If Nashville had developed a light or heavy rail system... (Murfreesboro: neighborhoods, costs)

[nashvols]

Originally Posted by Joke Insurance

I don't mean to bust your bubble but commuter rail is not a form of heavy rail. Sorry. But mind you, I do agree with your concept on what commuter rail should do down there.

Eh, I guess I mean as opposed to light rail. Looking at the definition, I see heavy rail is listed as electric...so no, that wouldn't be what I'm talking about.

[strumpeace]

I would love to see light rail in/around Nashville. Alas, density--or lack thereof--is the real killer here.

[kooks35]

Never, never, never construct light rail. Its a huge waste of money and will not reduce commute time. You'd be far better off spending the money on more/wider highways.

Coming from MN I've been able to see how useless it is. It loses $7M/yr on operating costs on top of the billions that have been spent on construction. Its a much more expensive bus for people that think they are too good for the bus.

[po-boy]

Density and light rail or streetcars is a bit of a chicken and egg thing. They encourage each other. IMO it is better to plan ahead and try to direct some of the growth by utilizing smart planning for better public transportation. Nashville seems like a really nice city, but it could definitely benefit from more public transportation.

Either a streetcar or a light rail seem like the way to go in the dense downtown part of Nashville. Hopefully that would be successful and could then be expanded to some of the bigger suburbs. I know a lot of people favor BRT, and there is something to be said for that because it makes a better experience for those who use it, but it seems to me that buses just don't convert people into public transportation utilizers. Light rail and to a lesser extent streetcars do though.

When I lived in DC I loved the metro (rail) and took it everywhere, but I very rarely took the metro bus. Busses are just not that pleasant. Heavy rail is great and when heavy rail does not make sense then I think light rail is a good option. It is less noisy and doesn't produce the air pollution at the point where people interact with it.

[Joke Insurance]

Originally Posted by kooks35

Never, never, never construct light rail. Its a huge waste of money and will not reduce commute time. You'd be far better off spending the money on more/wider highways.

Coming from MN I've been able to see how useless it is. It loses $7M/yr on operating costs on top of the billions that have been spent on construction. Its a much more expensive bus for people that think they are too good for the bus.

I love how you didn't back up your claims

[po-boy]

Two more points:

First I agree with all the posts that Nashville should invest more in making its more developed areas pedestrian and bike friendly. Sidewalks should actually lead somewhere and should connect with other sidewalks.

Second, yes, light rail and streetcars lose money. City roads, bridges, street lights and interestates lose money also. Those things are all infrastructure and they are there to improve the quality of life of residents and visitors. I don't understand why people always want to see public transportation make money and they don't realize that other forms of transportation are subsidized as well. I have been on many roads in the middle of the day with absolutely no other cars around for miles and no one seems to mind that, yet people howl when they see busses or streetcars that are at less then full capacity.

[kooks35]

Originally Posted by Joke Insurance

I love how you didn't back up your claims

Here's a few for you

Light Rail Doesn't Work | Randal O'Toole | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary
The Costs and Benefits of Light Rail
Hiawatha Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
MinnPost - Dirty little secrets about light rail and a clean environment
The Antiplanner :: The Hiawatha Light-Rail Disaster :: http://ti.org/antiplanner

[strumpeace]

Originally Posted by po-boy

Two more points:

First I agree with all the posts that Nashville should invest more in making its more developed areas pedestrian and bike friendly. Sidewalks should actually lead somewhere and should connect with other sidewalks.

Second, yes, light rail and streetcars lose money. City roads, bridges, street lights and interestates lose money also. Those things are all infrastructure and they are there to improve the quality of life of residents and visitors. I don't understand why people always want to see public transportation make money and they don't realize that other forms of transportation are subsidized as well. I have been on many roads in the middle of the day with absolutely no other cars around for miles and no one seems to mind that, yet people howl when they see busses or streetcars that are at less then full capacity.

That's really a point that the anti-rail folks never seem to grasp. In most places, roads are fully paid for by tax dollars--not user fees--and they never pay for themselves. Even states that have toll roads put tax dollars into the construction and maintenance of the roads; tolls typically never produce enough money to cover the full cost of the roads. Using the 'it doesn't pay for itself' argument against rail is misguided and inconsistent at best.

[Joke Insurance]

Originally Posted by kooks35

Here's a few for you

Light Rail Doesn't Work | Randal O'Toole | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary
The Costs and Benefits of Light Rail
Hiawatha Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
MinnPost - Dirty little secrets about light rail and a clean environment
The Antiplanner :: The Hiawatha Light-Rail Disaster :: http://ti.org/antiplanner

Cato Institute, are you serious? No wonder you have these asinine claims about transit.

[Big TR]

Originally Posted by Joke Insurance

Cato Institute, are you serious? No wonder you have these asinine claims about transit.

I like how you conveniently ignored the other 4 articles, including one published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.