American-Statesman Readers React To Rail Plan

By Bill Oakey – July 2, 2014

In its online edition, the Austin American-Statesman has published a brief compilation of negative reader comments on the Project Connect urban rail plan.  These reflect the very tough sell that the mayor and other supporters of the plan will face in trying to promote the November bond proposition.  Although the paper’s editorial board has endorsed the plan, the piece that appears today shows their respect for the views of their readers.

Posted: 12:00 a.m. Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Urban rail and roads plan

By Staff

Special to the American-Statesman

Last week, the Austin City Council officially endorsed a plan for a $1 billion mixture of rail and road projects that includes the proposed urban rail line running from Highland Mall to south of Lady Bird Lake and continuing east along Riverside Drive. With the endorsement, rail planners for the city and Capital Metro can initiate an environmental study of the proposed 9.5-mile line.

Ryan Holden: They should really be on separate propositions. I’d vote for the road proposition, but not the railway proposition.

Donna Rene Johnston: Well, thank goodness they are building a line from Riverside to Highland Mall, because I travel between those two points all the time. SAID NO ONE EVER!

Katie Gorbea Araguz: They should be required to put pedestrian safety first … they need more SIDEWALKS especially in South Austin … a new ”rail” would just be a waste of money down the dang toilet … I’ll be telling City Council OFF if they get this over sidewalks and pedestrian safety!

Sunny Conditt Williams: I think the urban rail is a super good idea — quick, relatively safe — too bad it only runs to Highland Mall — and by the way, why there????

Joseph Iley: I vote no, unless the city implements a monorail plan. … Traffic is bad enough, taking lanes away to be installing rail defeats the purpose.

Shaunt Attarian: Hard to get excited about this rail proposal. The big dollars being put behind this project would be much better suited to build an effective rail line that serves areas where people need to go. Building a rail line along Lamar or Lavaca/Guadalupe would be a much better investment. Too bad our city leaders lack the daring and foresight to propose such a line. And why this train doesn’t go to the airport is frankly beyond comprehension. Second, why doesn’t this proposal include biking and pedestrian improvements in Austin? If we are trying to get cars off the road, we should be expanding transportation options that can replace cars, and building infrastructure that can support these alternatives.

Russell Dreyer: Why does this rail go from one ACC to another? Horrible planning, like always (MoPac should be interesting.) Good idea though. Reroute it.

Jeremy King: This is being shoved down our throats by a lame duck council on their way out! They aren’t listening that this route isn’t wanted and it will show up in Nov.!

————————————————————————————————————

Now, what was that old saying about lipstick…?

Lipstick On a Pig

Advertisements

One thought on “American-Statesman Readers React To Rail Plan

  1. Larry Sunderland

    The way to effectively support public transit is to get on a bus and use it. Most of the conversation is being waged by non transit users.
    Public transit is hugely important going forward. Rail is only one option for public transit. We are not talking about other options that might be a better fit for us or better newer technology, personally I object to the single minded simplistic narrative presented by our city and won’t support the bond for that reason.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s