Jim Mork Cooper
Wrote
Am I imagining it or is someone actually suggesting PRT can be "door to door"? I thought these pods were to be guided along rails raised above the streets. How can such a thing be anymore "door to door" than any other public mode of transit?
I suggest you attend one of the open house before you start tearing down an idea that you have obviously not researched. PRT is lightweight and simple to build. While many stations would be free standing, many more can be attached to the lobbies of multi-unit dwellings such as senior highrises or those highrises downtown. Stations can also be attached to the side of skyways or directly to facilities such as Target Center and the Metrodome or frequently used places like Medical Arts or HCMC and thus facilitate door to door service for many of the cities elderly and handicap who live in such highrises.
Will the system run down every street of the city? And how much money will that cost?
Not every street but let's say we use the park board example and establish sstation within 6 blocks of everyone just as we now have a park within six blocks of everyone. Mile for mile it is cheaper to build than LRT and it can be done with technologies and manufacturers right here in Minnesota. And the more you build the cheaper it becomes.
Plus, if you put 4 people in the pod, how can it take all four of the people "nonstop" anywhere?> the same destination? In which case wouldnt it be more practical to give them a capacity of one?
It will be really more like 4 people sharing a cab, and only the first of the 4 passengers can get a > nonstop trip. Or is the capacity of 4 just for the extremely rare case of 4 people who have
If you had bothered to really read my post all four were gbing to the same destination. "Extremely rare"? How often do you take public transit. Many times I see family units of 3 or 4 board the bus or train to go to the same destination. Espcially young mothers with toddlers and infants in strollers who have to negotiate the bus steps or the steps within the train cars. PRT is designed to just roll right in and sit down. And if it happens that two people wish to share a PRT pod who are going to different destinations in the same direction then the person going the farthest will not have a non-stop trip BUT they will only have a one-stop interruption at the station where the first person is getting off. They will not have to stop for red lights or slow traffic or train crossings or for other passengers they aren't associated with because once the pod pulls out onto the track there is nothing for it to stop for until they arrive at the requested designation.
Anyway, I have to say this is a dream that has no chance of coming true. It may be more the economics of it than the convenience. We already saw the politics at work with the lrt. A system that requires a higher expenditure than cars per passenger mile encounters a political resistance that was barely overcome with lrt.
PRT and LRT comparisons are apples and oranges. LRT is, despite its name, a heavy and EXPENSIVE thing to build and contributes greatly to traffic congestion on the ground with the traffic and buses already running at street level. Not to mention the fact that even the train has to obey the traffic lights as it moves along. If you want to eliminate our dependence on the car then we have to think of transportation that is more "car like" which PRT is. It offers flexibility and convenience far greater than that of bus or train.
If politics favors any change from the personal vehicle, it is probably a new commuter
train delvering people from the northwest suburbst o downtown. The cost and disruption of
building prt will pretty much determine it won't ever be built.
Again PLEASE attend an open house and learn what the facts are!! PRT construction becomes less expensive the more you build and is far less disruptive than putting in new sewers or resurfacing the streets. A hole is dug for the supporting pole. The pole is inserted. The track is laid across the top and a wiring crew hooks up the power. Compare that process to what took place with LRT
And that is because there are too many competing needs that require bonding and the resistance > to any increase in taxes.
Who said anything about taxes? The beautiful thing about PRT is that it will cost very little in maintainance beyond the revenues it generates. The main reason that PRT seeks public assistance is startup is that that is how those in charge of transportation think. "We have to spend a lot to get this off the ground and then spend a lot in subsidies to keep it going." We run the buses and trains all day and during non-peak hours they often have very few passengers. But we run the whole thing anyway because buses and train cars can't be chopped up. A maintainance/holding yard would store cars when they aren't needed and send them out when they are.
PLEASE PEOPLE START DOING YOUR HOMEWORK BEFORE YOU SPOUT OFF ON A SUBJECT YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY NOT RESEARCHED.
Steven M Nelson
Willard Hay
http://citizenshipchronicles.blogspot.com/
Get UP! Get OUT! & GET INVOLVED!!!
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.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
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
