Louisville is booming... What do we need next? (Lexington, Frankfort: best city, credit)

[Cattknap]

Busses pollute, use ever-increasingly expensive petrolium products, are noisy and add to traffic problems. A good light rail system can be underground or overhead and the systems are usually clean, fast, safe and efficient. I disagree completely about the above statement that only the middle class use light rail. In Boston, Washington DC and Los Angeles (the three systems that I am most familiar with from a user's point of view) people of every socio-economic level ride the rail system.

You have to think long term to see the benefits of a good light rail system, the project has to be planned and executed by a proven company and closely overseen, but in the long run, a good light rail system would really add to Louisville's profile as a major, modern city and would be a smarter, cleaner and more effecient way of transporting people than adding more and more diesel guzzling busses.

[Peter1948]

Originally Posted by Cattknap

Busses pollute, use ever-increasingly expensive petrolium products, are noisy and add to traffic problems. A good light rail system can be underground or overhead and the systems are usually clean, fast, safe and efficient. I disagree completely about the above statement that only the middle class use light rail. In Boston, Washington DC and Los Angeles (the three systems that I am most familiar with from a user's point of view) people of every socio-economic level ride the rail system.

You have to think long term to see the benefits of a good light rail system, the project has to be planned and executed by a proven company and closely overseen, but in the long run, a good light rail system would really add to Louisville's profile as a major, modern city and would be a smarter, cleaner and more effecient way of transporting people than adding more and more diesel guzzling busses.

Well spoken. Louisville has made every attempt and indication in the last few years that she intends to be a world class mid sized city. The only world class cities in its size range right now are New Orleans and Las Vegas, and the real movers in this size class are really Austin, Nashville, and Charlotte. With Louisville's southern location and growth as a medical and logistics hub, it has a chance to gain great momentum. Still, Louisville is making a lot of progress, especially in its urban areas, that some larger cities in the Rustbelt could only dream of. Light Rail and removing the riverfront freeway would add to the growing progressive spirit in a city whose state is often grossly stereotyped, even though in many instances, there is some justification for this stereotype.

[Visvaldis]

Originally Posted by stx12499

Well spoken. Louisville has made every attempt and indication in the last few years that she intends to be a world class mid sized city. The only world class cities in its size range right now are New Orleans and Las Vegas, and the real movers in this size class are really Austin, Nashville, and Charlotte. With Louisville's southern location and growth as a medical and logistics hub, it has a chance to gain great momentum. Still, Louisville is making a lot of progress, especially in its urban areas, that some larger cities in the Rustbelt could only dream of. Light Rail and removing the riverfront freeway would add to the growing progressive spirit in a city whose state is often grossly stereotyped, even though in many instances, there is some justification for this stereotype.

Removing the riverfront expressway to replace with a park would greatly enhance the appearance of the city, as well as be a place where people could spend their leisure time. Louisville could even have festivals there, where people don't have to view the concrete support columns nor have conversations competing with traffic noise.
I've often wondered about the light rail. Are the proposals for tracks on the surface. If so, that could create traffic congestion on roads whenever a train passes. A suspended monorail would be better. Or start building a subway now!

[missymomof3]

Originally Posted by Cattknap

Busses pollute, use ever-increasingly expensive petrolium products, are noisy and add to traffic problems. A good light rail system can be underground or overhead and the systems are usually clean, fast, safe and efficient. I disagree completely about the above statement that only the middle class use light rail. In Boston, Washington DC and Los Angeles (the three systems that I am most familiar with from a user's point of view) people of every socio-economic level ride the rail system.

You have to think long term to see the benefits of a good light rail system, the project has to be planned and executed by a proven company and closely overseen, but in the long run, a good light rail system would really add to Louisville's profile as a major, modern city and would be a smarter, cleaner and more effecient way of transporting people than adding more and more diesel guzzling busses.

Some of our busses are hybrids LouisvilleKy.gov - 2007 - TARC Adds More Hybrid Buses

[yegna97]

Originally Posted by Cattknap

Busses pollute, use ever-increasingly expensive petrolium products, are noisy and add to traffic problems. A good light rail system can be underground or overhead and the systems are usually clean, fast, safe and efficient. I disagree completely about the above statement that only the middle class use light rail. In Boston, Washington DC and Los Angeles (the three systems that I am most familiar with from a user's point of view) people of every socio-economic level ride the rail system.

You have to think long term to see the benefits of a good light rail system, the project has to be planned and executed by a proven company and closely overseen, but in the long run, a good light rail system would really add to Louisville's profile as a major, modern city and would be a smarter, cleaner and more effecient way of transporting people than adding more and more diesel guzzling busses.

It's true buses pollute and the noise is a mitigating factor. But what about the decrease in pollution from fewer cars? And the reduction in accidents and lives lost? I figure the total decrease in petroleum-generated pollution is huge, even you take only ten cars off the road for each additional bus purchased. The lower accident and death rate would occur almost immediately.

Quieter and more efficient buses are probably available at a higher cost. That's something that may pay off in the mid-term, say over 5-10 years.

It's the price of doing it today that matters, not the hope of achieving a utopian future, no matter how much it costs. The east coast cities that have awesome public transport built them over a century or more. LA's, I'm not familiar with but I lived in SF. California is one of the richest places on the planet. Not everyone is so fortunate.

A rail system in this city would cost billions of dollars, easily. It wouldn't come close to making money even with 50,000 passengers-a-day. If the numbers are there and private enterprise will take the risk, I'm all for it. Not for billions of taxpayer dollars though.

I choose better public education or more parks and recreation places or income supplements for seniors and the disabled living in poverty. Or any number of other things that have a positive effect on everyone now, and in the future.

Why would I want tax dollars spent on my city's "profile as a major, modern city"? Governments should not base spending choices on this idea. I would like the government to spend money sensibly and rationally. That will allow the people of the city to make it great through their own creativity.

[Avengerfire]

Without a decent public transportation system no city on earth can be "World Class."

[Cattknap]

Electric rails don't pollute at all. Busses do - even hybrids pollute. There are long term ways of financing a good public transportation system. Thinking short term and being unwilling to think out of the box is what keeps cities backward, polluted and inefficient in meeting the needs of the people.

With a city the size of Louisville, including suburbs, a rail system would have to be built in increments over a period of years - it wouldn't happen all at once. Again, in the long term, rather than short term, an efficient, non-polluting and safe rail system would benefit the city to a much greater degree than continuing to add more and more busses to an antiquated transportation system.

The population of the city is growing not shrinking. Traffic is getting worse not better (I don't necessary believe that extra busses equate to less traffic or less pollution). Pollution is a problem in the summer - there are smog alerts and cautions issued every summer. Imagaine what the air will be like in 20, 30 or 50 years if steps aren't taken now to cut down on petroleum product pollution now.

Just because money isn't being spent on a light rail system does not necessarily mean that those funds that would have been spent on such a project would be diverted into senior supplements, better schools or more parks. Government is notorious for spending ridiculous amounts of money on salary increases, pet projects and inefficient endeavors and not where the public perceives it should be spent.

Many are just fine with the status quo - they don't want any new fangled changes that might upset them or that can't instantly be beneficial to them. Others look to bettering the lives of generations of people and giving careful considerations to how decisions made today affect the environment that all must live and breathe in.

[Peter1948]

Originally Posted by louroclou

I'm not so sure. I can't believe that a town that has three gallery hops a month, that has a world-class rep theatre and numerous other drama companies, that has bands with strong visual and weirdness senses like My Morning Jacket, Wax Fang, Will Oldham, the Photographic, that was the home of Gus Van Zant and Hunter S. Thompson, that has an active film-making community and organizations like the Louisville Film Society, Kentuckiana Cinematography Club, Kino, and the 48-hour Project ... I can't believe such a town couldn't support two screens showing art and independent cinema... especially if they serve beer! Rochester, a city nowhere near as hip and active as Louisville, has an indie theatre that has five screens - nothing but foreign and independent...

The Baxter Ave guys are basically wusses. They gave up on the original vision of the place. But just because a couple of guys choose to turn their business into a McDonald's doesn't mean there can't be a Seviche or a Proof...

This site and many of its links may interest you

MySpace.com - Louisville Film Society - 99 - Female - LOUISVILLE, Kentucky - www.myspace.com/louisvillefilm

[gameguy56]

86-64, Definitely, the riverfront highway has to go!

[louroclou]

Thanks, stx... I have been in contact with LFS for a while. They are doing wonderful things for film in the city and are definitely going to be a part in some way of creating an arthouse cinema. Their goals and techniques are a bit more guerilla than the enterprise I have been part of - but that is an extremely minor concern. Trust me: some big things are going to happen with film in Louisville. I wish UL had more film studies on campus, though. That would help, but as I've said, there's a not-so-quiet film underground in Louisville's large, gritty, irregular, surprising creative community.

Re: public transport... If I could snap my fingers and do something, it would be to 86 64 and build a monorail. Cool, practical, innovative, green, less disruptive. But if I had to choose between it and more pressing social concerns, well...

If we were serious about a subway, we'd have to stop everything right now and figure out where the big ditch could go. Does anyone know which cities in the country have public transportation systems that were built in, say, the last 20 years. What kinds are they? Have they been successful - useful and profitable? How big were those cities? What disruptions did they cause?

I love DC's Metro: cheap, regular, safe, well-mapped and constructed. But DC is a very special tourist-employment situation.