Maryland Governor Larry Hogan says the $150-million-per-mile cost of the proposed Purple light-rail line between Bethesda and New Carrollton is “not acceptable.” The Maryland Department of Transportation thinks that it can reduce the cost by 10 percent, but that probably isn’t enough, considering that Hogan wants it to be “dramatically lower.” Hogan promises to make a decision in the next month.
Before he does, the Antiplanner thinks he should know that, no matter how much the planners say it will cost, it always costs more. From that view, a 10 percent reduction probably means 30 percent more than the current projected cost.
Mail was rejected due to size or what it contains – Attempt to transmit a more viagra free consultation minimal message with just text and without attachments to discover if that works. viagra spain Each chiropractic program is designed specifically for a patient to address the problem accordingly. Known interactions include such medications as nitroglycerin drugs, nitroprusside medicines, amyl nitrate, azole antifungal drugs and others. viagra online in uk http://www.donssite.com/OPTICALIILLUSIONS/next14.htm Black an eye are also included on brownish devices to determine enhancement toward the dark buckle mastercard tadalafil position.
Instead of building light rail, Maryland could just run buses. The Antiplanner estimates that a fleet of 70 buses could provide service every two minutes in each direction. If buses operated on this schedule during rush hours and at half that frequency during off-peak hours and on weekends and holidays, they could carry as many people as the 69,000 that light rail is optimistically projected to carry at a lower operating cost and for about 2 percent of the start-up cost of light rail. Would a 98 percent reduction in costs be dramatic enough for the governor?
Buses with dedicated lanes or just buses? Seems to me regular buses would just end up sitting in the same soul-draining traffic congestion that already routinely paralyzes the Capital Beltway.
Why your fixation on buses? They kill people, they add to the congestion and pollution, and they cost billions. Plus users still have to get to the bus and from the bus. Move the charity dollars from the mismanaged transit bus and trolley rich dudes to buying rides for the poor using free enterprise and big data to optimize the use of fuel and labor. Advanced transportation can then serve that market without being tied down to the idea of a service being a charity. UberPool is a far-superior option that could instantly replace bus fleets across the nation as one quick fix. http://blog.uber.com/uberpool
Dave Brough wrote:
Why your fixation on buses?
I will not answer for Randal (who is quite capable of speaking for himself), but my take is this – they can be fast, they are inherently flexible, and can carry a lot of patrons, and they do not usually need special infrastructure except for bus stops, in some cases shelters, and bus pads (in some cases) at bus stops.
They kill people, they add to the congestion and pollution, and they cost billions.
As we saw recently in Philadelphia, any transportation mode can have crashes that result in death or injury. Not limited to buses. As for pollution, that may have been true years ago with the two-stroke GM Diesel engines that were once popular among transit operations, but no more.
Plus users still have to get to the bus and from the bus.
True.
Move the charity dollars from the mismanaged transit bus and trolley rich dudes to buying rides for the poor using free enterprise and big data to optimize the use of fuel and labor.
How about self-driving buses?
Advanced transportation can then serve that market without being tied down to the idea of a service being a charity.
I regard transit as a service that needs to be provided. Not a charity, since everyone needs to be able to get around (my late brother could not drive for medical reasons, and was transit-dependent as a result). Note that transit does not need to be provided by government employees or government agencies, but it does need to be provided (at least for now).
Still hoping for a post about this.
I’m curious to know how $150M / mile is too much for one liberal governor yet another, Minnesota’s lieral Governor Dayton, has stated that the proposed Southwest Light Rails’ $125M / mile price tag is too high.
Or maybe the Purple LIne is a bargain?
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/26744/purple-line-its-not-the-cost-its-the-country-club/
Over the six years of construction, Maryland will spend less on the Purple Line than on last week’s toll cuts. The toll cuts, targeted to benefit big trucking companies and owners of beach houses, will cost $54 million a year.
Doesn’t even come close to the $1.55 BILLION a mile initial protected cost described in the link I posted.