Quote:
Originally Posted by nieuwy-89
You can't compare cities with metro populations of well over 5 million (mega-cities) with Calgary. All of the "modern" LRT systems in Europe and North America are at-grade systems similar to Calgary.
|
Pretty much. Calgary's population was about 500 000 when LRT first started construction. I wouldn't ever fault you for wanting things to be done better Seoulfire, but the comparisons to Edmonton are apt for a few reasons:
1. Similar size
2. Systems both built in the same era
3. Same funding sources for capital projects.
Basically, Edmonton and Calgary (at least up until Calgary's second wave of LRT construction c.~1998) received similar funding for their LRT systems and the results speak for themselves to date. Calgary has triple the track length and 4 times the ridership, most of which is attributable to choosing the much less costly above ground option.
Of course, now Calgary is forced to go underground downtown, but that is after the system's popularity has made a case for it. Contrast that to Edmonton, where the underground line is seen as a costly boondoggle that shouldn't be repeated. While they have pretty good ridership given the length of track they have, their system is seen as paltry compared to Calgary's. Their system to-date has not been seen to justify the expense of the tunnel. They are actually planning on building an at-grade section downtown connecting their next two lines (west and southeast) even though the existing tunnel can handle them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nieuwy-89
Portland is the gold standard for LRT in the USA and it is entirely at grade.
|
Not to take too much away from Portland because they should be commended. Still, Calgary blows all but Boston out of the water in terms of ridership.
MBTA (Boston): 231 200/weekday
MAX Light Rail (Portland): 119 300/weekday
C-Train (Calgary): 266 100/weekday
Quote:
Originally Posted by nieuwy-89
Tunnels or Elevated Guideways are not economically feasible for mid-sized cities.
|
At-grade crossings are still being built on new LRT systems in mid-sized cities. They just aren't seen as an antiquated design aspect that only backwards cities like Calgary use. Hell, some newer systems have
more at-grade operation and crossings than Calgary does. Here's some recent examples:
- Phoenix (system opened 2008)
- Charlotte (system opened 2007)
- Norfolk, VA (system opens 2011)
I've seen some people calling for WestLRT and other future lines to be completely underground. Sorry to say, but that would be a complete show-stopper due to economics. Really, as long as at-grade crossings are planned and designed well enough, negative effects can be mitigated.