Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl
No. I am talking about everywhere. Most American cities' planning & growth post WWII has almost exclusively been based on cars. It's an enormous conundrum across the country and it cannot be solved for those highly car dependent communities. We cannot make those communities "rail only communities" without an absolutely enormous investment that isn't going to happen without a monumental shift in the public narrative around funding infrastructure and taxes.
For car dependent suburbia, and IMO, the best we can hope for is redevelopment to create new-urbanism walkable communities to serve these distributed suburban communities to lessen the amount of daily activities that are dependent on a car.
FWIW, the Triangle is also planning its heavy commuter rail future onto its existing rail backbone too. High growth/high density nodes can be planned along that backbone. I suspect that this can happen in most American cities, but it won't come close to covering everywhere.
|
"Rail only" doesn't exist anywhere, not even NYC so I think that's a bit extreme.
For car-dependent suburbia, I agree with creating walkable New Urbanism-type developments but light rail works for many of these communities. Also there should be investment in bike lanes and more robust bus transit, including BRT where feasible.
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.
