 |
|
| Responses to Arguments Against Light Rail This is the interactive part of this site. If you have heard arguments against Light Rail and public transit in Tucson, please email them to us at info@TucsonLightRail.org Please also indicate whether we can use your name. We will post arguments and responses as we get them, so keep checking back to see what we've posted... MYTH: "We need greater density to support light rail." RESPONSE: The real issue is not population density, but travel density. Any corridor with severe auto density is a candidate for light rail. The corridor chosen must be the one that has the largest number of large trip attractors. That is why Broadway consistently rises to the top as a likely first choice, because no where else in the metro area can you line up (within the corridor, not necessarily right on Broadway) PCC West, two major hospitals (St. Mary's and St. Joseph's), downtown and Rio Nuevo, the U of A, two regional shopping centers (El Con and Park Place), and a corporate center (Williams Center). The old issue of population density was (and still is) applicable to a lot of the subway (heavy rail) lines in the largest cities, where there is no parking around the station. There had to be enough people living or working within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of the stations (close enough to walk to the stations) to make the line work. In no place where Light Rail has been built have they expected that significant numbers of people would walk to the station or that sufficient people would be located near the station to make the line work. Rather they have assumed that people would come to the station by driving, bicycling, being dropped off, or shuttle bus. That combination requires large parking lots at outlying stations, but brings people from a two to three mile radius of suburban stations, and results in enough riders to make the line successful. Many of the successful new light rail systems around the country are in urban sprawl, automobile oriented, sun belt cities with densities comparable to Tucson. Salt Lake, Denver, Dallas, Sacramento, San Diego, to name a few, all have successful LRT lines in operation primarily serving areas with densities not unlike Tucson. Lines are being planned in Phoenix and Albuquerque. Here are some comparisons of population densities of Tucson with those cities: Tucson: 2656 persons/square mile (which includes all that empty land on the southeast side, skewing the number further downwards) Portland: 3572 persons/square mile Additionally, there are census tracts in Tucson which have the same population density as Miami, Providence, and Berkeley. These tracts will also likely be adjacent to the proposed light rail lines.
MYTH: "Let's face it. We're not gonna get people out of their cars." RESPONSE: We are not fighting against cars when we fight for public transit. We are seeking to give people options which might allow them the freedom to choose high-quality transit if they so desire. Currently most people with cars have no other real options, as SunTran is so intimidating and underfunded as to be extremely unattractive to car commuters. Light Rail has been proven to be a transit option which is so attractive that it does attract former car commuters at extremely high rates. Surveys in Denver show that 48% of the riders on their Light Rail system had never previously used public transit. Similar surveys in St. Louis put that figure at an amazing 70%. Large portions of the car trips made on Tucson's major corridors are made by people driving to work, parking their cars all day, then driving home again at night. If there were high-quality transit options besides that increasingly congested and stressful commute, many Tucsonans would gladly choose to take transit. And if that choice allowed their family to get by with only one car instead of two, they could save around $7,000 per year (tax free!) in excess auto expenses while still benefiting from the remaining car for errands and other trips not served by transit lines. Cars do benefit people, and we do not advocate abandoning our road system. But adding high-quality transit options can make our lives a lot easier, our bank accounts a lot fatter, and our communities a lot more livable.
MYTH: "We should just spend more money on buses. They're cheaper, aren't they?" RESPONSE: We support spending more money on our bus system, as we need to have a healthy bus system covering the whole city as part of our overall transit picture. But we do not believe that buses alone will solve our transportation problems. First, in order to attract car commuters, you need to give drivers an option they want to use. In city after city, surveys show that Light Rail is more effective than any other mode at attracting former car commuters. In Denver, 48% of their riders had never previously used public transit; in St, Louis, that figure was 70%. Let's talk cost. Yes light rail cost more up front.. But buses cost more in the long run. Here's a few point-by-point comparisons: 1) Buses last 12 years, then need to be replaced; Light Rail vehicles last 30-50 years. 2) Buses use the same asphalt lanes as cars, and thus are subject to the same congestion as cars, as well as clogging up the streets in the way of cars 3) Because buses use the same asphalt as cars, and because of their weight, they tend to wear out the asphalt much quicker, increasing maintenance costs on all routes. Light Rail vehicles use rails, which take decades to wear out. In fact, some of the current trolley line rails were laid originally over 100 years ago. 4) The maximum comfortable capacity of an articulated bus is 90 people for one driver; one light rail train can carry 450 people for one driver. Driver salaries are the largest percentage of the operating costs for any transit system. Light rail carries more people per driver, and thus costs less to operate. 5) Buses require more ongoing maintenance than rail vehicles, increasing operating costs. But let's not get in a bus vs rail argument. We need both. What we need is bus AND light rail AND commuter rail AND VanTran AND bicycles AND pedestrians AND cars to create an integrated, efficient, and functional transportation system.
Also check out these links for responses to arguments against Light Rail: Does Transit Work? A Conservative Reappraisal by Paul Weyrich http://www.apta.com/info/online/weyrich2new.htm| Light Rail Claims vs. Facts http://members.aol.com/friends4expo/lrp922.htm Light Rail Myths http://www.lightrailnow.org/myths.html How to Respond to Anti-Transit Rhetoric http://www.apta.com/info/online/weyrich_blumenauer.htm And visit our Links page for other information on the Web. |