Projects on the #MARTA16 referendum must make transit competitive

On the 2016 Referendum

The City of Atlanta is about to decide on projects to be executed should a MARTA 0.5% sales tax and a city 0.5% TSPLOST sales tax be approved by the residents in November 2016, for a total of up to 1% increase. It is important that the projects enable a competitive transit offering in order to attract ridership.

City officials like to speak about how transportation, and public transit in particular, is an "instrument" for "equity, mobility, and prosperity," and that the anticipated growth of Atlanta to 1 million inhabitants can be fostered if planners can get people out their cars to get around.

The list of MARTA projects calls for several new streetcar and strengthened bus service. The list of city projects includes multi-use trails, street makeovers (as "complete streets" or "neighborhood greenways"), and more, especially around existing transit centers. If specified and executed well, these projects will dramatically improve the transit landscape in Atlanta.

 

On the need for competitiveness

I said at a recent public hearing that it is really important that the projects make transit a competitive travel option. Let's examine two recent transit projects in Atlanta that have not been executed to the fullest potential, do not provide a competitive offer, and failed the ridership test. I have highlighted the shortcomings points in red.

 

Atlanta Streetcar

• Length: 2.7 miles for entire loop.
• Distinctive signage and branding.
• Service: every 15 minutes 6am-10pm.
• Average speed including stops and traffic lights: 6 mph. 30-40 minutes to ride entire loop.
• Separate $1 fare using MARTA Breeze system. Partner transfers not accepted and not issued.
• Shared right-of-way with automobile traffic.
• Extended waits at traffic signals.
• Disruptions from multiple crashes involving cars at fault.

Ridership with the Atlanta Streetcar has plummeted since the $1 fare has been introduced. Some safety incidents are not enhancing the picture, and now GDOT is threatening to shutdown the streetcar. For people to ride, the streetcar has to be much faster than walking. Increased frequency and faster travel through traffic light priority (and dedicated lanes?) is a must to bring customers back. Free transfers would further attract riders already using MARTA or other systems. 

 

MARTA "Q" Bus on Memorial Drive (2009-2011 - Discontinued)

• Length: 6 miles.
• Service: Every 10 minutes rush hour only.
• Average speed: unknown.
• Limited number of stops.
• No distinctive markings, signage, or amenities (fleet or shelters).
• Shared right-of-way with automobile traffic.
• 2 protected intersections with green light extension and queue jumper lanes (no priority for red lights).
• Extended waits at most traffic signals.

Except for the limited number of stops, the MARTA "Q" bus had no distinctive feature from other MARTA routes. The 2 intersections fitted with queue jumping lanes to give priority to the bus did not contribute enough to improve travel time and make the public notice, and the routes have been discontinued since.

 

My plea for the referendum projects

The projects must include good performance metrics in order to avoid the fiascos of the Atlanta Streetcar or the defunct MARTA Memorial Drive Q Bus.

If streetcars or bus-rapid-transit lines are built, they must provide the following in my opinion:

• Dedicated right-of-way,
• Reasonable spacing between stations,
• Reasonable travel speeds between stations,
• Minimal time wasted in mixed traffic and traffic lights,
• Frequency so that captive ridership is confident they don't have to deal with long waits if they wanted to try the streetcars,
• Electronic signs on platforms with real-time arrivals,
• Signage, maps, and branding on par with the premium service offered.
• Beautiful street redesign that encourages walking around the stations.

If strong arterial bus service is built, it must provide in my opinion:

• Increased travel speeds compared to current service, with minimal time wasted at traffic lights,
• Reasonable spacing between stops,
• Shelters, benches, and pedestrian amenities at/near most stops,
• Frequency so that captive ridership is confident they don't have to deal with long waits if they wanted to try the arterial bus service,
• Signage, maps, and branding on par with the premium service offered.

 

Conclusion

If done well, the new transit projects that will come from the MARTA referendum will drastically improve the image of public transit in Atlanta. That includes setting a new standard for transit frequency, travel speeds, and signage. Officials will only have one shot at executing the projects, and it is really important that the resulting offering be competitive to attract riders who would otherwise drive.