[sustran] Re: More on Denver thread

Wendell Cox wcox at publicpurpose.com
Thu Nov 1 07:47:22 JST 2001


Have to agree with Eric on sports stadia. Let the owners and fans pay.

Have to disagree on what light rail has accomplished in Portland, but that
debate could rage forever, and whether whatever it has created (which I
would argue it has not) could not have been as easily created with buses.

As for metros in large developing world cities. Problem is that they are a
non-comprehensive form of transit. It is not possible to provide auto
competitive service throughout the urban area with metros, whether we are
talking about
Sao Paulo or Shanghai. And if you dont provide auto competitive service, the
people are going to buy cars as soon as they can afford them.




DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy)
http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use)
http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport))
Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134
PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA
----- Original Message -----
From: <BruunB at aol.com>
To: <sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>
Cc: <preston at cc.wwu.edu>
Sent: Monday, 29 October, 2001 08:46
Subject: [sustran] Re: More on Denver thread


> Alan and company,
>
> This debate could go on and on....
>
> I want to add one other fuzzy attribute to the evaluation process. Wendell
> mentioned
> that rail is a waste in Portland. But what if people like what rail has
done
> to their city?
> It has created an option to live without a car along a corridor and has
put
> employment possibilities along it as well. I feel that if I have to pay
for
> professional sports stadiums I don't use and breathe dirty air from cars I
> don't drive, these same folk can help me build better public transport
> options. Livability is a real concern, even if it is
> hard to quantify.
>
> Also, we can agree that metros are expensive and hard for poor countries
to
> afford. But from someone who tries to estimate performance of
alternatives, I
> see no other
> solution that can move the numbers of people and with the speed required
to
> span large cities. Metros can also be electric, which jitneys will never
be.
> (I am not against jitneys, but they can not be the main form of public
> transport for large cities.) Thus, the problem is that large poor cities
need
> rail, even if they can not afford it. In my opinion, the richer countries
are
> just going to have to help finance them instead of trying to just make
money
> from selling consulting and hardware.
>
> Eric Bruun





More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list