Remember me
▼ Content

Light Rail vs Cars


Light Rail vs Cars07-11-2019 07:10
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
When I lived in the Seattle area, people wondered why I promoted a light rail system. While it's doubled or more in population, it's roads haven't.
Kind of why I wonder why people would support a ballot initiative that encourages more people to drive when it's not necessary.


https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/election-results-2019-initiative-976-car-tab-fees-taxes-tim-eyman-washington-state/
07-11-2019 08:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
James___ wrote:
When I lived in the Seattle area, people wondered why I promoted a light rail system. While it's doubled or more in population, it's roads haven't.
Kind of why I wonder why people would support a ballot initiative that encourages more people to drive when it's not necessary.


https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/election-results-2019-initiative-976-car-tab-fees-taxes-tim-eyman-washington-state/


Because light rail does not do anything for the roads. It just means some of those currently riding a bus will ride a train instead. Light rail as it is being implemented is also very expensive.

I too support light rail, but it should be funded from property taxes, not car tabs. There also needs to be a lot more accountability to what is being spent to design and build it. The light rail system does not need to cost anywhere near what it does, and it should not take ten years to build a line.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 07-11-2019 08:41
07-11-2019 10:06
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1459)
I don't believe light-rail, or even mass transit works for all areas of the country. Here, there are few destination, were folks riding can just get off, and be basically where they intended to go. The population lives too spread out though, and most would need to some how need to commute to the nearest stop, to utilize these forms of transportation. And, with few exceptions, most would also need transportation to get to their final destination. It doesn't really save a lot of time or money, if you need three different rides to get where you are going. The goal for most people is a simpler life, no more complications, or stress. In areas where you have a lot of people living say, high-rise apartment buildings, and it's just a short walk to a train/bus stop, it can work. If businesses or places of work are similar, it can work. But when everything is spread out quite a bit, beyond walking distance, it make less sense.
07-11-2019 17:14
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
When I lived in the Seattle area, people wondered why I promoted a light rail system. While it's doubled or more in population, it's roads haven't.
Kind of why I wonder why people would support a ballot initiative that encourages more people to drive when it's not necessary.


https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/election-results-2019-initiative-976-car-tab-fees-taxes-tim-eyman-washington-state/


Because light rail does not do anything for the roads. It just means some of those currently riding a bus will ride a train instead. Light rail as it is being implemented is also very expensive.

I too support light rail, but it should be funded from property taxes, not car tabs. There also needs to be a lot more accountability to what is being spent to design and build it. The light rail system does not need to cost anywhere near what it does, and it should not take ten years to build a line.



Are they going to be using the old inter urban? That went from around Southgate to Everett.
With something like light rail they should be looking at what other cities have done. Remember WPPS and the problems they had with getting power plants built? They blamed it on the bid process when everyone knew what companies weren't worth considering.
07-11-2019 18:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't believe light-rail, or even mass transit works for all areas of the country.

Railroads don't. We're just too spread out as a country. Remember the airlines are mass transit too.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Here, there are few destination, were folks riding can just get off, and be basically where they intended to go. The population lives too spread out though, and most would need to some how need to commute to the nearest stop, to utilize these forms of transportation.

In cities it can work, by having the rail system augment buses. Instead of buses making long haul trips,you just have feeders to each rail station. Smaller buses can be used, and they can get where the big boys can't get to.
HarveyH55 wrote:
And, with few exceptions, most would also need transportation to get to their final destination.

Such a bus system would do that...probably better than the bus system in place now. Some rail systems are intelligent about their routing, and larger industries can be served reasonably well.
HarveyH55 wrote:
It doesn't really save a lot of time or money, if you need three different rides to get where you are going.

Mass transit isn't about saving time or money. It is about getting to work without having to get stuck driving in that commute.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The goal for most people is a simpler life, no more complications, or stress. In areas where you have a lot of people living say, high-rise apartment buildings, and it's just a short walk to a train/bus stop, it can work. If businesses or places of work are similar, it can work. But when everything is spread out quite a bit, beyond walking distance, it make less sense.

Generally people who ride such a system already live near a railstop, and where they work is already near a railstop.

Seattle is a bit unique with the high rise problem and the concentration of work areas.

The Seattle city council, in their various efforts at socialism, have introduced price controls on apartment housing. The result was predictable. A massive shortage of apartments and sky-high prices for condos. So most people left Seattle in search of a place to live.

A huge collection of apartment complexes built up around the city, right on the border. This is where these refugees from socialism are now living. Now they have to commute.

Seattle does have an extensive bus system, but all the buses are doing the same trip for most of their distance. It is duplicated effort and is putting more buses on those crowded freeways. This is where a light rail system can come into good use. It doesn't use the freeway, and reduces or removes the need for all that duplication of bus routes. Bus routes are now shorter, use smaller buses, and those don't use the freeway. The only go to the nearest rail station.

Seattle is a city caught between two large bodies of water on two sides and a canal that divides the central city from northern Seattle. Bridges required to cross these are where many pinch points in traffic flow occur. Everyone gets funneled into some available bridge somewhere.

It's as bad for traffic from the south, not because of water, but because of Boeing field. This large area of land funnels people onto I-5 or SR-99 to get to downtown. SR-99 was closed for a long time due to tunnel construction, and is now a toll road. Further, SR-99 no longer has any exits for downtown Seattle. So this puts everyone on I-5.

Seattle is famous for stupid road designs. At the I-90 interchange, I-5 is reduced from 11 lanes to 2. Guess what happens to the traffic? Worse, parking your iron somewhere in Seattle or the U district is very expensive.

Light rail currently runs from Angle Lake (just south of SeaTac airport) right on up to the U district. Students living in Rainier Valley, Tukwila, or Beacon Hill can now use the rail to get right to class, and workers at Amazon can get right to work. There are stations at both locations.

The high tech sector in the Seattle area is primarily on the east side, such as Bellevue and Redmond (home of Microsoft, Nintendo of North America, Vetco Systems, various travel agency web services, etc. Currently, light rail is being extended to these areas. This means people living on the East side have easier access to downtown Seattle, and people living along the current line or in the U district have access to their high tech jobs at Microsoft.

Microsoft alone has so many employees there aren't enough places to park their cars. Many of these employees already live near the current rail line, but it does not yet serve Microsoft. That's why the Eastside extension is being built.

That system can run across existing bridges, but does not have to get slowed down by the traffic clutter on those bridges. It means those people can doze, listen to music, and generally relax instead of driving that distance.

Heavy rail works somewhat as well in the Seattle area. Currently, there are lines tying Everett and north Seattle to downtown, and Tacoma and Puyallup to downtown. These lines are fast and smooth, and they also tie into the light rail station system fairly conveniently.

Light rail also goes to SeaTac airport. No more parking in that expensive and too small garage for airline trips. Cruise line visitors to Seattle can get to their cruise ships without having to take a taxi, Uber, or special bus. Many of them like the light rail. It lets them arrive a bit early and perhaps visit PIkes Place Market and Seattle Center before boarding their cruise ship. That's a fair bit of traffic, too.

Most attitudes about rail are narrow minded. It can work, but you have to look at where people are generally traveling and build in those corridors.

Now to Florida.

In Florida, rail is failing miserably. It doesn't go where people need to go. It is extremely expensive the way it's being implemented. It's a boondoggle project put together by corrupt politicians to justify grabbing some of that federal money. Visitors to Florida usually rent a car to visit Disneyworld because they also want to visit perhaps Universal Studios, maybe see the Everglades (why?), maybe head down the Keys, or perhaps visit someone in The Villages.

People living in The Villages generally just party and play golf. They don't commute. Yes...it's significant. The Villages currently covers three counties. People living in the Keys just stay in the Keys. Miami traffic is generally limited to Miami, and most of that is along the shoreline. Orlando is only popular because of all of the resorts in the general area. Workers for these resorts already have plenty of parking and live within the area they work. The visitors to these parks generally stay in hotels near them or are renting a car to visit other parts of Florida.

Rail is just not going to be a big thing in Florida. Orlando airport, Miami airport, and rental cars take care of the visitors, and most everyone living there isn't commuting far or not at all.

It's just a different kind of economy.


The Parrot Killer
07-11-2019 18:53
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
When I lived in the Seattle area, people wondered why I promoted a light rail system. While it's doubled or more in population, it's roads haven't.
Kind of why I wonder why people would support a ballot initiative that encourages more people to drive when it's not necessary.


https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/election-results-2019-initiative-976-car-tab-fees-taxes-tim-eyman-washington-state/


Because light rail does not do anything for the roads. It just means some of those currently riding a bus will ride a train instead. Light rail as it is being implemented is also very expensive.

I too support light rail, but it should be funded from property taxes, not car tabs. There also needs to be a lot more accountability to what is being spent to design and build it. The light rail system does not need to cost anywhere near what it does, and it should not take ten years to build a line.



Are they going to be using the old inter urban? That went from around Southgate to Everett.
With something like light rail they should be looking at what other cities have done. Remember WPPS and the problems they had with getting power plants built? They blamed it on the bid process when everyone knew what companies weren't worth considering.


No. They already have heavy rail serving Everett. Southgate is served primarily by light rail.

I remember WPPS. The problems they had wasn't so much corruption, it was lawsuits brought by anti-nuke protestors. They managed to build just one power plant instead of the three they were planning. The WPPS two plant was only partially completed, no reactor was ever installed (but the buildings and cooling towers were built). The buildings are now leased to small businesses in that area. Eventually, WPPS was abandoned, since environmentalists successfully cost that organization far more money than the plants themselves would have cost.

Washington's power mostly comes from hydroelectric and natural gas plants now. We have one functioning nuke.


The Parrot Killer
07-11-2019 23:29
James___
★★★★☆
(1691)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
When I lived in the Seattle area, people wondered why I promoted a light rail system. While it's doubled or more in population, it's roads haven't.
Kind of why I wonder why people would support a ballot initiative that encourages more people to drive when it's not necessary.


https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/election-results-2019-initiative-976-car-tab-fees-taxes-tim-eyman-washington-state/


Because light rail does not do anything for the roads. It just means some of those currently riding a bus will ride a train instead. Light rail as it is being implemented is also very expensive.

I too support light rail, but it should be funded from property taxes, not car tabs. There also needs to be a lot more accountability to what is being spent to design and build it. The light rail system does not need to cost anywhere near what it does, and it should not take ten years to build a line.



Are they going to be using the old inter urban? That went from around Southgate to Everett.
With something like light rail they should be looking at what other cities have done. Remember WPPS and the problems they had with getting power plants built? They blamed it on the bid process when everyone knew what companies weren't worth considering.


No. They already have heavy rail serving Everett. Southgate is served primarily by light rail.

I remember WPPS. The problems they had wasn't so much corruption, it was lawsuits brought by anti-nuke protestors. They managed to build just one power plant instead of the three they were planning. The WPPS two plant was only partially completed, no reactor was ever installed (but the buildings and cooling towers were built). The buildings are now leased to small businesses in that area. Eventually, WPPS was abandoned, since environmentalists successfully cost that organization far more money than the plants themselves would have cost.

Washington's power mostly comes from hydroelectric and natural gas plants now. We have one functioning nuke.



When you consider Hanford but then salmon runs are down. What I never understood is since the entire flow of the river isn't going through the turbines why they don't create a channel around the dam. It might need to be several miles up stream but it would allow for power generation while allowing the river to have sufficient flow to help support the ecosystem.
08-11-2019 19:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9806)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
When I lived in the Seattle area, people wondered why I promoted a light rail system. While it's doubled or more in population, it's roads haven't.
Kind of why I wonder why people would support a ballot initiative that encourages more people to drive when it's not necessary.


https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/election-results-2019-initiative-976-car-tab-fees-taxes-tim-eyman-washington-state/


Because light rail does not do anything for the roads. It just means some of those currently riding a bus will ride a train instead. Light rail as it is being implemented is also very expensive.

I too support light rail, but it should be funded from property taxes, not car tabs. There also needs to be a lot more accountability to what is being spent to design and build it. The light rail system does not need to cost anywhere near what it does, and it should not take ten years to build a line.



Are they going to be using the old inter urban? That went from around Southgate to Everett.
With something like light rail they should be looking at what other cities have done. Remember WPPS and the problems they had with getting power plants built? They blamed it on the bid process when everyone knew what companies weren't worth considering.


No. They already have heavy rail serving Everett. Southgate is served primarily by light rail.

I remember WPPS. The problems they had wasn't so much corruption, it was lawsuits brought by anti-nuke protestors. They managed to build just one power plant instead of the three they were planning. The WPPS two plant was only partially completed, no reactor was ever installed (but the buildings and cooling towers were built). The buildings are now leased to small businesses in that area. Eventually, WPPS was abandoned, since environmentalists successfully cost that organization far more money than the plants themselves would have cost.

Washington's power mostly comes from hydroelectric and natural gas plants now. We have one functioning nuke.



When you consider Hanford but then salmon runs are down. What I never understood is since the entire flow of the river isn't going through the turbines why they don't create a channel around the dam. It might need to be several miles up stream but it would allow for power generation while allowing the river to have sufficient flow to help support the ecosystem.

The river does have sufficient flow.

Salmon runs go up and down. Nothing about Hanford changes that.


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate Light Rail vs Cars:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Hybrid cars vs electric cars6512-09-2019 01:43
Climate Change causes flooding in Orlando, damages cars.411-07-2019 20:05
Trump Administration's Attempts to Limit Climate Change Science 'Like Designing Cars Without Seat128-05-2019 20:13
Jaguar Land Rover recalls 44,000 cars over carbon dioxide levels2017-03-2019 08:17
Why don't Canada stop making steel and cars like Austrlia did in 2017 if they are so concerned about 004-03-2019 17:21
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact