Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Couldn’t you say the same for a project like Complete 540? Yep people don’t bat an eye at the massive development money that is going to be made off that project.
The way we treat transit in this country is the equivalent of building a starter 3 mile freeway in the middle of nowhere not connected to anything and then calling the Interstate system a failure because nobody rides it.
I guess we’ll see in 2027 whether that was the right move or not.
Couldn’t you say the same for a project like Complete 540? Yep people don’t bat an eye at the massive development money that is going to be made off that project.
The way we treat transit in this country is the equivalent of building a starter 3 mile freeway in the middle of nowhere not connected to anything and then calling the Interstate system a failure because nobody rides it.
I guess we’ll see in 2027 whether that was the right move or not.
Building the LRT doesn't eliminate the need for roads like 540. This isn't Sodor. Completing 540 is expected to cost about half of the LRT and will serve far more people and not just people who live along its route. Also, don't forget that the interstate highway system was built largely for national security purposes, to mobilize military assets in an invasion and to aid evacuations in an emergency.
Building the LRT doesn't eliminate the need for roads like 540. This isn't Sodor. Completing 540 is expected to cost about half of the LRT and will serve far more people and not just people who live along its route. Also, don't forget that the interstate highway system was built largely for national security purposes, to mobilize military assets in an invasion and to aid evacuations in an emergency.
Not really. That was one of the reasons, but the primary reason was to provide faster, safer driving for the the motoring public.
"On June 29, 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. The bill created a 41,000-mile “National System of Interstate and Defense Highways” that would, according to Eisenhower, eliminate unsafe roads, inefficient routes, traffic jams and all of the other things that got in the way of “speedy, safe transcontinental travel.” At the same time, highway advocates argued, “in case of atomic attack on our key cities, the road net [would] permit quick evacuation of target areas.”
"The new interstate highways were controlled-access expressways with no at-grade crossings–that is, they had overpasses and underpasses instead of intersections. They were at least four lanes wide and were designed for high-speed driving. They were intended to serve several purposes: eliminate traffic congestion; replace what one highway advocate called “undesirable slum areas” with pristine ribbons of concrete; make coast-to-coast transportation more efficient; and make it easy to get out of big cities in case of an atomic attack."
In any case, pierretong is entirely correct that roads and highways are also publicly subsidized transportation projects that create windfalls for landowners and developers.
Blame the state legislature for limiting the amount of funding light rail can pull from different funding sources. For people who hate big government, they sure like putting a bunch of senseless regulations (saw a proposed bill today that would make cyclists register to be able to ride on the roads)
As for Duke - lets just get down to the root reasons. They don’t want poor/black people potentially coming to their campus. They’ll complain about trees, medical equipment etc..... but they’ve never wanted the project for some deeper concerns whatever that might be. They’ve had years to make their concerns known and GoTriangle seems to have made some good faith efforts to address those concerns. As long as the line goes near their campus they will just do what they have to do to stall it.
Light rail is going to make things worse for poor folks in this area. Poor people who live near the rail lines will get priced out of their homes. Gentrification will get worse with light rail. A lot of the black people in Durham will be out in Roxboro and Oxford by the time light rail would get finished. Rising housing prices and lack of affordable housing is the bigger long term problem in Durham (and the rest of the Triangle)
Also, don't forget that the interstate highway system was built largely for national security purposes, to mobilize military assets in an invasion and to aid evacuations in an emergency.
Then why doesn't an interstate go to Camp Lejeune in Jacksonville? Then why is it only now Seymour Johnson AFB is getting connected to I795?
Then why doesn't an interstate go to Camp Lejeune in Jacksonville? Then why is it only now Seymour Johnson AFB is getting connected to I795?
It doesn't have to goto a military base's gate to accomplish that. Camp Lejeune and Seymore Johnson are both serviced by I40 and I95. Why doesn't the DOLRT have a station in my neighborhood?!
Last edited by BullCity75; 02-28-2019 at 06:18 AM..
Reason: ?
Not really. That was one of the reasons, but the primary reason was to provide faster, safer driving for the the motoring public.
"On June 29, 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. The bill created a 41,000-mile “National System of Interstate and Defense Highways” that would, according to Eisenhower, eliminate unsafe roads, inefficient routes, traffic jams and all of the other things that got in the way of “speedy, safe transcontinental travel.” At the same time, highway advocates argued, “in case of atomic attack on our key cities, the road net [would] permit quick evacuation of target areas.”
"The new interstate highways were controlled-access expressways with no at-grade crossings–that is, they had overpasses and underpasses instead of intersections. They were at least four lanes wide and were designed for high-speed driving. They were intended to serve several purposes: eliminate traffic congestion; replace what one highway advocate called “undesirable slum areas” with pristine ribbons of concrete; make coast-to-coast transportation more efficient; and make it easy to get out of big cities in case of an atomic attack."
In any case, pierretong is entirely correct that roads and highways are also publicly subsidized transportation projects that create windfalls for landowners and developers.
OK, its official name is literally the "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways." Of course it also provides roads for motorists, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Are you really questioning the need for the interstate highway system?
Don't take my word for it. Read the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 for yourself.
Quote:
It is hereby declared to be essential to the national interest to provide for the early completion of the "National System of Interstate Highways" ... Because of its primary importance to the national defense, the name of such system is hereby changed to the "National System of Interstate and Defense Highways". Such National System of Interstate and Defense Highways is hereinafter in this Act referred to as the "Interstate System .
Light rail is going to make things worse for poor folks in this area. Poor people who live near the rail lines will get priced out of their homes. Gentrification will get worse with light rail. A lot of the black people in Durham will be out in Roxboro and Oxford by the time light rail would get finished. Rising housing prices and lack of affordable housing is the bigger long term problem in Durham (and the rest of the Triangle)
Do you think gentrification is not going to happen without light rail? Because at the rate Durham is growing, I’m highly skeptical of that.
(Again, the state legislature is to blame for putting restrictions on what cities can do to force developers to provide affordable housing, cities have to do it themselves, thus the huge affordable housing bond recently proposed in Durham)
Do you think gentrification is not going to happen without light rail? Because at the rate Durham is growing, I’m highly skeptical of that.
(Again, the state legislature is to blame for putting restrictions on what cities can do to force developers to provide affordable housing, cities have to do it themselves, thus the huge affordable housing bond recently proposed in Durham)
No, I think the DOLRT will accelerate gentrification.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
