| >> |
07/05/11(Tue)04:34 No.288601>>286246
Not
in L.A. that I can remember, Boston had Streetcars that went
underground and that portion remains as their Green line doesn't it?
>>286248
look
at cities that kept their streetcars/trams - they're vital component of
public transportation, bringing them back or introducing for the first
time could be a major asset
so long as you keep in mind they're not the only mode but work as one system in an integrated network
>>286432
>replace train with light rail
>low ridership
It might be low ridership when you do it, but what about later?
In
Melbourne we converted the St Kilda and Port Melbourne railways to
tram/streetcar/lightrail 24 years ago, at the time they were a very low
density area right on the doorstep of the CBD and with industry leaving
the area there was no more freight to justify keeping it so they
shutdown the railway and converted... now it has become well populated
high density area and the tram/streetcar/lightrail vehicles struggle to
cope
It is even worse in London with the Dockland Light Rail, or L.A.
with the Blue Line - the underground and/or elevated station platforms
can not be extended to allow for longer vehicle sets
(and a tram is just what the rest of the world calls a streetcar, no doubt adding further confusion for you yanks)
>>286760
>Light Rail have their own right-of-way. Streetcars, meanwhile, share road traffic.
...you can do both
Lightrail is just the modern streetcar - I keep saying this but you lot do not listen! Treat it as such.
And they dont share, the tracks on the road the cars should keep off of.
You can put the streetcar on a dedicated right of way, or railway, or median strip, and there you go
Most
of Melbournes trams are street running, but some newer or rebuilt parts
are what you Americans would call lightrail due to operating on
converted railways or highway median strip
So again, they're the same thing |
