Dave Peihl wrote: > Great article in the Star Tribune regarding the > potential future of Twin Cities transit - keep in mind > that a recent study said we'd need 70% more freeways > over the next 15 years or so to keep congestion > reasonable. Is this a time when local politicians > should be offering alternative solutions to freeways? > Clearly, there would be no end in sight in terms of > enlarging freeways.
Mark Anderson replies: It's funny how the only arguments being made for mass transit are to complain how expensive and impossible highway construction is. Those arguments would be a lot more credible if they'd include the cost and possibility of reducing congestion by building mass transit. Berg had an article in today's Strib that said it would cost $20 billion to build enough lanes to make congestion "reasonable." His only reference to the cost of mass transit was to say that $20 billion would build 20 Hiawatha lines. But I seriously question whether 20 Hiawatha lines would make congestion "reasonable." What I'm concerned about is we will spend something in that range for mass transit over the next 10-20 years, and it'll still take hours to get from one side of the metro to another, by any means. I think mass transit advocates are afraid to come up with a comprehensive study, because then we'd all see the enormous costs of lowering congestion with all the trains and buses needed to do so. It's much easier to take potshots at highway costs. Mark V Anderson Bancroft REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
