BIKE: Re: Rails with Trails

[David Foster]

OK, SO here I go exhausting my second post of the day so early in the 
morning...

Mike expresses what many central city progressives have been saying, namely 
that this commuter rail will carry too few passengers and erode support for 
transit. I myself have had similar concerns, which is why I joined others 
in the petition drive to get a streetcar circulator added to the ballot, 
without success. It is certainly true that this commuter rail line will not 
be as effective as the light rail package rejected by the voters in 2000, 
for which I labored long and hard at the cost of much lost sleep.

The key to this commuter rail line's success will be two-fold: connecting 
to the key employment centers and neighborhoods that Mike and others have 
mentioned; and building ridership

At 08:33 AM 8/18/04, Mike Dahmus wrote:
>David Foster wrote:
>
>"I don't agree with the characterization of commuter rail as 'crappy'. The 
>technology Cap Metro is looking at is an electric hybrid. Some of these 
>low-polluting trains (depending in part of course on how the electricity 
>is produced) are already in operation in New Jersey and Europe, and newer 
>hybrids are in design as well. "
>[...]
>"However, I do see commuter rail as a 'foot in the door' and we can and 
>should have serious conversations about how to expand passenger rail, in 
>whatever form, once we have made a start here.
>
>All that said, I am a solid supporter of the commuter rail proposal, and 
>believe that cyclists should work to pass it partly because it does open 
>up tremendous opportunities for Rails-with-Trails."
>
>The danger is that a bad starter system is, as another commissioner put it 
>on Monday, likely to be a finisher system. And this, by any measure, is a 
>bad starter system.
>
>1. It doesn't provide service throughout the day - only every 30 minutes 
>during morning and afternoon rush - not at all in the middle of the day or 
>in the evening
>2. It doesn't provide service to ANY of Austin's high-density residential 
>areas
>3. It requires nearly every passenger who rides it to transfer to a 
>shuttle bus (stuck in traffic) to reach their final destination (UT, 
>Capitol, downtown).
>
>This is NOT a foot in the door, folks. This is a shot in the foot in the 
>door. No starter system that has those 3 characteristics has EVER succeeded.
>
>Voting for this plan in order to get rails with trails is also silly - 
>this line is going to be such a failure in terms of ridership that Capital 
>Metro is going to lose momentum for any further transit expansion in the 
>city, so there's no way they'll have the money or political cover to build 
>trails.
>
>- MD