Raleigh is not ready for trains, I’ve come to a conclusion Raleigh doesn’t even have a good bus system, invest more into that and in 10 years think about a train.
1 Like
I think it’s apples to oranges - in a lot of places around here, buses don’t avoid the traffic, meaning for most people, a bus is not worth the additional time, hassle, and complexity when it comes to travel…if I could take a train from Union Station (a quick scooter ride away from me) to the airport, or to RTP that gets me there quicker than a car/bus during rush hour - I would use that over driving 100% of the time. I also think buses (unfairly or not) have a certain amount of stigma that prevent adoption for certain people in this area…
All of this to say, please vote for trains if the opportunity comes up. We want more trains and more buses and a gondola and bike lanes and all sorts of public transit opportunities for folks in the future
7 Likes
I would support rail transit if a good project came up. I’m not going to support a peak express transit service built around a park and ride model, regardless of technology. When I’ve seen rail proposed in Raleigh, this is what I’ve seen proposed. The Commuter Rail was to be a peak-only express service surrounded by large parking lots. This was not proposed as a phase of a better build out. This was proposed as a final build out.
I do support the current transit expansion going on right now under the Wake Transit Plan. I love the frequent service we now have on the 9, 15, the coming 14, and the proposed all day frequent service on the 100x. I love how our fleet is growing and we’re hiring new bus drivers. When my parents visited Raleigh in November, they didn’t rent a car, because we mostly took the bus together. BRT is struggling but even without BRT, transit in Raleigh is improving significantly.
4 Likes
If we are going to have commuter rail, we need stations with high density mixed use development at each! Imagine a North Hills type redevelopment at each transit stop where riders could WALK to their station! Alas, that seems to be too much to ask.
7 Likes
I’m not trying to instigate anything here, but do you mind explaining why you’re so opposed to the park and ride concept? DC Metro ofc had/has plenty of park and rides, but by 2025, there’s mixed use development at pretty much all of them now. For people who utilize the park and ride option, it still means they’re driving far fewer total miles, which is a win.
FYI Omaha’s getting a 3 mile streetcar. Privately funded. There are countless opportunities for streetcars in Raleigh, and I’d prefer them over BRT no doubt. Omaha found a way between 1- having a strong vision for its downtown (mayor’s goal is to add 30k residents) and 2- luring an energy company downtown from midtown and making a deal that included a streetcar. Read: effort and creativity. That’s why I don’t accept any excuse from Raleigh on our BRT nightmare. We all know the reasons why it hasn’t started and that the city has been trying. Frankly, it just doesn’t matter at all. City leaders’ job is to figure it out, and they failed. I’d like to at least see responsibility taken vs the constant re-explanation of the reasons it hasn’t started @anon8787296
See, y’all thought I saw everything through rose colored lenses 
2 Likes
The basic answer is that park and rides don’t attract many riders and the riders they do attract tend to be high income/wealth.
A few park and rides are fine, they have a place but I would argue that WMATA was successful due to the Bullseye Plans that they made. Concentrating dense development around stations. By the time someone has gotten in a car, the likelihood of them getting on a transit service has dropped significantly. Especially if they can park at their destination.
4 Likes
Yep ok I think we’re actually aligned. You’re right, you can’t cater the whole system to high earners who drive. And need transit that connects existing working class neighborhoods too. This is why new light rails in Denver and Dallas have been scrutinized. They took the easier route of paralleling interstates, and the result is under-utilized lines. They simply don’t go where the density is. Now over time, I’m sure those suburban stations will fill in with development. But those cities spent a lot of money on transit lines that simply don’t connect a lot of people. (I know overall Dallas ridership is high, I’m talking about more recent suburban extensions).
2 Likes
To piggyback, Denver is an example of far too many park and rides. There are numerous stations where there’s…literally nothing but parking. If the point of transit is to offer an alternative to driving, forcing people to drive to transit seems to be the opposite of that goal with limited exceptions. Land around stations is nearly always better developed into medium/high density areas either commercial or residential or mixed use.
4 Likes
These Light Rail systems aren’t that new anymore. They’re both around 20 years old. Still surrounded by parking.
I think this is where I disagree, if it’s not in a plan, it’s not going to happen. There was no plan to only use park and rides as interim uses while development pressures build. The Federal Government, even in relatively good times, really doesn’t like it when you spend their money to build things you later demolish.
I know that TriMet has been doing this slowly around some stations but I don’t know of any other agencies actively doing it and it took them 30 years to start.