Negative thoughts on metro in general

[Hoque, Kazi]

I believe in the statement of  " that there should be horses for courses."

However the tram example in Budapest is not the fault of the metro but with
the planners who designed the systems.  Of course you must have the the
adequate market for a mass metro system. I believe the main reason for the
metro system is to maintain the beauty of Budapest. Budapest is an old city,
with old city problems.  If the metro system was limited. Would the tram
infrastructure cope with the demand?  Costs should not be a deciding factor
to alleviate the transport problems.

If people are getting fed up with this discussion, please inform us so. 

Kazi Hoque

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Car Busters [SMTP:carbusters at ecn.cz]
> Sent:	Monday, March 06, 2000 10:21 PM
> To:	Lis - SUSTRAN Listserve
> Subject:	[sustran] Re: Negative thoughts on metro in general
> 
> Sorry if it wasn't clear, but I wasn't suggesting the dissolution of
> existing metro systems. Talk of "limiting metro" was as close as I
> got, which meant that we shouldn't just assume metro should be
> expanded, when, for example in Budapest, trams could do the job for
> one-tenth the cost. Of course megacities need metro, but the trend
> toward megacities and the depopulation of the countryside hasn't
> exactly been an ecologically sound trend either. In fact megacities
> haven't existed for more than 100 years or so anyway. But yes, we all
> have to deal with the practicalities of the present, I know.
> 
> Further comments can be sent off the list, since people are probably
> getting tired of this discussion.
> 
> Randy Ghent
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> CAR BUSTERS Magazine and Resource Centre
> Kratka 26, 100 00 Praha 10, Czech Republic
> Tel: +(420) 2-781-08-49 ; Fax: +(420) 2-781-67-27
> <carbusters at ecn.cz> <www.antenna.nl/eyfa/cb>
> 
>