Those are all interesting points. But Wikipedia says he is also the guy who introduced bus lanes. Is there a key difference, or did he simply change his mind later on?For the most part, streetcars are more pleasant to ride than buses. They do not lurch nor do they change lanes. There are no gasoline or diesel fumes.
The downside of streetcars are that they are more expensive to run. Track maintenance and overhead wire maintenance eats up both manpower and dollars. Individual streetcars are not maintenance intensive compared to buses [[electric motors are rather simple things), but the cost of the system is what kills you.
The other downside of streetcars is that they take up a lot of the street. You need to have "safety islands" for the passengers to board and get off. There are also a large number of pedestrians crossing the street to get to the safety island, increasing auto/pedestrian incidents.
Henry Barnes, the legendary traffic engineer, said that "I often said I didn’t mind street cars except for the fact that they ran on the street."
Electric light rail transit works most efficiently on dedicated right-of-way. Light rail in the street [[either the center or the side) has conflicts with automobiles using the streets.
I read his autobiography [[back in the early 70s) and he was not against mass transit so long as it didn't interfere with the orderly flow of auto traffic. He really liked streetcars so long as they were on their own dedicated right-of-way. He was a firm believer in alternating one way streets [[easier to sync the traffic lights). Although he had a reputation for not suffering fools gladly, he was a pretty funny guy and his autobio was really a good read.
I thik that he felt that bus lanes didn't take up as much traffic space. He was violently opposed to on-street parking and wanted to use the curb lane for the buses so that they weren't constantly pulling out into the auto lanes and screwing up the flow of traffic.
Last edited by Hermod; April-10-11 at 06:39 PM.
|
Bookmarks