|
Post by FIU4Life on Sept 11, 2006 9:20:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FIUFan on Sept 11, 2006 10:03:41 GMT -5
Imo, it's still a very sticky issue; running a Metrorail line down the center of Sweethingyer from the 836 to FIU is going to place a very hard, behemoth of a structure right through a relatively gentile community. I do agree that the station would work best at the main entrance of FIU but major infrastructure with the Turnpike and the 836 should be used; why tear into that bedroom community (and perhaps a college town) with that large concrete gash.
Follow the 836 then down the turnpike you can then go up 8th street to FIU. Later you can go west along 8th street (Tamiami trail). Tamiami trail, 8th Street, is also US 41. This was once the main road from Miami to Tampa, it's a major thoroughfare which has gone through generations of upgrades. Guess what else is out there? Micoussoukkee!
Don't tear up Sweethingyer. Take a more Macro view of that area and understand where the historic main thoroughfares have run. People will not be upset if you upgrade and improve them. They will be if you run monstrosities through small communities.
|
|
|
Post by Fiu4Life on Sept 11, 2006 10:13:58 GMT -5
Higher house values surround 8th street, property owners would fight it tooth and nail. Sweethingyer not the case.
The 107 line could also potentially connect the malls to the metrorail, that would also be a plus for increasing ridership.
|
|
|
Post by Xpedition on Sept 11, 2006 10:18:10 GMT -5
I love it on 107th. Take the long view on this. The train won't be around for about 10 years. That area is going to build skyward and look completely different by then. A train cutting thru the middle providing easy access to downtown miami will be huge for the area. Look at Downtown Dadeland. A lot of that construction wouldn't be going on there without the train (access to work in miami/brickell). It's a huge selling point for all the condos and retail going up there. Plus easy access to the airport. It just makes sense if we really want a top notch transit system.
|
|
|
Post by FIUFan on Sept 11, 2006 11:08:51 GMT -5
Higher house values surround 8th street, property owners would fight it tooth and nail. Sweethingyer not the case. The 107 line could also potentially connect the malls to the metrorail, that would also be a plus for increasing ridership. The north side of 8th street is the Tamiami canal, there are governmental set-backs already established there. Very few homeowners would be affected. The malls are basically on the 836. No real need for a line north on 107, perhaps just a small jog north near the turnpike to capture the Dolphin Mall traffic. Then south down the turnpike to 8th Street. Why go down 107? To pick up the school of Engineering? What's that a couple of thousand people of which 10 - 20% would be able to use the line? Sounds like a lot of heartache for a handful of people. And don't say we've got to go down 107 to get to FIU; we're going to FIU anyways. To X's point; the area of Sweethingyer will never be going "skyward". It is too close to the flight paths of MIA, esp. 9R/27L (that's why old Tamiami airport was sent to west Kendall; it was too close to MIA). Also, Downtown Dadeland is a perfect example to make my point. The initial leg of the Metrorail ran right down the long established main north/south thoroughfare of Miami, US 1. The long established east/west thoroughfare has always been US 41/Tamiami Trail/8th street. We are used to having major infrastructure built up along that corridor. Imo, there's no point in reinventing the wheel here. The major infrastructure is already in place, just needs to be tweaked a little.
|
|
|
Post by FIU4Life on Sept 11, 2006 11:43:14 GMT -5
What does going "skyward" and MIA flight plans have to do with one another? I think what "skyward" meant was tearing down some of those dumping apartment buildings for nicer ones, maybe 3-7 stories...not sure how that would interfere with air traffic.
More people live on 107 and would be able to walk to a station (hence the "skyward" idea) thus increasing ridership, which is the main point afterall. I know, personally, if I have to sit through traffic (albeit less) and then find parking (maybe limited depending on size of station) to get on a metro I'd rather just drive to my destination, I'm already in my car anyway.
And even though the Tamiami canal creates a barrier for homeowners along 8th street...those same homeowners are mroe likely to get bit with the "not in my backyard" syndrome...they are not mostly renters like in Sweethingyer.
|
|
|
Post by FIUFan on Sept 11, 2006 13:56:57 GMT -5
Creating 'ridership' is about going to where people want to go (e.g. FIU, the Dolphin mall, etc.). Nobody "walks" in Miami except for Downtown. If you live more than 4 blocks from a station I guarantee 90% of the people are going to drive their cars to the parking facility of that station. So what landmarks/points of interest are there in Sweethingyer? none. Why wreak havoc on that neighborhood for a very minimal return, imo, when you've got such large 'points of interest' and established infrastructure out west?
|
|
|
Post by Xpedition on Sept 11, 2006 14:50:06 GMT -5
If that were the case Fan, a lot more people would use MetroRail as it currently stands. But that isn't the case. I don't use it for a simple reason. I have to get into my car, drive all the way down Kendall Drive traffic for 30 mins just to get to the train. And then I have to park, and wait for the train and then ride for another 45 mins downtown. What do I save in doing this over just driving? Nothing. Now if MetroRail ran near my house where I could walk to a station, and save all the traffic headache, I'd ride everyday.
I hate the concept of putting stations where people can drive to. The point is to get people out of their cars and into trains, right? Well by making people drive to stations, all you're doing is putting people in their cars and shifting where traffic flows. Why bother to build a train then?
Most successful mass transit areas (NYC, London, Boston, etc) have transit thru points of interest, commerical areas, airport(s), and areas where a lot of people live (right in their neighborhoods). If you don't build it in a way that's easy for people to use (ie, get to), people won't use it. That's the best lesson to take away from metrorail. It runs along a massively congested and essential artery with some key places to go to (downtown miami, the grove, south miami, etc), yet very few people use it. It isn't because it's not faster, less stressful or cheaper than commuting by car . It's because you still need to commute by car to get to the train (and FROM the stations when you get there). And like FIU4Life mentioned, what's the point then?
The only case where I've seen that model work well is the LIRR and NJT/PATH in NYC. The situation is different there though. 1) traffic is much worse than here. 2) to park in nyc you need to pay like you wouldn't belive for a spot (think extra car payment) 3)the tolls into the city alone are enough to make you bankrupt. So in NYC, it's worth commuting to a train. It isn't so in Miami.
|
|
|
Post by FIUFan on Sept 11, 2006 15:15:14 GMT -5
If that were the case Fan, a lot more people would use MetroRail as it currently stands. But that isn't the case. I don't use it for a simple reason. I have to get into my car, drive all the way down Kendall Drive traffic for 30 mins just to get to the train. And then I have to park, and wait for the train and then ride for another 45 mins downtown. What do I save in doing this over just driving? Nothing. Now if MetroRail ran near my house where I could walk to a station, and save all the traffic headache, I'd ride everyday. I hate the concept of putting stations where people can drive to. The point is to get people out of their cars and into trains, right? Well by making people drive to stations, all you're doing is putting people in their cars and shifting where traffic flows. Why bother to build a train then? Most successful mass transit areas (NYC, London, Boston, etc) have transit thru points of interest, commerical areas, airport(s), and areas where a lot of people live (right in their neighborhoods). If you don't build it in a way that's easy for people to use (ie, get to), people won't use it. That's the best lesson to take away from metrorail. It runs along a massively congested and essential artery with some key places to go to (downtown miami, the grove, south miami, etc), yet very few people use it. It isn't because it's not faster, less stressful or cheaper than commuting by car . It's because you still need to commute by car to get to the train (and FROM the stations when you get there). And like FIU4Life mentioned, what's the point then? The only case where I've seen that model work well is the LIRR and NJT/PATH in NYC. The situation is different there though. 1) traffic is much worse than here. 2) to park in nyc you need to pay like you wouldn't belive for a spot (think extra car payment) 3)the tolls into the city alone are enough to make you bankrupt. So in NYC, it's worth commuting to a train. It isn't so in Miami. That's the rub then. Sweethingyer is by no means a population center. Where can you put a station where a large number of people can walk to in S. Fla? Very, very few places. The Dadeland station is probably the most successful station of the entire metrorail line. It is at a point of interest but certainly no large number of people can walk there from their home. People park and ride. Imagine if you had a station say a 5 minute drive from your house and you planned to spend four or five hours in the FIU library. Wouldn't you consider the metrorail if it was going to FIU. I'm pretty sure you would. Point is, I don't think there are enough people who would use the Sweethingyer stops to justify the money spent and the inconvenience caused.
|
|
|
Post by Xpedition on Sept 11, 2006 15:33:04 GMT -5
A lot of people live there that don't have cars. Plus like I said before, the area is building up. The golf course is being torn up for more apartments. And the old one & two story apartments will be gone before the stations are built and replaced with more high density housing. Fountainbleu/Sweethingyer is a high density population area and will continue to be. As is hialeah. Stations should reside within those areas, not near them.
|
|
|
Post by FIU4Life on Sept 11, 2006 15:50:59 GMT -5
A lot of people live there that don't have cars. Plus like I said before, the area is building up. The golf course is being torn up for more apartments. And the old one & two story apartments will be gone before the stations are built and replaced with more high density housing. Fountainbleu/Sweethingyer is a high density population area and will continue to be. As is hialeah. Stations should reside within those areas, not near them. I couldn't agree more.
|
|
|
Post by FIUFan on Sept 11, 2006 16:16:12 GMT -5
A lot of people live there that don't have cars. Plus like I said before, the area is building up. The golf course is being torn up for more apartments. And the old one & two story apartments will be gone before the stations are built and replaced with more high density housing. Fountainbleu/Sweethingyer is a high density population area and will continue to be. As is hialeah. Stations should reside within those areas, not near them. Fountainbleu is probably going to have its station around 87th Ave and the 836 so I wouldn't lump Fountainbleu in there. If people don't have cars they can take a quick bus ride to their nearest station (that's what I do in DC). We already have stations in Hialeah and again most people drive (or take a bus) to the station. This community is too spread out to think you are going to put a station where any significant number of people are going to walk to. These are not unobtrusive bus stops we're talking about. These are huge concrete lines that block the sun and separate neighborhoods.
|
|
|
Post by Xpedition on Sept 11, 2006 16:24:16 GMT -5
MetroRail isn't that obstructive if designed right. They did a good job over at Jackson where it sits on the street. We could debate this forever.
|
|
|
Post by FIUFan on Sept 11, 2006 16:27:09 GMT -5
Well, I think you get my point, nobody's going to be walking to metrorail stations.
|
|
|
Post by FIU4Life on Sept 11, 2006 19:21:04 GMT -5
Well, I think you get my point, nobody's going to be walking to metrorail stations. I would certainly walk to a metro station if it was within a few blocks from my house...they way gas prices are, every little bit counts. In the end, our corrupt politicians will get whatever they can buy anyway.
|
|