For the plan? Against? Clueless?

If you don't like the plan what do you think is the solution? Toll roads? Bus System Improvements? BRT? Curitiba system? Monorail? Light Rail?

2/15/2006 12:51:37 PM

This has been discussed here plenty.

But basically, it's stupid. We have an incredibly decentralized metripolitan area with no real population or commercial centers. It's a huge waste of money for something rendered worthless by decades of urban sprawl.

2/15/2006 1:06:31 PM

MONORAIL!

2/15/2006 1:13:25 PM

very stupid

2/15/2006 1:14:49 PM

chicken or the egg

2/15/2006 1:14:50 PM

very stupid because they want to share the rails with the freight trains. that screws your scheduling for one thing (biggest problem), introduces risk and added expense to make the commuter trains heavy enough to meet safety standards in the event of freight/passenger collision

2/15/2006 1:17:30 PM

I think they should either build a lot of HOV lanes, or a separate major interstate toll road that connects Raleigh, CH, and Durham.

2/15/2006 1:23:26 PM

I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and by gum it put them on the map!

2/15/2006 1:27:37 PM

lisa needs braces

2/15/2006 1:28:03 PM

But SUNK COST we've already SUNK COST spent so much money SUNK COST planning!

2/15/2006 1:54:27 PM

But, but, Charlotte's getting one!

2/15/2006 1:59:01 PM

if we can get some rich guy, or federal money to build this, then it would be nice to have... but its not worth state money if we can manage to do something better with that money.

(but bureaucracy has a way of tying up money, so if this is the only project we could actually get backing for, then I might say go for it)

2/15/2006 2:05:19 PM

i think it would be awesome to have one, BUT, i would only use it if it was faster than driving to rtp daily. it would also be really nice to take to the airport. but when going to rtp and the airport, you then go to a loading station, then a bus takes you to where you want to go.

2/15/2006 2:07:59 PM

We're twice as smart as the people of Charlotte.
Just tell us your idea, and we'll vote for it!

2/15/2006 2:26:07 PM

Quote :

"it would also be really nice to take to the airport. but when going to rtp and the airport"

that's interesting because even if the project were to go ahead, they've already said they wouldn't put in an airport stop

how u like dem apples

2/15/2006 2:38:43 PM

Just make 40 a double decker highway in both directions. Oh and Capital Blvd. while you're at it.

2/15/2006 3:01:54 PM

Marge: I still think we ought to spend the money to fix Main Street Capital Blvd..
Homer: Well, you should've written a song like that guy.

2/15/2006 3:05:34 PM

We gotta stop sprawl either way.

2/15/2006 3:07:46 PM

^OMG YOU SOUND LIKE THOSE DAMN INNER-CITY LIBERAL BLACK POLITICIANS TRYIN TO BRING US UPSTANDING WHITE PEOPLE DOWN

unfortunately, thats an exact quote (sort of) from a guy thats on WPTF.

2/15/2006 3:10:07 PM

In conclusion, "mono" means "one" and "rail" means "rail".

2/15/2006 4:35:46 PM

I sense a TGD re-post coming on.

2/15/2006 4:46:35 PM

As much as I'd love to see it, I don't think the benefits will justify the costs. I think they need to build density first. They could take the money they want to spend on this and use it to entice developers to build dense affordable housing or as subsidies/tax breaks to make downtown condos more affordable. As long as you get bigger, better, and cheaper in the suburbs, sprawl will continue.

2/15/2006 4:53:22 PM

but this (or at least a better execution of the same idea) would help build density

chicken or the egg?

2/15/2006 5:38:26 PM

The way these things were paid for in the past was quite clever:

A group of developers get together, purchase a large tract of land outside of town (pick a direction). They then raise money to build a tramway line from downtown to their whole-ly owned suburb. They then build dense walk-ups along the sides of the tramway and side streets within walking distance.

As a result, the developers get to rent rural land as if it was downtown, rediculous profits are reaped. The tramway company doesn't even need to operate at a pure profit, as it is also owned by the land-owners who do not mind subsidizing the train in order to maintain their elevated land value and the high rents that naturally follow.

Today, this system is sometimes upside down: train access to downtown "can" reduce land value (allows the rift-raft easy access to your stuff).

Even when it is a positive effect, a city/government run line is incapable of capturing the value rendered because the route is decided by the political process and not the market (highest bidder). What should happen when all the land is already otherwise owned, the various suburbs' homeowners' associations should attempt to pay the rail-line to go through their neighborhood, either a one-time fee (for construction) or a yearly rent (to keep the local station open). If you refuse to pay, the rail-line goes elsewhere or simply doesn't stop here. If everyone refuses then it doesn't get built.

2/15/2006 5:54:42 PM

you didnt even attempt to make a simpsons reference in that post



so i disagree

2/15/2006 5:55:20 PM

http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Overview/projectOverview.html

2/15/2006 6:07:22 PM

Quote :

"I think they need to build density first. They could take the money they want to spend on this and use it to entice developers to build dense affordable housing or as subsidies/tax breaks to make downtown condos more affordable."

Most of the land near the stations has been bought up by developers anticipating the rail station...many of these projects will be abandonded if the rail is not built.
not that nando is a reputable source but... http://www.newsobserver.com/858/story/379685.html

Quote :

"MONORAIL!"

Actually, Seattle just approved a huge (though very controversial) monorail project (different form LV b/c that was private funding). Many cities in Asia use monorails as a real form of transportation (AKA not as a theme park ride). However, there are very few "proven" systems in the western world. Monorail proponents often argue that they can build their systems with private investments and then actually make back the money by leasing out space in the stations to retail, etc. It will be interesting to see how Seattle's system does. Almost as funny as the Simpson's monorail song, is the monorail society video http://www.monorails.org/....although i somehow doubt that this was its intention. One HUGE advantage of monorails is that they are not at-grade, reducing the risk of vehicle and pedestrian interactions (aka crashes).

Quote :

"or federal money to build this, then it would be nice to have... but its not worth state money "

...well, the way the federal law goes is that there is a maximum portion of a project that can be funded federally and every federal dollar has to be matched by state and local dollars....

Quote :

"very stupid because they want to share the rails with the freight trains"

nope.

2/16/2006 12:16:27 PM

What I am most curious about is actually what people think can be done other than the rail (since it appears to be headed downnnnnnnnnn) to reduce congestion.

I personally hate everything in the triangle being only car-accessible and would have loved to ride the rail. Whether that was the best solution for the entire population - who will know b/c it will probs never get built.

Do you think that building more roads even if they are tolls will help our congestion problem or will it just spread it out to other parts of the region (like the rest of the future outer loop area)? I am of the opinion that it will just foster a more spread out, car-dependent region that will fail to ever ever ever pass any FTA test for funding of transit. What do you all think about a system like that in Curitiba? DO you think it could ever work in NC? Has anybody ridden the system or other true BRT systems like the silver line in boston?
http://www.fta.dot.gov/7694_7697_ENG_HTML.htm

2/16/2006 12:22:34 PM

Quote :

"Most of the land near the stations has been bought up by developers anticipating the rail station..."

Why aren't they helping to pay for it?

2/16/2006 1:05:14 PM

just give everybody mopeds.

2/16/2006 2:07:35 PM

I call the big one Bitey!

And no, rail will not be effective in the triangle.

At all.

Ever.

2/16/2006 3:31:31 PM

^ The bus system, however, has promise

2/16/2006 4:05:58 PM

a rail system will work, i did it on simcity4 and my approval went up 3 little green bars

2/17/2006 4:00:42 PM

Was 95% of the map zoned as light residential?

2/17/2006 4:01:57 PM

yeah its just like raleigh
i even decreased road funding so i would have lots of potholes

2/17/2006 4:14:54 PM

DONUTS
IS THERE ANYTHING THEY CAN'T DO?

2/17/2006 4:20:58 PM

^^^ Well done!

2/17/2006 4:57:19 PM

man i gotta get v.4

2/18/2006 3:21:43 PM

Haha, well, while we're using sim city 4 as an example, when I put up monorail stations up around residential/commercial/industrial stations, development occurred near the station first and worked its way out (with the biggest buildings being closest to the station).

So clearly this will work.

2/18/2006 4:03:34 PM

thats what im saying

(^^ hit me up for a torrent)

2/18/2006 4:22:53 PM

Hell, I based a whole city off of a monorail public transportation system and a highway. Damn thing's up to 142,000 people now! (That's like a metropolis in SC4, huge.)

2/18/2006 4:32:16 PM

Quote :

"rift-raft "

2/18/2006 4:38:37 PM

2/18/2006 5:16:35 PM

Mindstorm, I had a city with over a million residents!

And monorail does rock. It has unlimited carrying capacity (not realistic, but who cares?)

2/18/2006 9:47:48 PM

I hear those things are awfully loud...

2/18/2006 9:49:14 PM

WHAAAT?

2/18/2006 10:39:59 PM

..the ring came off my pudding can...

2/21/2006 2:38:29 PM

take my pen knife, my good man

2/21/2006 2:39:50 PM

What about us brain dead slobs?

2/21/2006 2:44:26 PM

the solution is, of course, to build another loop around what will be 640

2/21/2006 2:48:42 PM