Good point. I've also wondered why the city is often times forced into accommodating businesses they assist downtown by agreeing to provide parking facilities as part of the development "package". The cost of constructing ramps and underground parking facilities is astronomical. If the city really wanted to encourage folks to "bike, bus or pool," they might be better served by encouraging the businesses they assist and their employees/customers to do the same. JHarmon Cleveland >From: Rich Chandler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Issues Minneapolis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [Mpls] Transit Subsidies. >Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 12:28:23 -0700 (PDT) > >--- ken avidor wrote: >There are no large-scale PRT systems in existence so >all the claims about cost and efficiency are >speculative. > >======================== >Are there any small scale systems? I've never seen a >picture of more than two PRT cars together. > >While I'm on the topic, let me ask why we need >subsidized transit? I think a transit system is a >good idea, and a metro wide system is a better idea. >But why subsidize people who would use a good system >at the cost of running it? Wouldn't it be better to >offer low cost passes to those who need it? > >Rich Chandler - Ward 9 > > > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ >_______________________________________ >Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy >Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: >http://e-democracy.org/mpls _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
