Commuter Rail Study Update

[JeffreyS]

I wish someone could explain the "commuter rail will alleviate traffic" statement as it relates to the neighborhoods surrounding rail/bus stations. 

If the 900 apartment dwellers use the train instead of cars you won't have as much traffic as without the rail. If the single family homes use the rail the commutes will only be a few minutes in   the car. If the shopping at Jackson sq. is a destination people can reach by rail less will use cars. No development would have the least traffic but in this growing city that is not an option.

Sorry, but that logic just doesn't work.

1. Be honest: do you think all 900+ apartment dwellers are going to use the train/bus? The proposed commuer rail designs I've seen are extremely exciting, but they do not and cannot reach all corners of this city/area where people work, or shop, or go to the doctor. There will not be a mass conversion to rail only.
2. The people who live in San Jose, Miramar, etc. and want to visit the retail shops at Jackson Sq. will not HAVE rail/bus to use to get to it. They'll have to drive. AND THEY WILL USE RIVER OAKS to do so.

The rail would only lessen the impact of this development (alleviate). I hope I do not sound insensitive to your  traffic concerns because I think the development should be very concerned with it's impact on the people already near by.  I like Lake's solution.
P.S. Commuter rail would also allow some who already drive in proximity to the neighborhood to fly right by.

[Railbus]

Regarding the debate regarding Emerson vs. Jackson Square: Commuter rail traditionally relies on parking lots to collect passengers over a larger, broader service area---more so than any other transit mode.  That can add to traffic on streets leading to stations.  So the argument about putting stations on major roads that can more readily absorb traffic than neighborhood streets is a good one.
But Jackson Square is proposed as a "transit-oriented development" (TOD)---concentrating residential and commericial development in a pedestrian-friendly environment centered around transit.  Bringing traffic into a neighborhood site does not sound pedestrian-friendly, any more than placing a big commuter parking lot in the middle of a TOD.
The better solution may be not "either/or" but "both."  Put a commuter parking lot at Emerson to collect people driving from further out and put a platform with no parking at all at Jackson Square for people going to or coming from the TOD.
One size does not always fit all.

[ProjectMaximus]

When can we expect to hear about the second phase of Gannett Fleming's rail study?

[thelakelander]

We'll have another Commuter Rail update article on the front page either tomorrow or on Tuesday.  It will focus on ridership numbers, service frequencies and capital costs for each corridor.

[ProjectMaximus]

We'll have another Commuter Rail update article on the front page either tomorrow or on Tuesday.  It will focus on ridership numbers, service frequencies and capital costs for each corridor.

COol! I'm lookin forward to that. But I was curious about the consulting firm itself...when will they be following up on their initial study findings?

[thelakelander]

The update we'll run will be a summary of the consultant's latest findings.

[ProjectMaximus]

The update we'll run will be a summary of the consultant's latest findings.

Oh, ok. thanks. Wonder why I didnt hear about this from any other outlets. I'll try to google for it now.