BIKE: Bicycle Organizations Support Commuter Rail

[Mike Dahmus]

Roger Baker wrote:

>>
>> And I want to remind all of you that, while these bike facilities 
>> are  an unquestionably good thing, it is very unlikely that Capital 
>> Metro  will build them unless the performance of the starter line is 
>> fairly  good, and by that I mean it has to be good enough to convince 
>> voters  to continue to build the system drawn in the long-range plan. 
>> The  rails-with-trails trail is not going to be part of the starter 
>> route;  it's going to be built afterwards IF AND ONLY IF the 
>> long-range plan  continues to be implemented.
>>
>> Whether or not this starter line is good enough to get us on the 
>> path  of implementing that long-range plan (which I think is still 
>> awful) is  a matter of opinion. I think by now you all know I believe 
>> the chance  that this starter line will match the extremely poor 
>> performance of  Tri-Rail in South Florida, which it closely resembles 
>> in all important  aspects, is quite good).
>>
>> So please vote simply based on whether you think this starter line 
>> is  going to work. Voting yes in the hopes of getting bike trails is  
>> foolish if the plan itself is never going to get to that point. You  
>> might in fact be impeding the development of mass transit in our 
>> area  and not get the bike trails anyways.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mike Dahmus
>> Urban Transportation Commission
>
>
>
> Mike Dahmus bases his argument against rail on his consideration that  
> the Tri-Rail system in South Florida is a miserable failure.
>
> He points to that new start on existing rail as evidence to argue by  
> analogy that Austin's inexpensive commuter rail start will not work  
> here, and that rail will be held in the same low regard that it is in  
> Florida, and that this failure it will drag down support for biking,  
> etc.
>
> Here is the best link I have found on Florida's Tri-Rail system, its  
> history, characteristics, funding etc.
>
> http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0OQD/is_1_7/ai_113071137

Here are two better links, both of which talk about the miserably low 
regard Tri-Rail is held in in South Florida.

http://www.newtimesbpb.com/issues/2004-04-15/news/news_print.html

"A week's worth of trips on the Tri-Rail, South Florida's poky, 
15-year-old commuter railway, recently confirmed the conventional 
rat-racing wisdom: The train serves not the region's most populated 
areas but the fringes. It doesn't offer riders destinations they truly 
need or desire, nor convenient times to get there. It's underutilized, 
even during rush hour. It's not located where people like Nick -- an 
unemployed construction worker who says he's "between cars" -- are most 
likely to use it."

http://www.floridacdc.org/articles/030930-1.htm

" Some South Florida leaders are itching to introduce something new to 
the region's commuter rail service: a train that takes people somewhere 
they want to go.

As it stands, Tri-Rail rides on tracks beside Interstate 95. The 
agency's trains go through no downtowns, and provide only indirect 
service to the region's airports. Getting where you want to go generally 
involves a second trip via bus, bike, taxi or Metrorail."

> The fact is that service is very new but does carry 12,000 per day 
> now  (or last Jan.). In fact if you read th linked article, this 
> passenger  rail's current status looks very promising including having 
> wide  political support, etc. They know the current situation is not 
> optimum  because it bypasses high density in the three counties 
> (because not  many people have prefered to live next to a freight 
> line?). They are  well aware they need funding for better bus links, 
> unlike Austin, and  intend to get it.

The fact is that fifteen years (NOT NEW) after opening on a corridor 
which is much longer than Austin's (>70 MILES), in an area whose 
population dwarfs Austin's (>4 MILLION), and on a line which (at one end 
at least) connects to a true urban rail system (MetroRail in Miami), 
Tri-Rail has only 12,000 riders per day, and is contemplating 
essentially starting over on the FEC railroad which, unlike the CSX 
corridor, actually runs where a non-trivial number of people want to go.

15 years. Wasted completely.

The comparison to Austin's situation is so obvious that I'm constantly 
surprised that anybody can dispute it.

As for your comments about the bus network - EVERY STATION IS SERVED BY 
HIGH-FREQUENCY SHUTTLE BUSES, just like Austin's plan. You could not be 
any more wrong on this. The bus network they're talking about in your 
article is for people who DON'T TAKE RAIL AT ALL, not for people trying 
to connect from rail to their final destination.

> I think part of the reason that Mike Dahmus is pessimistic about 
> rail,  even while supporting toll roads, is that he imagines the 
> future will  look like the past. It is true that many are in denial 
> about our  societal oil addiction, the nearness of peak oil and the 
> resulting end  of cheap oil. And how much all that is likely to affect 
> our  transportation future, and is affecting our economy right now. * 

Well, perhaps I shouldn't be surprised that Roger can dispute it.

For the record, Roger is a liar. I'm not pessimistic about rail. I'm 
pessimistic about THIS RAIL PLAN, because it nearly exactly matches the 
mistakes made in South Florida which have made it one of only a handful 
of new rail starts in the last 30 years to have failed to capture 
substantial numbers of new (non-bus-rider) passengers.

Light rail works. Denver, Dallas, Portland, Salt Lake, heck, even 
Houston show that rail that goes where people want to go works. Does 
that sound like a pessimist's view to you?

- MD