Apparently we were having an HTML error due to the recent wordpress software upgrade. We apologize for the inconvenience and incomplete emails that were sent out this morning.
Let me see if I am reading this sequence of events correctly:
- Miami-Dade County commissioners allowed development to occur adjacent to Kendall-Tamiami Airport.
- Thousands of cookie cutter homes were built, some in locations far too close to the airport boundary (you all remember how certain developers took certain commissioners on fishing trips to Mexico because they are so kind in exchange for a reduction in the airport buffer zone…)
- Knowing of the airport’s existence, families still moved into these houses.
- Residents are now complaining of the noise caused by the airport and want restrictions placed on flights.
I don’t know about you, but I’m left scratching my head on this one. How stupid are we? One of the proposed “solutions” is to move more of the training flights out to the Dade-collier transition facility in the middle of the everglades. In case you aren’t aware, in the late 1960’s some of our legislative geniuses laid the foundation to create the world’s largest airport (Everglades Jetport) in the middle of the Florida Everglades. Luckily, only one of the airports proposed 6 runways (a 10,500 ft behemoth nonetheless) was actually constructed before environmentalists (rather the cancellation of the SST aircraft, the main reason why the airport was conceived from the beginning) convinced the government that the airport would cause irreparable harm to the ecosystem.
I digressed as usual, but am I the only one in complete disbelief? This reminds me of the other geniuses in Kendall who never realized that existing rail rights-of-way like the CSX or FEC corridor could actually once again be used for regular rail service…
But residents are worried about the dangers associated with testing equipment in such a highly populated area.
It has even led homeowners to question whether it’s time for the Federal Aviation Administration to revisit airport guidelines now that the landscape around the airport has significantly changed from mostly empty fields to hundreds of homes.
Once again, this chain of events is the result of developers controlling our land-use regulations. Land-use planning is pro-active, why is it that in Miami-Dade County we’re always left cleaning up other people’s messes?
The swath of land centered in the image below was a former airfield in Pinecrest, forced to close due to encroaching development, could Kendall-Tamiami experience this fate one day? How about Homestead General Aviation Airport or even Dade-Collier?
33 Responses to The Foresight Dilemma – We Have None
Leave a Reply
Contact Us!
Planetizen- Going, Going, Gone: High Plains Drains its Water Supply May 21, 2013Years of record drought and more intensive farming are draining the High Plains Aquifer, distressing farmers from Colorado to Texas. Rural communities are suffering from dwindling water supplies. […]
- Syracuse Confronts 'Most Important Civic Decision in 60 Years' May 20, 2013To demolish, or not to demolish? As Syracuse considers what to do with its aged elevated highway, special interests are mobilizing to prevent tearing down the crumbling I-81 viaduct and replacing it with an urban boulevard, says David M. Rubin. […]
- 54 Arts Projects Awarded Creative Placemaking Grants May 20, 2013ArtPlace America has announced the 54 recipients (out of over 1200 applicants) for its most recent round of creative placemaking grants. The $15.2 million in grants will support projects in 44 communities and a statewide project in Connecticut. […]
- Minister Reins in Mumbai's Haphazard Development Controls; Will the City's Skyline Suffer? May 20, 2013The chief minister of the Indian state of Maharashtra (home to Mumbai) is pushing to rationalize the region's density controls, which had been prone to abuse by developers. Some fear the controls will result in more homogenous designs. […]
- Poverty's Sprawling Tentacles May 20, 2013From 2000-2011 the number of poor Americans living in the suburbs increased at a rate double that of the country's cities. The result is that more poor people now live in the suburbs than in cities. A new book examines this troubling trend. […]
- 10 Exemplary Approaches to Station Integration May 20, 2013Different contexts call for different approaches to inserting new transit stations into existing urban environments. From iconic statement to net-zero depot, Ron Nyren looks at 10 stations built recently in cities across the world. […]
- The Urban Diary as a City-Dweller's Tool May 20, 2013Chuck Wolfe champions the 'urban diary' tool as a universal means to understand the city around us. […]
- Rush to Rebuild Could Cause Long-Term Damage to NY/NJ Beaches May 20, 2013Just seven months ago Hurricane Sandy damaged 94 percent of New Jersey's beaches and eroded dozens of miles of coastline in New York. As waterfront communities rush to rebuild before summer, some fear disastrous long-term consequences. […]
- How Miami Lost Its Way to a Transit-Rich Future May 20, 2013Forty years ago, Dade County officials sketched a vision for a paradigm shift away from highways and towards a multi-model transportation system for the area. Four decades onward, highway expansion is alive and well in Miami-Dade. What happened? […]
- Cities Gain a Brain; But Will They Lose Their Souls? May 20, 2013In the quest to improve efficiency and effectiveness, "smart" technologies are helping cities become more intelligent machines. But a growing chorus fears the side effects of increased privatization, surveillance, and technological sophistication. […]
- Going, Going, Gone: High Plains Drains its Water Supply May 21, 2013
- Green Mobility Network
- An error has occurred, which probably means the feed is down. Try again later.
I noted your narrative stating: “other geniuses in Kendall who never realized that existing rail rights-of-way like the CSX.” For 80 years, the CSX corridor has been a cargo only fixed rail corridor–they have never used the corridor for transit. Yes the right of way is owned by CSX. Given these facts, using the corridor for transit by increasing the diesel rail traffic by ten fold is a drastic change of use that by definition would have to be agreed to by the majority of the some 10,000 residences that are located within 1/2 mile of the corridor. Doesn’t take a genius to figure this one out!
Anon, Actually, he was referring to useless NIMBY’s like yourself who criticize the traffic in Kendall, yet don’t want transit. Considering that CSX wants to share their land with MDT, and that the area around the CSX is under served by transit, there is no reason not to do this. Backward and ignorant people like you hold our community back.
The CSX line should be taken by Miami-Dade Transit or used by Tri-Rail. We need transit improvements in Miami.
I agree with Kevin– The CSX corridor right of way should be taken by Miami-Dade Transit and used for commuter transit. The ideal technology though is not fixed rail–this is backward technology that is way to expensive…so what then—the transit technology in this case should be a “guided busway.” Check out the You-tube website for the Adelaide Australia guided busway.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Adelaide+Guided+Busway&search_type=&aq=f
Tony, I suggest you go to this website and educate yourself. Fixed rail is far to expensive and destroys the living environment along the corridor unnecessarily. Plus, this guideway has the capacity to move 18,000 riders/hour…trains can’t run that close together. Check out this site and then tell me the Citizen’s of east Kendall are nothing more than NIMBY’s–NIMBY’S don’t bother to recommend alternative ways to achieve transit–do they?
BRT has reached it’s maximum capacity in Curitiba, Brazil and officials there are now looking into a rail solution to solve those issues. Rail can provide much higher capacity in these scenarios.
I believe BRT would be a great solution in this case, especially considering that rails have been torn up already along the FEC ROW. A BRT could connect the Kendall Metrorail Stations with the MIC, creating a closed transit loop around much of our population centers.
However, that being said, the CSX corridor is still ripe for LRT. Given the route’s longer distance (terminates in FL City linking to the Busway) and potential for redevelopment, rail will be the only option that will bring about adequate land-use changes to the corridor. Ripping out existing infrastructure is foolish, especially when there is such a need for premium transit in the area.
Our argument is against the claims of lower property values and traffic snarls along the east/west corridors. The APTA has shown that property values increase significantly when premium transit is introduced to the area (yes, their study included Miami.) With regards to the tie ups along the east/west corridors: this is selfish autocentric mentality – it must be broken if we are ever to progress, otherwise, Kendall will continue to strangle itself with congestion…
Guided buses are a novel technology that may have their uses, but I can foresee a few problems with using it in that area. Guided buses that are just a single unit, or even double-unit articulated buses (which MDT does not like) would have a lot less capacity than a light rail system with 3 or 4 car trains. Plus you would still have portions of the route with the bus stuck in traffic wherever it gets off the guideway. This would still hurt reliability compared to a system that stays on a fixed guideway.
Also, though I am not familiar with the details of the proposed rail system in Kendall, I believe there would be some issues with having different systems on a rail right-of-way. The project manager for the FEC corridor study told me that, despite the long list of alternative technologies on their website, commuter rail is about the only choice because other technologies would require a large separation between the different guideways. I expect the same rules would apply to Kendall, meaning a busway (or light rail, for that matter) might not fit within the right-of-way beside the existing tracks.
I agree that fixed rail is backward technology. We need to see mag-lev used in American transit systems. Until that day comes, we need some kind of fixed-guideway transit. And short of something like monorail, fixed rail is about as high-tech as this country has. Guided busways are a new concept and probably have their uses (they would be better than MDT’s current busway). But as the capacity and reliability are both lower than the rail alternatives, they would only be useful on certain projects.
Anon, I did not advocate any specific type of use for the CSX corridor, only that it be used for transit. We can argue about how the corridor should be used, but I think we can all agree that it is a great opportunity that should not be squandered.
PS. We do our research around here, maybe you should do the same.
Couldn’t help but notice that none of you visited the site. If you are as open to new ideas as you appear protest, you will give it a look. What will you find? For starters, Guided busways are about half the start up costs and about 1/3 of the operational and maintenance costs compared to any type of fixed rail. High tech Guided buses can do everything fixed rail can do but do it cheaper and faster. This whole idea is based on the county getting the right-of-way to the CSX corridor, thus the problems discussed above with sharing the corridor with other fixed rail technologies do not apply–this would be a two lane guided busway, linear park with green areas, and a bike path..that is, a multi-use corridor. For the two lane guided, you would only need 22 feet of right-of-way–you’ve got this amount on virtually the entire CSX corridor.
The proposed light rail configurations coming out of the Kendall Link study last year only had two cars to the diesel trains. In any case, if you view the videos you will see why no form of light rail can possibly compete with a guided busway relative to ridership capacity. The Adelaide guided busway successfully ran buses every twenty seconds safely (can’t do that with any form of fixed rail) and moved 18,000 riders per hour. If this business is a only about transit then the busway is much less expensive and moves many more people than the fixed diesel rails. Can any of you say you saw the Adelaide video on the site I gave? Come on guys, have an open enough mind to at least go see it. Otherwise, we are just talking in circles.
The claws came out on this issue. I love it. It is good everyone is pro transit. So if we can only get the county to act in a pro transit manner, we may actually get some.
Is there any way that CSX could privately fund a transit system on their lines? This may make transit actually occur, since the county is so unable to get this to happen. What do you all think?
The Kendall Link study proposed DMUs – I propose LRT
And as for the video, unfortunately my work network has it blocked, so I’ll be watching it later from home…
Emperor Tomato – Doubt CSX would even consider funding it themselves. The only local rail lines that would garner attention from private sectors is Baylink or the FEC corridor from Downtown Miami through FLL and WPB. Those two lines are the only ones that could garner the ridership required by most private funding interests…
Maybe a Public Private Partnership. Or a seperate entity similar to MDX that could run transit. Take it out of the hands of the county since they’ve run it so poorly. That half cent should only go to funding new transit lines, nothing else.
Not to sound like a hater, I do like the bus system here.
For those who are truly interested in how a guided busway could be configured on the CSX corridor and how the county would go about getting the right-of-way (the mechanism is called Cargo consolidation) attend the September 2nd Kendall Community Council (12) meeting at the Kendall library (97th Ave). I doubt that CSX would consider funding this. However, cargo consolidation is based on providing a much shorter route for their cargo trains to take the aggregate from the Rinker rock pit directly to the concrete factory in Dorsal (6 miles as the bird fly’s) instead of what they do now–a 30 mile convoluted route through dense residential Kendall twice a day (max 10 miles per hour). This way, CSX keeps its biggest customer (i.e. Rinker) and develops a separate line of income in the form of a 99 year lease with the county for the old CSX corridor. By the way, the county owns the property of the direct 6 mile route, so potentially the county would lease this property to CSX for 99 years. In the end CSX is richer…much richer and we have a corridor for rapid transit that fits our needs. This plan would appeal to that good old emotion–greed! Throw in the fact that the county could lease a fleet of brand new high tech hybrid buses (16 of them) for the cost of buying one outright and you have something that this county could actually afford. It seems that we all agree that the county’s ability to balance its books is in question, so cost has to be a primary consideration if any type of transit on the CSX corridor is to be accomplished.
Gabriel:
If your computer blocks You Tube then you must be a county employee. Do try and give the site a look–Adelaide is now the world leader in busway technology. Truly amazing.
Also, check out the last years Kendall Link final report. They initially proposed DMU’s until Commissioner Sosa said not in her lifetime. Then they proposed diesel light rail that would go northeast up the corridor and turn east on Kendall Drive and drop folks off at the Dadeland Metrostation. Fixed rail diesel trains on Kendall Drive!!!!!…more problems than you can possibly imagine. It would never work. Trying to take a positive approach, the guided busway looks like the solution.
Anon – If you read the author profile, you’ll see I work for a private company. But my employment is besides the point.
I know, I’ve read the Kendall Link study. The ideas are ludicrous. The notion of metrorail along Kendall itself is insane considering: a) we’ll never receive federal funding for it b) it would only further isolate the land uses along Kendall Dr c) it wouldn’t be accessible
I don’t understand why we keep pushing for metrorail in Miami-Dade – it’s an antiquated rail technology that is absurdly expensive. There are cheaper rail (yes, and bus) options that should be our number one priority.
Just take a look at the disastrous north corridor – there certainly isn’t enough ridership projected to support heavy rail – the county should be looking to build up BRT by re-purposing two lanes of traffic.
1. I’m completely against creating more layers of bureaucracy by creating yet another transit agency. Either we have MDX do it or SFRTA (Tri-Rail), but creating another agency creates more problems in the future.
2. Instead of creating another rail line, is it possible to find a type of system that can work on the existing rail system, aka: something along the lines of Tri-Rail but a little closer to light rail?
1. I agree – That was the same point I was going to make. SFRTA should have more authority – Transportation is a regional problem not local.
2. Yes. The rails would have to be upgraded for passenger transport. The same safety levels are not required for freight tracks.
Anonymous,
I will also try to check out the YouTube video at home. As for capacity, there are light rail systems that run 40,000 riders per hour per direction. So it boils down to what the forecasted demand would be for the corridor and what type of system would best match it.
BTW, you can make any guideway technology meet 20 second headways with a fully automated people mover. It’s not a function of the guideway, but of the automation. If you have a guideway where buses get off into traffic even at one point, all it takes is one traffic light or one bad driver to totally throw off the 20 second headway for the entire route. Lower reliability = lower ridership. That’s my beef with the system.
Also, as Kevin mentioned, why not use the existing rails? While infrastructure cost of new construction might be cheaper for a guided busway than for a rail line, in this case we have existing rails that would probably be cheaper to upgrade than to completely remove and replace with a roadway. If the county is buying the right-of-way and kicking CSX off those tracks, then it would definitely be feasible.
You want diesel buses instead of diesel trains? Where’s the improvement? Electric light rail would be an improvement.
Like I said, guided bus may work well for certain situations. But I’m not convinced that it’s really that great for this one.
If you come to the Kendall Community Council meeting on September 2nd (6:30 pm at the library on 97th Av), the information will be presented there. It’s just to detailed to present on a blog. Yes, cargo consolidation means having CSX off the corridor. There are quite a number of issues but all of them so far seem to have good solutions. I invite you to come and give you opinion–both negative and positive.
I don’t like Busways. I really don’t think they’re efficient as a permanent mode of transit. Furthermore, people are much more likely to use transit if it’s rail. People don’t like buses.
Why destroy the rail system we already have in place along the CSX for a busway? Let’s use the rails, upgrade the rail to passengar code, find a train that works on that size (something along the lines of Tri-Rail for example which runs on the FEC lines) and we’ve got a great cost efficient system which would be a lot cheaper that starting from scratch with a busway.
Again, people like trains not buses.
Kevin….what can I do to get you to go to the website and simply look at a 10 minute video? In Adelaide system, they actually increased their ridership every single year, so its been a tremendous success. This system is now more than 15 years old and this still holds true. No rail system I know of has ever done that. People like high tech reticulated hybrid buses that have every possible amenity, including internet access, particularly when they are on a guideway. I promise, the experience is not painful–its not like any bus system you have ever seen. No rail system would be a lot cheaper. Just look at the video and then give me your input.
Quite frankly, I feel Miami got the short end of the stick when they made Tri Rail. I really feel that they should expand down the CSX corridor all the way to Homestead. I am willing to settle for at least the Metrozoo area for now being the southern terminus, but TriRail really should go all the way to Homestead along the CSX corridor.
There have been many studies that show that there is significantly more ridership for rail transit than there is for Busways. Even more, property values tend to increase more along the transit corridors when there is an established guideway rather than busses. While busses may be cheaper (and by busses, I do not mean a guided busway or all the procurement/retrofitting that needs to be done for such a system), it is Rail that is the better solution for the now and the expandability in the future.
By the way, before it could be said that I should see the video, I feel I should say that I have seen the video and read all the relevant pages on the concept of a guided busway. I really do not feel that it serves as a viable solution. Additionally, the idea of connecting the Rinker facilities with a rail line away from the houses was suggested so that CSX can maintain the freight traffic while we get a guided busway. Not only is this a horrible idea (it puts industrial transportation through protected wetlands) but it also would be essentially asking the county to front the cost of building entire railbeds for a private company (while not unheard of, is very difficult to find funding for these days).
Running passenger rail down the CSX corridor just makes sense.
Additionally, Anon, you mention that the guided busway was able to increase ridership every year and that no rail system you know has ever been able to do that. Quite frankly, I would like to suggest that you check out some of the websites that this blog links to and actually read up on rail transit as a solution a little better since TriRail has been increasing ridership exponentially every year, in a place that does not even embrace transit. Please check out the other sites such as “The Overhead Wire” and some of the others rail oriented sites. They prove a great source of information about rail as a viable alternative to busses.
Rail is at best a 19th century technology. Any good transit professional you talk to will tell you bus rapid transit is always much less expensive…did you listen to that video at all? Could write a thesis on all the facts you have wrong, but then I think I’ll just get my facts from transit professionals and save my breath. Fixed transit rail will never fly on the CSX due to the small right of way along the northern sector, in Commissioner Sosa’s district…its only 16 feet between SW 8 and SW 11th. That’s why they tried to run it east on Kendall Drive…What a great idea that was. So, if your going to get public transit on the CSX right of way, its got to be compatible with the some 10,000 residences with 1/2 mile along this densely populated area.
Anon is correct in the small right of way. Thanks to a recent supreme court ruling though, emminent domain is much easier for projects that would benefit the entire community as a whole, such as this one.
The concept of rail transit being at best a 19th century solution sounds like the rallying call of several congressmen and uninformed people as of lately. Rail is very much a 21st century and beyond solution. As proof of this concept, there are several high-speed rail lines being built all over the country and in fact the world. Some are bullet trains such as the French TGV’s while others are maglevs such as the new Shanghai Maglev. While it is agreed that an elevated guideway such as metrorail is grossly overbuilding the area, a light rail alternative or DMU would fit into the corridor perfectly.
Oh, jeesh, and here I have been riding around on my bicycle, at best an 18th-century contraption.
And before I turn in tonight, I’ll be sure to grab my whacking stick and take out all those lightbulbs, born of a crude 19th-century technology created by that really old dumbtard, Thomas Edison.
Anonymous @ 3:59 pm…I mentioned in a previous post that those 16 feet would make a very nice bike lane.
Yeah bike lanes. As for rail being antiquated, you obviously didn’t see the video of Beijings new rails, how cool is that? I love transit, but as a long term solution for a county that is expected to have enourmous growth in the next 30 years a small scale solution such as busway is not idea. Trains which are able to reach higher speeds, and can carry more riders is ideal. I like rapid buslines as a community solution, or a small line solution, but for a countywide solution we need many light rail lines. CSX only makes sense to use as a line, and if you can expand to the tri-rail that would be grand.
I’ve been following along with this thread, and it’s a marvel of misinformation and preconceived claptrap without any factual basis. And someone actually said “we do our research here”!
The CSX corridor is not a right of way. It is an easement. That’s why it’s so narrow in so many places. CSX doesn’t own the corridor and can’t sell it or give it away. And only in your wildest dreams would they want to convert their easement to a passenger commuter system. CSX doesn’t care what you would like.
Please do your “research” properly. You may go to to the Parkland DRI Request, amended December 21, 2007 and turn to page 94 which will bring you a letter from the law firm representing Edward Easton and partners challenging CSX ownership of any railway right of way through the Parkland tract. I’ll give you two snippets:
“Available title records indicate that all but 1.53 acres of the right of way is owned by our clients, with CSX holding an easement over the land”
“Based on title records,the 1.53 acre right of way segment should be listed as being under the ownership of the successors in interest to an apparently defunct Corporation, the Mandan Securities Corporation”
Translation: No way is CSX going to give, lease, rent, share, develop or do anything else with Ed Eastons land.
This probably explains why the CSX corridor is anywhere from 48 feet wide at Bird Road down to 16 feet wide at SW 11th Street. Folks it’s only an easement across someone elses land.
TRi-Rail was invoked in this conversation as a good example of the effectiveness of trains. Let’s look behind the curtain. Tri-Rail has been in business for 22 years. It’s a 72 mile system with 18 stations located in the 3 most populous counties in Florida. It provides commuter transit to one third of the entire population of Florida. Folks, on its busiest day ever it only carried about 14,000 passengers, and that was this summer when the price of gas was above $4 a gallon. Those 14,000 passengers were actually the same 7,000 people going to work in the morning and returning home at night. Tri-Rail likes counting passengers so much that it does it twice. According to the Transit Ridership Study conducted by the Corradino Group for the Miami-Dade MPO, about 45% of those riders don’t have a car, so their riding of Tri-Rail doesn’t reduce auto traffic. About 65% of all those riders commute from Palm Beach County and Broward County to the Airport MetroRail station and then to work in downtown Miami. So that’s approximately 4550 paychecks that aren’t earned by Miami-Dade residents, and that’s about 4550 people who don’t pay property, school or most other taxes in Miami-Dade County. They work on Miami Avenue and spend their money on Worth Avenue.
TRi-Rail never gives ridership increases in raw numbers, just percentages. Their ordinary ridership is about 9000 a day, 4500 each way. A 10 percent increase sounds huge, until you do the arithmetic. 900 people, of whom 65% don’t drive anyway. Big deal!
Tri-Rail is currently on life support, and the prognosis isn’t good. We don’t need another Tri-Rail thanks.
The reason Tri-Rail, and the Central Florida Commuter Rail which was dead at birth, don’t work is that they can’t move with the population. The people have to come to the train, as Mohammed had to go to the mountain. If the train isn’t convenient to where a commuter lives and doesn’t take him where he needs to go, then the train will be as empty as Tri-Rail is.
The people in Kendall want useful transit, not nostalgia. The high end bus services now running in Austaralia, China, Japan, France, Canada, Germany, England, Scotland, and who knows where else, deliver near door to door service. They pick up passengers in their neighborhoods and take them near where they need to go. They are rubber tired vehicles that look for all the world like a Bullet Train. They gather their riders in convenient places and then enter single-use transit corridors that allow them to achieve light rail speeds. They do everything that fixed rail does and do it more efficiently. They are sleek, quiet, fast, and oh my god we can afford them now.
They will increase property values due to their environmentally friendly design, not destroy them like trains do. Forget that public relations silliness about fixed rail systems improving community value, that’s just not real world. Doubt me on that? Take the Tri-Rail from Miami International to Fort Lauderdale like I did. Don’t worry, you’ll find plenty of parking space and you might have a rail car all to yourself like I did. As you gaze out the window you’ll discover what industrial blight does to a community. The homes and neighborhoods along the tracks are economically and socially destroyed, and they’ll never be any better.
No one wants that in Miami. We don’t need to have it.
We want world class transit, not third world class transit.
We want something that we can be proud of, not ashamed of.
I don’t know Anon, but I’m going to that meeting and I hope to meet him there. He just makes common sense. And I think everyone on this blog should go there too, or refrain from further posting.
If you can’t do that much, you’re part of the problem.
Oh lordy, here we go. First of all, we are all transit advocates here. We are professional transportation engineers and planners. We didn’t just do some internet research, wikipedia our opinions, and post it as the Word. I do think it is really funny that the two people who continue this tirade do so anonymously. It speaks volumes about how much you are willing to back up your comments. That being said, facts are stubborn things, and since we are talking about what is factually correct lets clarify some things. The CSX corridor is mostly ROW and not easement. Look it up. Just because you found an obscure reference to an ownership discrepancy on someone’s property does not mean that the corridor is an easement. Again, do your research.
Second, Tri-rail’s success (or lack of it in your opinion) is dependent on the land uses around the stations. In the same way that the CSX idea will not be successful if development around the line is not pedestrian friendly (regardless of the type of transit that goes there). The solution is not to move transit to where people are, but to build up infrastructure around transit. Our land development regulations do not allow this to happen because they are suburban, automobile based standards. When you claim to want transit to move with people you are perpetuating this same fallacy.
(BTW Tri-rail is on ‘life support’ because of funding and management, not because of effectiveness).
The really disappointing thing is that people like you, who have no idea what you are talking about, go to these meetings and make statements like ‘we want world class transit’. What does that mean? We are here trying to advocate for transit, so that people like you can’t come back and say, “see transit doesn’t work here because…blah blah blah.”
Tony, does that mean we will see you at the meeting? It’s only 10 days away so it should be convenient.
If so, can we count on you to stand up there and identify yourself and state your expert opinion?
If not then I doubt both your sincerity and your credentials.
I won’t add anything now to this blog. After the meeting I will return and comment on your presentation, or on your failure to attend.
An empty wagon makes the most noise.
So not showing up at this meeting is reason for you to doubt our credentials? Going to the meeting is a matter of how involved someone would want to get, not a question of credentials. Anyone who lives in the area probably should go. If the people in Kendall truly believe that guided bus is the best thing for their community (and they refuse to support a form of rail transit), then I hope they get it. It would definitely be an improvement over the existing conditions, and they would get some brownie points for being the first guided busway (and the first dual mode system) in the US. That “first” business probably means some challenges trying to get funding, though.
We’re trying to have a reasonable discussion on the pros and cons of guided bus vs. rail. Throwing in some ad hominem fallacies does not add to the discussion. I’ve seen posts from different people doing that. Let’s stick to the point, shall we?
Not everyone on this blog even lives or works in Miami-Dade county, much less in the Kendall area. So you cannot expect everyone to be willing to attend a meeting for a transit system that is far from where they live and work. It makes for interesting discussion, but it typically has to affect you personally (and fit into your work schedule) to attend a meeting about it.
If people do not want to hear airport noise, then why move near the airport?! The same goes for the highway noise barriers. Why move near a highway if the noise is going to bother you?! Now we are spending millions of dollars building these walls near the highway, because the people living near these areas have a problem with noise. If noise is a problem move away from it! It’s common sense!