Page 1 of 5

Buses vs Rail and Cars vs Transit

Posted: October 10th, 2012, 7:47 am
by PhilmerPhil
This article was passed around on Twitter yesterday and I wanted to share it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/brent-tode ... 40979.html
Expanding urban biking is about making better, fiscally smarter, healthier, more flexible and resilient cities. Bikes are hardly a silver bullet, but they can be a big part of better city-making.
I know most people on this forum seem to get this, but for the few that think it's about bikes vs. cars, I think it's important to look at the bigger picture and think about what makes for a better city.

Re: It's Not About The Bike Or Car -- It's About Better Citi

Posted: October 10th, 2012, 3:21 pm
by UptownSport
but for the few that think it's about bikes vs. cars.
Bikes vs cars? I think the car would win. :shock:

Re: It's Not About The Bike Or Car -- It's About Better Citi

Posted: October 10th, 2012, 3:23 pm
by PhilmerPhil
If ever anyone says there's a war on cars, a good response is "If you go by fatalities, cars are way in the lead!"

Re: It's Not About The Bike Or Car -- It's About Better Citi

Posted: November 5th, 2012, 7:32 am
by seanrichardryan

Buses vs Rail and Cars vs Transit

Posted: May 23rd, 2013, 11:27 am
by mullen
a streetcar in rochester...that's really precious. meanwhile the twin cities has to beg, borrow and look under couch cushions for transit funding.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 11:12 am
by nasa35
a streetcar in rochester...that's really precious. meanwhile the twin cities has to beg, borrow and look under couch cushions for transit funding.
Honestly, what exactly is wrong with the transit choices in the twin cities? Our buses are on time and go just about everywhere.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 12:12 pm
by ECtransplant
a streetcar in rochester...that's really precious. meanwhile the twin cities has to beg, borrow and look under couch cushions for transit funding.
Honestly, what exactly is wrong with the transit choices in the twin cities? Our buses are on time and go just about everywhere.
Spoken like someone who relies on their car.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 12:18 pm
by David Greene
^^ This.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 12:42 pm
by RailBaronYarr
^Yep.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 12:47 pm
by MNdible
If you're strategic about where you live and where you work, the transit system will do a great job of serving your needs. Areas of the metro are very well served by the existing bus system.

And other areas, not so much. And to be completely honest, there are many areas that cannot effectively be served by mass transit.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:24 pm
by the kid
^Yep.
^Spoken like a young kid who likes spending other peoples money to make his urban wet dreams come true

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:27 pm
by mattaudio
^by mapping out existing service?
#letmeknowifyouwantyourpostdeletedtoavoidshame

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:35 pm
by FISHMANPET
a streetcar in rochester...that's really precious. meanwhile the twin cities has to beg, borrow and look under couch cushions for transit funding.
Honestly, what exactly is wrong with the transit choices in the twin cities? Our buses are on time and go just about everywhere.
This is what confuses me about you nasa35, you crave tall buildings at all costs, but view transit as a necessity for the poor. Everyone should be able to drive if they can afford to. Should a downtown be 75% parking ramps and 25% 1000ft tall buildings? I'm just not sure what urban vision you have, other than tall buildings are good, not tall buildings are bad.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:45 pm
by nasa35
a streetcar in rochester...that's really precious. meanwhile the twin cities has to beg, borrow and look under couch cushions for transit funding.
Honestly, what exactly is wrong with the transit choices in the twin cities? Our buses are on time and go just about everywhere.
Spoken like someone who relies on their car.
answered by someone who clearly doesn't know. People have to drive their cars to rail stops, or does that just become some non factor?

Bus can go anywhere. Rail interupts the flow of traffic and is locked down. Not sensible solution in a sprawl.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:46 pm
by ECtransplant
^Yep.
^Spoken like a young kid who likes spending other peoples money to make his urban wet dreams come true
Or who doesn't like the spending of other peoples' money to build sprawl, freeways, bridges, etc. out to the sticks.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:46 pm
by nasa35
a streetcar in rochester...that's really precious. meanwhile the twin cities has to beg, borrow and look under couch cushions for transit funding.
Honestly, what exactly is wrong with the transit choices in the twin cities? Our buses are on time and go just about everywhere.
This is what confuses me about you nasa35, you crave tall buildings at all costs, but view transit as a necessity for the poor. Everyone should be able to drive if they can afford to. Should a downtown be 75% parking ramps and 25% 1000ft tall buildings? I'm just not sure what urban vision you have, other than tall buildings are good, not tall buildings are bad.
What part of my support for buses do you not understand?

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:47 pm
by nasa35
^Yep.
^Spoken like a young kid who likes spending other peoples money to make his urban wet dreams come true
:lol:

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:48 pm
by ECtransplant
answered by someone who clearly doesn't know. People have to drive their cars to rail stops, or does that just become some non factor?

Bus can go anywhere. Rail interupts the flow of traffic and is locked down. Not sensible solution in a sprawl.
There are people who walk to train stations . . . and we don't have to just accept the sprawl as a given . . .

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 1:50 pm
by nasa35
answered by someone who clearly doesn't know. People have to drive their cars to rail stops, or does that just become some non factor?

Bus can go anywhere. Rail interupts the flow of traffic and is locked down. Not sensible solution in a sprawl.
There are people who walk to train stations . . . and we don't have to just accept the sprawl as a given . . .
You allowed your opinion, but not your facts. We live in a sprawl.

Re: Rochester Transit Line

Posted: May 24th, 2013, 2:28 pm
by RailBaronYarr
^Yep.
^Spoken like a young kid who likes spending other peoples money to make his urban wet dreams come true
Or who doesn't like the spending of other peoples' money to build sprawl, freeways, bridges, etc. out to the sticks.
^^ The amount of subsidy for rail or any other transit by far pales in comparison to the amount we prop up oil, roads, bridges, SF homes, and on and on. Not even close.
answered by someone who clearly doesn't know. People have to drive their cars to rail stops, or does that just become some non factor?

Bus can go anywhere. Rail interupts the flow of traffic and is locked down. Not sensible solution in a sprawl.
Does grade-separated rail interrupt precious car traffic? Where is it written in the rule of man that an at-grade train carrying hundreds of passengers shouldn't have right of way vs. a car? I was unaware that the only way to get to train stations or platforms was by car. I'll be sure to notify everyone in London, NYC, Paris, Singapore, Hong Kong, Boston,, (need I go on) who arrive at rail transit by foot or bike that they're living in a dreamworld.