RE: [carfree_cities] Ranking US cities
- It was written:
>>Hi. I'm currently living in Minneapolis, Mn which is one of the worstI heard recently that in Minneapolis or St.Paul MN that a 11.5 mile Light
>>major cities in the US in terms of sprawl and car dependance. To add
>>to the recent discussion about carfree US cities, how about we rank
>>cities in terms of their carfree-ness? I would proposes one group of
>>major cities (250,000 and up) meduim (250,000 to 50,000) and small
>>(50,000 and smaller).
Rail line is going to built between the airport, Mall of America and the
CBD. I also read that there is a lot of opposition by some one named Bruce
Gaarder of St.Paul and by Mall of America over the building of a LRT
>I think it might be useful to add a category of mega-city, thoseNew York also has a pretty good commuter train system as well. San Francisco
>above about 5 million or so. The problems are rather different
>in really large cities.
>>Just to start it up I would say San Francisco, Portland, OR and New
>>York in that order for major cities.
>I'd rate New York as the number one in transit--the NY subway
>system may be gritty, but it works pretty well.
has commuter train service to San Jose and up until 1958 there was even
commuter train service across the San Francisco Bay bridge to Oakland!
>Rail or Busway, that's a good question, but it also leads a lot of otherActually, I don't have a lot of hard information on costs.
>questions. Capital costs, operating costs, type of equipment used,
>distances, air/water pollution and etc. It's a complex situation that seems
>to be best solved on a case by case nature.
>Mr.Crawford would have more info.
They're terribly specific to the local situation and really
require engineering assessment for each case.
Rules of thumb:
New underground metro systems in existing urban areas
cost roughly as much per mile as new urban freeways.
As far as I am aware, nobody has ever built a new metro
in a greenfield area. The costs should be far lower than
in built-up areas, however. That's why I've dared to
propose their use in new carfree cities. (The big problem
in existing cities is working around all the existing
infrastructure.) Fare-free systems can be built closer
to the surface (no fare-pay mezzanine), and so should
be a lot cheaper to build.
LRVs are competitive with buses in any circumstance
where the traffic is heavy enough to require frequent
service (a modern tram can carry easily twice as many
people as an articulated bus, so labor costs are less
People won't switch from cars to buses, but they will
switch from cars to electrically-powered rail systems.
"Nobody with a choice ever took a bus anywhere."
J.H. Crawford _Carfree Cities_
- Mr.Risemberg wrote:
>I remember trolley buses in LA--very quiet, but subject to the same trafficRichard have you ever seen this URL http://www.erha.org/latl.htm before?
>delays and lurching, etc, as regular buses. Rail is smoother and more
>mechanically efficient, and with grade separation not as subject to
This might bring back some memories of LA and once it had a fairly extensive
interurban rail system http://www.erha.org/pesystem.htm.
>If I recall correctly (I was very young at the time), annoyance at the dualIn Montreal one of the reasons(excuses) to get rid of the trams and trolley
>overhead wires of the trolley buses was a major excuse for removing them.
buses was visual pollution of the lines.
>Richard Ron Dawson
- Mr.Crawford wrote:
>LRVs are competitive with buses in any circumstanceIn Montreal on our Duex-Montangne EMU(Electric Multiple Unit) commuter line,
>where the traffic is heavy enough to require frequent
>service (a modern tram can carry easily twice as many
>people as an articulated bus, so labor costs are less
a ten car(5 married pairs) train can handle 900(seated) to 1200(standing
room) people with a crew of two. Rolling stock information can be found at
the following URL http://www.transportation.bombardier.com/htmen/A2H.htm.
Hey I rode them today. During off peak periods trains can be 4,6 or 8 cars
Montreal commuter trains work on the honour system and time to time fare
inspectors come around. A friend of mine calls the inspectors "POP
COPs",(POP being for "Proof of Payment").
For a map of the line look at http://www.amt.qc.ca/tc/train/plan.asp. I live
near the Bois-Franc station and can see the pantographs from my kitchen
window. The two other commuter lines use Diesel-Electric trains.
>In Montreal on our Duex-Montangne EMU(Electric Multiple Unit) commuter line,I used to ride the electrics when I lived in the Town of Mount Royal.
>a ten car(5 married pairs) train can handle 900(seated) to 1200(standing
>room) people with a crew of two. Rolling stock information can be found at
>the following URL http://www.transportation.bombardier.com/htmen/A2H.htm.
>Hey I rode them today. During off peak periods trains can be 4,6 or 8 cars
>Montreal commuter trains work on the honour system and time to time fare
>inspectors come around. A friend of mine calls the inspectors "POP
>COPs",(POP being for "Proof of Payment").
>For a map of the line look at http://www.amt.qc.ca/tc/train/plan.asp. I live
>near the Bois-Franc station and can see the pantographs from my kitchen
>window. The two other commuter lines use Diesel-Electric trains.
> Ron Dawson
They provided very rapid, convenient access to downtown Montreal.
It's reassuring to know that they're still running.
J.H. Crawford _Carfree Cities_
- Mr.Crawford wrote:
>I used to ride the electrics when I lived in the Town of Mount Royal.Wow, I had no idea that you used to live in TMR (Town of Mount Royal). I
>They provided very rapid, convenient access to downtown Montreal.
>It's reassuring to know that they're still running.
live just 4 miles down the line in Ville St.Laurent. TMR is a great example
of a railroad suburb, in that all the major streets lead to the train
station, kind of like the letter X.
From 1993 to 1995 the line between Montreal and Duex-Montangne was totally
renovated for $300(CDN)million. New track, new catenary, new stations and
new rolling stock. Before the track was 100lb joint rail, now it is 115lb
welded rail with 65mph track conditions, the catenary is now at 25Kv A.C.
instead of the 3Kv D.C. that it use to be, at stations we have new platforms
and better lighting. The Boxcab type locomotives from the 1920's, the
heavyweight coaches from the 1940's and even the EMU cars from the 1950's
were all retired. Replaced by Bombardier MR-90s (some of the older equipment
has found new homes on tourist lines and at various museums).
Mr.Crawford and others, I think you will enjoy this awesome URL done by Marc
Dufour http://www.emdx.qc.ca/rail/DeuxMontagnes/index.html . Here is an
other URL, this time in English http://home.swipnet.se/ricard/tmr.html .
Till later,Ron Dawson