Quote:
Originally Posted by Austinite
Serious question for you and the people who made similar posts before you:
Why?
I think I understand why someone would want urban rail in Austin, but I don't understand why someone would think Austin needs urban rail.
At least as I've understood the rail debates in Austin over the past 10 or 15 years, neither side thinks that rail would lower congestion and pollution. Instead, the pro-rail side thinks--reasonably enough--that rail is an important quality-of-life feature and a symbol of what the city aspires to be, while the anti-rail side thinks--again, quite reasonably--that those quality-of-life projects and civic-status-symbols don't justify the cost.
Isn't that right? Isn't rail something that's nice if you can afford it, but unnecessary in any event?
Fire away.
|
Good question. I really have no idea on the finances, (and would love and benefit having a train to get around in) but it would probably be a money sink for quite a while, why would Austin be any different than any other city in the U.S. There really aren't that many that have urban rail, and Austin would probably be one of the smaller cities to get it? It has to be a forward looking investment, that hopefully one day pays off in the future.