else has absolutely horrible ridership numbers except for at rush hour.
Detroit called and would like to discuss the People Mover and the QLine.
Wouldn't rolling stock coming by periodically attenuate the nature-trail aspect of the line? Does the right-of-way even have room to accommodate them alongside each other?
I live near the Beltline. I wish they would complete the whole loop of trail before messing it all up with light rail. The density needed for it to make sense is not there, and will not be for decades.
The existing Streetcar was a white elephant money pit from the jump. It does nothing...literally duplicates an existing MARTA route but slower. Expanding it now at the expense of other, more pressing transit in the City is a terrible idea...but par for the course in Atlanta.
Sometimes there is a very narrow focus on these projects, without taking into account such things as historical development and weather.
European cities developed before cars were a thing, so they are more compact and built around major common areas…sort of like the older northeast cities like New York and Boston. Those places were built for public transit, not cars.
The other issue that they don’t take into account is the climate. Paris is closer to the same latitude as North American cities like Winnipeg and Vancouver, whereas Atlanta, Dallas, Los Angeles, and other southern cities are on the same level as Morocco, Tunisia, and Libya. So the European public transit style systems, where the public spends a lot of time outside, walking, riding bikes and waiting for trains, would often be an unpleasant experience in the warmer months.
Not to mention our cities were built more spread out, would require a lot of stations and sub-stations for trains to be near enough people to make it useable. And that’s going to make for a long ride with many stops for most passengers.
The car is a much more pleasant and expedient way to get around Atlanta. At least until they rebuild the entire city structure and change the weather patterns of the world.
Ever heard of the Gulf Stream? Your latitude comparison is meaningless.
Good thing you mentioned it: the gulf stream is what gives much of Europe a more temperate climate, making it easier for people to walk and bike. Across the US, there are a lot more temperature extremes throughout the year. Thanks for bringing this up.
Think I had a wet dream
Cruising through the Gulf Stream
Oooooo, ooooo, oooo, oooooooooo
Wet dreeeeeeam......
Since it's important for you to insert the Gulf Stream argument, first you need to know it's called the North Atlantic Current when it's near Europe. And the stream does cool as it heads that way because it's moving toward cooler regions, which are sometimes defined by the proximity of a place to the equator versus the poles, which can be measured by latitude lines. I'm not a meteorologist obviously, but if I'm going to be called out, at least have more knowledge and less snark.
Pedantry is not knowledge that anyone cares about. Everyone knows what the Gulf Stream is, and everyone knows it keeps Europe warm.
Those places were built for public transit, not cars.
All grid based cities are built for tons of transit/development options and obviously long predate cars.
What destroyed the grids amazing functionality was the combo of faster cars (driving peds, bikes, etc off the transport grid altogether) and zoning 'blocks' that are much larger than the grid. Transport - public or private - tends to start at one 'zone type' (say home) and end at a different 'zone type' (say work or shopping or restaurants etc). Neither of those are actually irreversible. Grids can work wonders in the future.
The suburb design (curvilinear, hierarchical street design with huge single-purpose zones) is obviously purely car based and can never do anything else. It is also financially a Ponzi scheme because it can't be maintained without new development funding.
Everyone interested in the subject of light rail and urban mass transit ought to read Romance of the Rails. Details urban mass transit from the first horse cars to modern buses and light rail, and long haul passenger trains to boot. The guy loves trains, yet damns them for their inefficiency. It is incredible how every single improvement is first taxed to keep it from upsetting the status quo, then grudgingly accepted, then subsidized to keep it in face of the new (and taxed) improvements. A perfect summary of government, from horse wagons to horse rail wagons to steam and electric and ICE, buses and rail and subways.
After the 3rd or 4th iteration of this tax-ignore-subsidize cycle, you begin to get the impression that government is simply crony incompetence personified.
One surprising discovery was that Manhattan and the outer boroughs were manufacturing centers, full of factories, because street cars and such were too expensive for the working class, contrary to movies and stories; something like 10% of pay. So the factory workers all walked to work, and factories had to be within walking distance of where the workers live. Streetcars were only used by the middle class office workers -- accountants, lawyers, senior clerks, etc. Cars used to be manufactured in New York City, in 7-8 story tall buildings full of cranes lifting and lowering cars as they were assembled. Henry Ford's moving assembly line had to be built elsewhere with plenty of open space, and he chose Detroit.
Fascinating book, absolutely recommended.
The author of that book, Randy O'Toole, is a rail and cycle fan and environmentalist, also a senior fellow at Cato (which probably disqualifies him for some posters here). He sees U.S. roads as the future of transit, not trains.
Some local train advocates want to restore rail service between Phila. and Reading, Pa. At a cost of millions (rails already exist - Norfolk Southern freight line). So they started a demo service, using luxury buses on the same schedule as the proposed train schedules. In the first month, each bus trip averaged less than 5 people! Anyone want to bet that this obvious lack of need for such service will deter the advocates from taking the next step?
The book is especially enlightening since his love of rails comes through all over, in spite of his cold hard financial calculations showing how inefficient rail transit is.
Rail transit is inefficient for moving people compared to other modern transportation technologies; it is highly efficient for moving freight.
And, what do you know, the US has by far the largest rail network in the world, bigger than that of all of Europe combined. And it is nearly 100% used for freight because that's the economically efficient use of such a network.
And everything Biden wants to do with Amtrak is at the expense of that rail freight efficiency, improving the case for trucking. Like everything else green, it shifts the cost/benefit ration in the direction opposite to their stated goals.
So the cost of building a rail line, never mind operating and maintaining it, is roughly $122.5 million per mile.
And why is it so difficult for people to realize that the US is not Europe, in any shape, form, or fashion? It just will not fit.
Most of Paris was designed when you had to walk or take a horse-drawn bus, so there were stores that met most of your needs within 1/4 mile of your home. Of course it's still convenient for walkers.
Modern suburbs are designed around the automobile, so unless you're willing to tear them all down and start again...
European cities started to appearing over 1200 years ago. Most American cities started to appear 200 years ago, if that. They are going to different.
And some of think of living, working, shopping, entertaining, etc., all within a one mile circle (that's 1.6km in oppression units) as an absolute hell of boredom.
Maryland Dept. of Transportation's Purple line light rail might give this streetcar a run for its money.
https://aneconomicsense.org/2022/02/04/it-is-time-to-admit-the-purple-line-was-a-mistake/#:~:text=The%20Purple%20Line%20has%20long%20been%20controversial%20%E2%80%93,a%20privileged%20few%20rather%20than%20the%20broader%20community.
Is This Atlanta Streetcar 'The Worst Transit Project of All Time'?
Seattle says, "Hold my beer and watch this!"
I thought the Boston Big Dig was their goal to beat.
"Seattle says, “Hold my beer and watch this!”
I searched google for 'seattle subway.' I got links to some sandwich shops.
It's inter-city rail, of course, but Texas is building a Shinkansen ('new trunk line' imported Japanese tech) high speed rail link to connect Dallas with Houston, and I believe connections to Austin/San Antonio are being planned. It seems like the geography/demographics of Texas are a perfect fit.
Is This Atlanta Streetcar ‘The Worst Transit Project of All Time’?
Atlanta, isn’t that a long time Democratic run city? I think Atlanta has had many worsts over those years. Keep Voting Democratic for Worst awards!
For the past 25 years or so, Atlanta has led the nation as enjoying the largest number of black American immigrants. Almost 1/4 million. Dallas is number two with only a small fraction of Atlanta's numbers. If the Georgia Republicans had any sense, they would adjust themselves accordingly.
You know who else ran "The Worst Transit Project of All Time?"
This will give the Atlanta project a run for it's money on worst transit project.
Kenosha, Wisconsin Streetcar System
It wasn't as expensive as the Atlanta project will be, but it's a total loop of only 1.7 miles in a city with 2% of Atlanta's population. A train from nowhere to nowhere.
But isn't there a bible verse? "If you build it, they will come."
Nothing can compare to California's
bulletmoderately-faster-than-average train project. All we have so far is a few unfinished overpasses. When the first stage opens up someday, you will be able to get to Bakersfield in a few hours, after you drive north of LA.Meanwhile, everyone takes one of the dozens of cheap daily Southwest flights to move around the state.
Ironically, given traffic jams, leaving LA takes far more time than any drive/train ride up to Bakersfield.
"a plan to make Atlanta more like Paris"
You mean bring in a bunch of yanke.... er "Northerners", that will be rude to everybody?
CB
And je parle Francais even when they speak Anglais? Mais oui, monsieur. Now va te faire foutre!
The Seattle Capital Hill streetcar might give Atlanta some competition for waste. Not too many people catch that ride.
Not really sure what the stats are to support or not support this project. However, I do agree that cities need to do more than just build more roads. Transit is going to become very important as we progrees through this century, and highway building has historically not been affective at easing traffic. More urban population centers are going to start to build upwards vice outwards(suburban sprawl), so an effective way to move people quickly and efficiently is prudent for most city planners. Again, I'd have to research this particular project.
Next generation public transit is going to have to be either air or road based to have the necessary level of flexibility to operate efficiently. Passenger rail will never again be anything other than a money pit.
Right now MARTA and the street car to no where are just carnival rides for homeless people. The trains are convenient for the airport, arena and stadium for those of us that live in civilization (the northern burbs) but other than that it's just a hodge-podge of busses that may or may not show up on time if it all. MARTA is good when there's a big event, we took the train to the Elton John concert last night and it was fine. It does get you out of the crime ridden hellscape that is Atlanta efficiently. And it keeps you from having to stop at a gas station inside the perimeter where you will most likely be car jacked and shot.
Why in the hell would anybody be building mass transit or denser housing etc.. after what COVID showed us? The next time we might not be so lucky to get a virus with a ~0.5% mortality rate and yet these people are going full force of this shit still. It's all based on ideological fantasy and wishful thinking. The car is going nowhere, especially in the US and it's time the left learned to cope with that fact.
Nadra Card Centre UK is a services provider for Pakistani overseas living abroad in Europe who want to renew their Nadra Card Online. Fast premium tracking service provider by our trained agents.
Nadra Card Online