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.
I wonder how many posters are familiar with urban life in all seven cities. Or who has experienced life in a real urban city? I don't have a opinion because I am not familiar with what is going on in all 7 cities. I
So we have seven cities, impressive in their regions, some with national and international clout, that may or may not make the effort to become "legitimately urban". Those efforts will require voter approval for major infrastructure improvements, a willingness to endure traffic disruption and congestion, and welcome a diverse population growth. I doubt that the residents will be enthusiastic for more than a little of that. Plus, we have to assume that the major metros, like Atlanta or Dallas/Fort Worth or Chicago will sit idly by and watch these places grow and attract corporate and other development investments and learn how to be equal competitors. For a relatively young country, the US is set in its ways. Rail and Interstate routes are established to serve the major metros. It takes more than a city deciding it wants to be a major player.
Your example is kind of a reach. You stated Nashville "wasn't doing much" in regards to transit, then was corrected in the fact it is doing and has done more than most of the cities included on this poll. Not seeing how this can be disputed, unless you care to elaborate which cities outside of Austin are doing more on this poll?
You think it was "corrected"? Did you miss the part about only 2.5 trips during rush hour or the worst performing rail in the country? Performance/success/quality matter just as much as existence and Austin, Columbus, and Jacksonville all have a higher performing premium transit.
Columbus' bus rapid transit line, which had five times the annual ridership as the Music City Star. None of Nashville's BRT Lite lines compare. Also for clarification, "BRT Lite" is not BRT.
Jacksonville's elevated downtown people mover has higher annual ridership than any of Nashville's lines. There's also transit-oriented development occurring near the station.
Indy's Red Line BRT is already off to a better start (daily ridership) than anything in Nashville.
I'm just not sure Nashville's mediocre/poor "premium transit" means it has "done more". It's obviously debatable. Realistically, they are all pretty mediocre and unimpressive, and Austin is the only one that slightly stands out. Frankly, I think the decision is a wash. Upon further research, they are all very lacking. Interestingly, at least 3 have stopped light rail efforts pretty recently.
Last edited by newgensandiego; 12-11-2019 at 10:40 PM..
Atlanta built their subway in the 1970's....and promptly lost %20 of their population immediately afterwards. They are probably happy they built it in the long run. Cleveland lost over half their population after their system was built.
Metro rail is a big, serious commitment. When you build one, you are making a statement that you are a major player and that you aren't going anywhere.
Nashville built the cheapest start-up rail ever...which subsequently became the lowest performing rail in the country. When asked to spend more money on a regional transit system, voters turned it down by a huge 2-1 margin. That's neither vision or commitment. Sorry, but I don't think a region gets brownie points for a weak effort and then subsequent rejection. Checking a box for rail is a pretty low bar for determining whether a city is committed to transit, especially considering most transit ridership is on bus even in transit-oriented metros/cities.
Also, rail is not always the best solution so let's avoid superficially elevating it above actual good transit.
Last edited by newgensandiego; 12-11-2019 at 10:39 PM..
You think it was "corrected"? Did you miss the part about only 2.5 trips during rush hour or the worst performing rail in the country? Performance/success/quality matter just as much as existence and Austin, Columbus, and Jacksonville all have a higher performing premium transit.
Columbus' bus rapid transit line, which had five times the annual ridership as the Music City Star. None of Nashville's BRT Lite lines compare. Also for clarification, "BRT Lite" is not BRT.
Jacksonville's elevated downtown people mover has higher annual ridership than any of Nashville's lines. There's also transit-oriented development occurring near the station.
Indy's Red Line BRT is already off to a better start (daily ridership) than anything in Nashville.
I'm just not sure Nashville's mediocre/poor "premium transit" means it has "done more". It's obviously debatable. Realistically, they are all pretty mediocre and unimpressive, and Austin is the only one that slightly stands out.
Changing the goal post I see. You made the statement regarding Nashville not doing much with regards to transit. Posting transit ridership numbers doesn't refute the initial point made. Though none of the cities listed have transit systems to write home about, Nashville does in fact have an option of commuter rail that those cities don't despite slightly lower ridership(Columbus not withstanding), with plans to improve as well.
Nashville built the cheapest start-up rail ever...which subsequently became the lowest performing rail in the country. When asked to spend more money on a regional transit system, voters turned it down by a huge 2-1 margin. That's neither vision or commitment. Sorry, but I don't think a region gets brownie points for a weak effort and then subsequent rejection. Checking a box for rail is a pretty low bar for determining whether a city is committed to transit, especially considering most transit ridership is on bus even in transit-oriented metros/cities.
Also, rail is not always the best solution so let's avoid superficially elevating it above actual good transit.
The issue isn't necessarily that Nashvillians didn't want transit but the administration at that time were very inept on educating the population on the costs. Also there were some areas that felt they were being left out, therefore believed the proposed system wouldn't have benefited them. It didn't help that the mayor at the time had a highly publicized infidelity scandal, then the constant ads from the Koch brothers, then you have a recipe for disaster.
I personally believe the Nashville plan was way too ambitious for a starting transit system and believe it would have had a better chance at passing if it was just one transit line, then expanding in increments as needed. Hopefully the current administration will propose an alternative in the coming months.
Changing the goal post I see. You made the statement regarding Nashville not doing much with regards to transit. Posting transit ridership numbers doesn't refute the initial point made. Though none of the cities listed have transit systems to write home about, Nashville does in fact have an option of commuter rail that those cities don't despite slightly lower ridership, with plans to improve as well.
I 100% stand by my statement that Nashville is "not doing much" regarding transit, even compared to this select group. This supposed "booming" town's biggest feat in terms of transit is the worst rail system in the country with 2.5 trips during rush hour. Their BRT Lite compares poorly to many cities/regions of similar size including some on this poll.
Ultimately, all of these "boom towns" are doing poorly in transit. Salt Lake City metro, comparable in size to all these metros, already has three light rail lines, commuter rail, 2 BRT, and a streetcar.
Given that perspective, they are all failures and are not doing much.
So we have seven cities, impressive in their regions, some with national and international clout, that may or may not make the effort to become "legitimately urban". Those efforts will require voter approval for major infrastructure improvements, a willingness to endure traffic disruption and congestion, and welcome a diverse population growth. I doubt that the residents will be enthusiastic for more than a little of that. Plus, we have to assume that the major metros, like Atlanta or Dallas/Fort Worth or Chicago will sit idly by and watch these places grow and attract corporate and other development investments and learn how to be equal competitors. For a relatively young country, the US is set in its ways. Rail and Interstate routes are established to serve the major metros. It takes more than a city deciding it wants to be a major player.
Very unique insight here.
So, the game is rigged?
If we remember back to the Amazon HQ2 debacle, we have ample evidence to support that.
Several of the poll choices were finalists (we had posters here claiming inside knowledge that Austin was to be selected), and it turned out to be a big scam that gave false hope to "up and coming" places with dreams of the big time.
Its also true that most of these cities have seen population growth from suburban minded people with eyes on big houses and big yards. If a vote is put to metro rail, they aren't voting for it.
So maybe it doesn't even matter how bad they want to hit the big time, its out of their control.
Nashville built the cheapest start-up rail ever...which subsequently became the lowest performing rail in the country. When asked to spend more money on a regional transit system, voters turned it down by a huge 2-1 margin. That's neither vision or commitment. Sorry, but I don't think a region gets brownie points for a weak effort and then subsequent rejection. Checking a box for rail is a pretty low bar for determining whether a city is committed to transit, especially considering most transit ridership is on bus even in transit-oriented metros/cities.
Also, rail is not always the best solution so let's avoid superficially elevating it above actual good transit.
Nashville has commuter rail, not quite the same as metro rail.
San Diego built one of the first next generation metro rail systems in the United States. Locals make fun of it because it doesn't have enough stops in the cool neighborhoods, but thats not the point of metro rail-an even distribution of service throughout a metropolitan area, which is exactly what the San Diego Trolley is. When the mid coast extension opens soon, it will almost certainly surpass Portland and San Francisco in light rail ridership.
Rail isn't the answer to everything, but the poll choices are at or pushing 2 million metro population-they need it.
I wonder how many posters are familiar with urban life in all seven cities. Or who has experienced life in a real urban city? I don't have a opinion because I am not familiar with what is going on in all 7 cities. I
I haven't spent a lot of time in all of these cities, with the exception of Nashville but I've been to them all. I can tell you the experience in Nashville is exhilarating compared to the rest of these places. Austin is the only one that comes close.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins
So we have seven cities, impressive in their regions, some with national and international clout, that may or may not make the effort to become "legitimately urban". Those efforts will require voter approval for major infrastructure improvements, a willingness to endure traffic disruption and congestion, and welcome a diverse population growth. I doubt that the residents will be enthusiastic for more than a little of that. Plus, we have to assume that the major metros, like Atlanta or Dallas/Fort Worth or Chicago will sit idly by and watch these places grow and attract corporate and other development investments and learn how to be equal competitors. For a relatively young country, the US is set in its ways. Rail and Interstate routes are established to serve the major metros. It takes more than a city deciding it wants to be a major player.
Nashville hasn't just decided it want to be a major player, it has BECOME a major player.
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.
