Our City Online

Messageboard - Transportation

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Bustling Urban Neighborhoods Create Parking Tension

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Transportation Bustling Urban Neighborhoods Create Parking Tension

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 212 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #546540
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    columbusmike said:
    I don’t think you can convince anyone in this part of the country to build rail without first changing the culture and attitudes.

    That much we agree on.

    #546541

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    InnerCore said:
    While I most agree with you, its like being right in theory and not reality. We should be building a light rail right now, but you know what, we aren’t. Furthermore we don’t have solid plans to build it anytime soon. But yet we are spending PUBLIC money to build parking garages.

    This is what I hate about liberals. They would rather fight “fair” on principles about what they think is right meanwhile everyone else will use whatever tactic to get push through their agenda.

    I think we can guarantee that there wont be a light rail line build in a year. But a shuttle/trolley bus/circulator could be implemented in a matter of months. Why not implement it and continue to fight for light rail, instead of not implementing it and spending more public money on garages making it less likely we’ll ever get the rail.

    I have no problem with a shuttle in the interim period so long as it is used as a temporary fix. But I guarantee that if a shuttle system is in place, if a rail plan is not put forth at the same time, it’ll become more difficult for a rail system to come later. There will be plenty of people who will see the shuttle as the long-term solution and won’t think the next step is needed or why money was spent for a system that will just be replaced by another. If you want a shuttle system, future rail has to be part of the equation and goal. It has to be an understood progression, especially for politicians/suburbanites who have stood against these efforts for decades.

    #546542

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    columbusmike said:
    I think you’re on the right track. We need to increase our existing public transit service, ala our COTA bus system, in order to change the culture here. If COTA could service more locations, more frequently, soon you would quickly develop a culture of public transportation that will demand rail and other forms of public transit.

    I’m not sure how places such as Seattle and Portland developed their public transportation culture, but unfortunately I don’t think you can convince anyone in this part of the country to build rail without first changing the culture and attitudes.

    I totally disagree with that last part. Rail proposals for Columbus have long been supported by the general public within the city. It seems like the local culture is already willing, but politics and financial issues have been getting in the way.

    #546543

    GCrites80s
    Participant

    ^Then people who care giving up and bolting.

    #546544

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    GCrites80s said:
    ^Then people who care giving up and bolting.

    Columbus has been extremely unlucky when it comes to rail proposals.

    #546545

    NerosNeptune
    Participant

    jbcmh81 said:
    I have no problem with a shuttle in the interim period so long as it is used as a temporary fix. But I guarantee that if a shuttle system is in place, if a rail plan is not put forth at the same time, it’ll become more difficult for a rail system to come later. There will be plenty of people who will see the shuttle as the long-term solution and won’t think the next step is needed or why money was spent for a system that will just be replaced by another. If you want a shuttle system, future rail has to be part of the equation and goal. It has to be an understood progression, especially for politicians/suburbanites who have stood against these efforts for decades.

    If a circulator works and takes care of the problem, then I don’t see what’s wrong with that. We shouldn’t be trying to solve the problem by spending as much money as possible, and we shouldn’t be building rail for no reason at all. If a circulator route does the job for a lot less money, then that’s perfect. If the circulator route is successful but shows a need for more transit or permanent rail lines, then that will eventually happen.

    #546546

    mrsgeedeck
    Participant

    NerosNeptune said:
    If a circulator works and takes care of the problem, then I don’t see what’s wrong with that. We shouldn’t be trying to solve the problem by spending as much money as possible, and we shouldn’t be building rail for no reason at all. If a circulator route does the job for a lot less money, then that’s perfect. If the circulator route is successful but shows a need for more transit or permanent rail lines, then that will eventually happen.

    +1

    I’m a proponent of rail, but I agree, if a circulator or BRT works I’d rather have that then nothing especially considering the infrastructure etc., is in place.

    #546547

    columbusmike
    Participant

    mrsgeedeck said:
    +1

    I’m a proponent of rail, but I agree, if a circulator or BRT works I’d rather have that then nothing especially considering the infrastructure etc., is in place.

    I agree. I’d love rail, but I’d also much rather have a very good bus system in the very near future that can get me around town with ease.

    Whatever the system, it just needs to get more vehicles off the road and get more people walking. It will make our people healthier, our neighborhoods more pedestrian oriented, reduce congestion, allow for essential personnel, and hopefully reduce the amount of road infrastructure we need to maintain — not to mention numerous other benefits.

    I’d much rather brag to other’s that 75% of the Columbus population takes the public bus daily than say we have this new shiny train that carries 5-10% of cbus riders daily.

    #546548

    InnerCore
    Participant

    jbcmh81 said:
    I have no problem with a shuttle in the interim period so long as it is used as a temporary fix. But I guarantee that if a shuttle system is in place, if a rail plan is not put forth at the same time, it’ll become more difficult for a rail system to come later. There will be plenty of people who will see the shuttle as the long-term solution and won’t think the next step is needed or why money was spent for a system that will just be replaced by another. If you want a shuttle system, future rail has to be part of the equation and goal. It has to be an understood progression, especially for politicians/suburbanites who have stood against these efforts for decades.

    The problem is that position isn’t in a position of power right now. So lets follow your logic and say “screw it, if they won’t lets us do light rail, then were not going to do a shuttle in the meantime we’ll show them.”

    Then the only thing that happens is that we build more garages, diluting the neighborhood and creating more public funded demand for parking and therefore less demand for rail in the future.

    I think you of all people know I’m pretty much as pro rail as you can get. I slam Columbus constantly and pretty much find a way to revert ever topic back to rail because I feel its a huge negative for the area.

    But at the end of the day it is what it is. We aren’t getting rail anytime soon. Maybe we do get it a decade from now, maybe we don’t. But what are we going to do about parking in the SN TODAY.

    #546549

    InnerCore
    Participant

    columbusmike said:
    I’d much rather brag to other’s that 75% of the Columbus population takes the public bus daily than say we have this new shiny train that carries 5-10% of cbus riders daily.

    Now you’re going a little bit to far. We know that more people are willing ride rail than buses. As long as you don’t have rail you are essentially handicapping yourself.

    Both buses and rails have their strengths and weaknesses. Any system without both will be a flawed system. No one system can be used universally.

    #546550

    NerosNeptune
    Participant

    I think these are two different conversations. Building up a rail line for people to come to the short north or downtown for fun doesn’t make as much sense as it does for getting commuters off of roads during peak hours. There is never traffic backed up on the interstate with people trying to get to gallery hop.. the traffic/parking problem is specifically in that small area.

    Putting in a circulator, and signage pointing people who are driving into the area to outside lots/garages, would be a quick and easy way of getting cars out of the short north. People don’t even need to change their behavior, they just get in the car and head to the short north, see a sign for short north parking, park, and hop on a shuttle.

    #546551
    Josh Lapp
    Josh Lapp
    Participant

    NerosNeptune said:
    I think these are two different conversations. Building up a rail line for people to come to the short north or downtown for fun doesn’t make as much sense as it does for getting commuters off of roads during peak hours. There is never traffic backed up on the interstate with people trying to get to gallery hop.. the traffic/parking problem is specifically in that small area.

    Putting in a circulator, and signage pointing people who are driving into the area to outside lots/garages, would be a quick and easy way of getting cars out of the short north. People don’t even need to change their behavior, they just get in the car and head to the short north, see a sign for short north parking, park, and hop on a shuttle.

    The thing is that a circulator is certainly needed in the short term (or maybe just better branding/simplification of the #2?) But in order to really make transit more desirable than cars we need to build a system with a dedicated right of way. Transit would be really attractive if you were sitting in traffic watching the train or BRT zooming by you rather than stuck in traffic alongside you. And dedicated right of ways aren’t cheap. Until this is done the bus system won’t meet it’s potential.

    #546552

    GCrites80s
    Participant

    Once rail transit is in place in a city, the attitude toward buses changes significantly for the better. It turns them from, in many people’s eyes, a jitney for the poor to an important part of the transportation system.

    That’s why right-wingers are so hell-bent on bus, bus, bus with no rail whatsoever. They want the bus (and public transportation overall) to remain perceived as something only poor people and the mentally ill use because they have to rather than buses gaining a favorable reputation among all citizens.

    #546553
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    columbusmike said:
    I’d much rather brag to other’s that 75% of the Columbus population takes the public bus daily than say we have this new shiny train that carries 5-10% of cbus riders daily.

    Maybe, just maybe, transit policy shouldn’t be based on bragging rights?

    #546554

    bman
    Participant

    GCrites80s said:
    Once rail transit is in place in a city, the attitude toward buses changes significantly for the better. It turns them from, in many people’s eyes, a jitney for the poor to an important part of the transportation system.

    That’s why right-wingers are so hell-bent on bus, bus, bus with no rail whatsoever. They want the bus (and public transportation overall) to remain perceived as something only poor people and the mentally ill use because they have to rather than buses gaining a favorable reputation among all citizens.

    LOL!!!

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 212 total)

The forum ‘Transportation’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: