Negative thoughts on metro in general (and on from there)

Eric Bruun ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu
Fri Mar 10 03:38:04 JST 2000



Eric, et. al.

I don't have the time to spend either, much as I would like, but I
have to make a comment.

Up to now, I have almost always agreed with you. But "Goodbye to 
Metros" is a bit much. Look at productive capacity - capacity times
speed (Productive Capacity), to see what the investment buys - if
tremendous capacity over long distances in a reasonable amount of time is
needed - nothing can outperform them. Of course, cost is a problem, but it
is not true that other modes have the same performance, that is my only
point.  This doesn't mean they always go to the right places, have
the right network configuration, or are properly connected to other
modes, but one can say this about any proposed rail or busway investment.
On the other hand, since the investment is permanent, one can eventually
revise the connecting network to improve the overall system over time.

Also, if you want to make service attractive in wealthier cities, you
might have to invest in high performance. Parkinson's law does not
always hold, either. Munich has had no increase in average trip length per
capita for 20 years, even with massive increases in rail service.
The secret is to take additional measures such as pedestrian malls,
high parking prices, etc. to deter additional driving. 

Eric Bruun




More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list