1813Re: [carfree_cities] Re: Seattle monorail.
- Nov 1, 2000Mike Lacey said:
>my problem with monorail is that from street level the track looksAny notion that elevated transportation systems do not impair the
>like an elevated freeway and thenegative effect on street livability
>is probaly comprobable. The name of the pressure group says it
>well "rise above it all" - and presumably leave the old city to die,
>the urban renewal specialists of the 50s and 60s had similar ideas.
quality of urban life is plain and simply nuts. Even if the things
are COMPLETELY silent, they're still ugly and intrusive. No way,
>Trams/Streetcars work so well because they mesh with the existingI've never resolved this in my own mind and have come to the conclusion,
>fabric of the city, ensuring a lively buzz at street level. San
>Francisco has a fleet of streetcars that must give and take with
>other street traffic. They are slow but always packed and as such
>they enrich the city, rather than subtract from it.
"it depends." In some situations, street-level trams work fine,
are reasonably quiet, and fairly safe. In bigger cities, though,
I tend to think that we should be subways, not trams. The argument
is especially strong if you're building a new city, because the
costs of construction can be kept under control. Modern trams are
mostly much noiser than necessary--listen to a 1935 PCC streetcar
in good working order, especially the slightly later "all electric"
version that had no compressed air system at all. Noise is a major
issue, and we shouldn't forget about it just to save some money--we're
going to be living with the noise "forever."
J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>