Any Light Rail Station With 1,200 Parking Spots to Lose Should Lose 1,200 Parking Spots (Calgary Sun)
Sure, Doze Off On the Train. Google Now Will Wake You Up When You Get There (Android Police)
New Urbanist Credo of Focusing Investment on Prosperous Areas “Beyond Irresponsible” (Buffalo News)
Transit Riders to Get Restroom Relief in Washington and Honolulu (WaPo, Hawaii News Now)
SUVs Beat Out Convertibles Because Cars Aren’t For Senseless Style Anymore (BusinessWeek)
Pat
Honking while passing? Ya, lets just scare the shit out of cyclists on the mountain roads of WV. Sounds safe!
Ben Ross
Parking at a city’s first few light rail lines makes sense. There will be parking lots downtown, and they should be built on before you build on empty lots near the outer-suburb stations. Park-and-ride lets people who work downtown and don’t have good bus service get to work after you build on the downtown parking lots. Only when the downtown parking lots are gone, and there’s an extensive rail network with lots of feeder buses, does it make sense to reduce parking at outer-suburb stations.
fewd
They already have buses to feed the stations, but the low density suburban developments are laid out in a manner that makes frequent and fast buses impossible, or at least infeasible.
“If you had asked me back in 1981 whether I "needed" bike lanes, I would have said no. But I could not have imagined the difference that they have made. Not only is each street with a bike lane much more pleasant, but the aggregate effect of the appearance of bike lanes is that drivers now expect us. They hate us -- but they expect us.”
