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.
The RTP employers need to be taxed to support the loop shuttle buses that would make rail feasible.
Since Wake County is stressed out by growth, new businesses need to pay their way instead of being given incentives.
Also, no more new roads to drive sprawl further out.
Every time I see I-40 jams on the DOT webcams, I look at the green median and think that a train could zip by all the congestion on the road if it were built in the median on existing rights of way.
Every time I see I-40 jams on the DOT webcams, I look at the green median and think that a train could zip by all the congestion on the road if it were built in the median on existing rights of way.
Where would the riders get of the rail? In the middle of traffic on I-40? That would be the only option if the rail ran down the median.
Doesn't sound like such a great plan to me. The solution isn't as simple as some people want to think.
From Wake Forest to RTP I'd even take heavy rail if it was offered. Some kind of mass transit is needed to move from the investigative phases to reality and soon! We seem to think in terms of small town USA when we have grown far beyond that term IMO. Mass transit is needed sooner rather than later!
I would love to see some type of rail system here in the Triangle. I know it would definitely take a lot of planning but being that there's so much of a traffic problem, I think it would be so beneficial!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Durham and Chapel Hill were on board and Raleigh was the holdout which caused any possibility of getting grant money to fund it to go out the window.... I can only imagine if Durham and Chapel Hill decided to go it alone and got grant money Raleigh would be ready to jump on board again and cause it to fizzle again.....
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Durham and Chapel Hill were on board and Raleigh was the holdout which caused any possibility of getting grant money to fund it to go out the window.... I can only imagine if Durham and Chapel Hill decided to go it alone and got grant money Raleigh would be ready to jump on board again and cause it to fizzle again.....
I think you are wrong about that. All three were on board. The grant money fizzled when the ridership calculations did not meet the Federal requirements. The calculations are too complicated for me to comprehend, but I know a lot of information goes into the calculation.
But no, this project did not fail because any one city held-out on the process. The project simply didn't meet the federal requirements to qualify for federal funding.
I used to live in NC and have been following the rail debate in Charlotte and the Triangle for about 8 years or so.
I went to school for and started my career as a transportation planner. Suffice it to say that I think people have a lot of misconceptions about what transit, and rail transit, specifically, is supposed to do.
In Philadelphia we have 13 suburban commuter lines, 3 subway/elevated lines, 6 trolley lines in the city and 4 lightrail lines in the suburbs - and well over 100 bus routes. Transit trips in the region are over 1 million per day. Still, transit accounts for only about 10% of all work-based trips. Trips to and from work only account for about 25% of all travel so if you look at it in the context of all the trips taken in the region it's actually a really small percentage.
What people miss in all of this is that no amount of transit is going to make a serious dent in rush hour traffi. As soon as you get 10 people on a train you have 9 people lined up waiting to take their place on the highway. What does make a serious difference, on the other hand, is that when you use transit in a place that's oriented around it you start to make a lot of trips as a pedestrian that you would've made in a car. That's what starts to cut in to how much we drive - getting back to the 75% of trips we make that have nothing to do with getting to work.
You have a choice - you can add capacity by building new highways (you think a new rail line is expensive?) or you can add it by building new transit facilities. When you're facing a future of energy insecurity the choice is a lot easier to make.
The fact that the Triangle has 4 centers is a transit strength, not a weakness. Before Denver's rail expansion downtown wasn't all that. They're still struggling to build new towns around their stations in the middle-of-nowhere, and if you look at their expansion plans you'll see some interesting looking routes and spurs that are a testament to the decentralized nature of their region.
Same goes for Dallas and Houston.
From a practical point of view - I don't own a car. Haven't owned one since I moved up here from Charleston about 9 years ago. I rely on my two feet, my bicycle, transit and a great little service called PhillyCarShare (http://www.phillycarshare.org/residents.php - broken link)
This evening I had to go out to the suburbs for work. I had to make two stops about 7 miles apart. Both were on the same rail line and both places were a 5 minute walk from their respective stations. The combined train trips would've cost me about $10.50. Driving cost me about $15. I decided to drive because a. rush hour was over, b. I only needed to spend 10 minutes at my first stop which would've left me at the station for 40 minutes waiting for the next train to take be to point B and c. work was paying for it.
When I go back out to point B this weekend to check out the new brewpub I will most certainly be taking the train because a. it's my only stop, b. i plan on having more than one beer and c. i'm paying for it.
These are the types of decisions that people make everyday. It's about convenience. The roads will always have traffic but at a certain point, for certain trips, it's just easier or quicker or cheaper to take the train.
Any light rail is going to require substantial federal dollars.
A key derailer of the last effort was the opposition from Dole and Burr. Until that changes, little is going to happen. (They may not have been explicitly opposed, but they did nothing to really advance the Triangle rail cause)
Also, the federal government has cut the amount of money available for mass transit.
But you have to have your senators on board, first, IMO
Every time I see I-40 jams on the DOT webcams, I look at the green median and think that a train could zip by all the congestion on the road if it were built in the median on existing rights of way.
Where would the riders get of the rail? In the middle of traffic on I-40? That would be the only option if the rail ran down the median.
Doesn't sound like such a great plan to me. The solution isn't as simple as some people want to think.
I have actually seen commuter rail lines in medians in places like Atlanta and Baltimore. For an example, check out the Buckhead Marta station in Atlanta on Google Maps in satellite view (just search Buckhead Station, Atlanta). The station and tracks are right down the middle of GA-400 which is a huge freeway. The Buckhead area is fairly dense, but the rail tracks continue north up the middle of 400 into the sprawl. It can be done.
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.
