|
|
| Re: 2nd Ave Subway Setback (811568) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: 2nd Ave Subway Setback |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Wed Jul 22 00:52:07 2009, in response to Re: 2nd Ave Subway Setback, posted by Easy on Tue Jul 21 21:59:22 2009. Why light rail?What LA has, but without the absurd high floors and awful Bredas and non-off the shelf Siemens light rail cars. Light rail is relatively expensive to build (50% of heavy rail) That can easily vary due to construction needs. Salt Lake City and Portland are working on extensions in the near $50 to $60 million dollar per mile range, while Central Link in Seattle approaches $150 million per mile due to the deep bored tunnels. LA's Gold Line Eastside extension is approaching $150 million per mile, but one must take into account that has a nearly two mile deep-bored section with two stations in the tunnel. Mind you, you have to remember that a light rail system is basically for all intents and purposes, an IRT-sized subway that has the ability to run in the street. Given the choice between one heavy rail line and two or three heavy rail lines that can serve more corridors, I'd much rather take the latter to ensure better access in a region. Besides, at a later date, one can dig tunnels if necessary to bypass certain street running sections. Then you have a system that has less than half the capacity of heavy rail. Cologne Stadtbahn, a light rail system, has ridership near 507,000 daily riders and a system network of 119 miles which for comparison purposes would make it the largest light rail system in the United States, and the fourth largest heavy rail system in the US. Hannover Stadtbahn is a network of 75 miles with nearly 500,000 daily riders as well. Hell, even Calgary moves 300,000 daily riders on its 30 mile light rail network system. I'd argue it's a bit premature to claim that light rail can't meet heavy rail capacity... |
|
|
|