Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With suburbs becoming more urban and offering car-less lifestyles, metro area's are planning for the future with rapid transit expansions. Many older cities don't expand their heavy rail outside city limits opting for commuter rail outside the city. Recent planning because of cost has turned to light rail for rapid transit. Which type of transit will allow people to live an easier car free lifestyle once transit oriented development is built along the lines?
**I'm not talking about funneling workers downtown. I'm talking about working and living in the suburbs without a car. Take into account future development in Dallas and Portland that will eventually happen around their light rail giving the option to live without a car. Remember Boston and Philly's commuter rail systems are old so they have been built up for years.**
Which form of rapid transit comparing Dallas or Portland Light rail vs. Boston or Philly Commuter rail gives the greater ability to live without a car in the suburbs?
Which form of transit would you prefer in your metro for daily transportation and car free living outside the city limits?
Does commuter rail develop downtown area's the same way light rail does?
Last edited by MDAllstar; 08-24-2011 at 03:52 PM..
Commuter rail, if you live near a station,, light rail doesnt extend much outside City limits, and Portland isnt on the Level of Boston/PHilly.
But light rail can connect to heavy rail or commuter rail outside of cities in the suburbs. Im really talking more about developing live, work, play downtown's in the suburbs instead of sprawl. Im not talking about funneling employee's downtown. More so people working and living in the suburbs. Which form is better to do that?
But light rail can connect to heavy rail or commuter rail outside of cities in the suburbs. Im really talking more about developing live, work, play downtown's in the suburbs instead of sprawl. Which form is better to do that?
Boston Purely because it has town centres on most of its suburbs.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,744 posts, read 23,801,634 times
Reputation: 14650
Portland is more condusive to pedestrian activity and has more sprawl control than btownboss gives it credit for, even in some of the burbs like Beaverton and Hillsboro. It also has a remarkably well developed and extensive system for a medium sized metro at just over 2 million.
To compare with Philly and Boston though is rather arbitrary as they are just a whole nother animal having the urban bones and rail systems in place for many, many years back. I live a 10 minute walk to a commuter rail station and can ride the rails to places like Newburyport and Rockport and walk around downtown to spend an enjoyable afternoon.
If you have your eye on newer suburban development around light rail, I would take Dallas out of the equation for now. At least Portland has a thriving downtown and a few examples of dense community development in some of its suburban light rail stops like Orenco Station. Dallas yes is proposing that with developments such as Mockingbird station. But the way the city and suburbs are developed already, DART is a tough sell other than commuting purposes and will take quite a while to develop into suburban point A to point B within by rail lifestyle.
Seattle is developing around its light rail stations along what was failrly low density MLK Ave in South Seattle. Seattle's light rail system though is a bit more like an actual metro/subway than Portland and Dallas with a lot lesss at grade track and more elevated and subway track. When the Eastside line is constructed out to Bellevue and Redmond it will definitely be a line where suburban residents can ride the train from A to B with many purposes in mind besides just comutting, without having to ride it into the city of Seattle.
I think Washington's metro system has got some of the best urban planning around it's metro system as there are many edge cities to ride the rail,s to like Alexandria, Bethesda, Silver Spring, and soon to be Tyson's Corner on the new line to Dulles Airport (watch out for earthquakes).
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 08-24-2011 at 03:55 PM..
Light rail would be far too slow to service the suburbs. A commuter rail system is the only option IMO.
I don't think people understand what I'm saying here. Im asking which transit system is better for someone who needs to use the train to go to the bar, the store, a friends house etc. If you have an example of commuter trains systems that do that, then that would be applicable in the discussion. Speed is not a factor in local travel which is why I said Im not talking about traveling downtown for work or entertainment. Im talking about local travel from suburb to suburb or within a suburb without a car.
I don't think people understand what I'm saying here. Im asking which transit system is better for someone who needs to use the train to go to the bar, the store, a friends house etc. If you have an example of commuter trains systems that do that, then that would be applicable in the discussion. Speed is not a factor in local travel which is why I said Im not talking about traveling downtown for work or entertainment. Im talking about local travel from suburb to suburb or within a suburb without a car.
Oh ok. When you were comparing it to a commuter rail system, I was thinking service to and from a commerce center and bedroom community.
In that case I'm not sure suburbs have the density to attrack the ridership numbers to make it a worth while investment. Thats what buses are for. Now I'm basing this off Boston as I've never been to Portland or Dallas.
But to answer your question: Light rail would be better suited for localized transport.
Yeah for a question as specific as this one eventually became, light rail is the best option. LRT systems are usually small, slower, lots of stops so it's good for getting around a small area (a 12 mile LRT line is considered "long"). Commuter rail is better for ferrying people longer distances (a 60 mile commuter rail line is considered "long").
Lots of people use commuter rail for suburb-to-suburb trips. Once upon a time I used commuter rail to get from my residence in one suburb to a job 20 miles away in another suburb (I even had to xfer). But to get around your own community, a light rail system that has a stop every 1/4 mile would be most useful.
Yeah for a question as specific as this one eventually became, light rail is the best option. LRT systems are usually small, slower, lots of stops so it's good for getting around a small area (a 12 mile LRT line is considered "long"). Commuter rail is better for ferrying people longer distances (a 60 mile commuter rail line is considered "long").
Lots of people use commuter rail for suburb-to-suburb trips. Once upon a time I used commuter rail to get from my residence in one suburb to a job 20 miles away in another suburb (I even had to xfer). But to get around your own community, a light rail system that has a stop every 1/4 mile would be most useful.
With most metro trying to go car-less in urban corridors outside the city limits, would you say they should focus on building light rail in suburban cities rather than commuter rail? Im speaking about suburban cities with the density to sustain a light rail line. What do you think a sustainable density would need to be in those suburbs?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
