Comment 67368

By -Hammer- (registered) | Posted August 04, 2011 at 16:08:28 in reply to Comment 67367

Thank You, although that same article also lists that is all of these cities, LRT was cheaper per passenger mile and only marginally expensive in a few locations.

Edit: The rest is needless and I misinterpreted your point.

So Ryan, the next question would be, how do you account for Baltimore, LA and San Jose (that both have more density then Hamilton) having higher operating costs, since you did list why Buffalo is the exception to the rule.

From what I can see, LRT's costs seem dependant on Ridership. If Ridership is higher (which is likely given the Main St Corridor has 13,000 utilizing the Bus system currently) it becomes cheaper, when Ridership is down, it becomes costlier. This of course gets back to the density arguement which I feel is LRT's biggest deterrent to success in Hamilton, which I will also note Ryan hasn't sourced on the main article, but I'm certain some may be forthcoming as the "Calgary some years ago" arguement did convince me somewhat (athough some years ago Calgary was booming, Hamilton isn't quite booming yet).

It just strikes me that Ridership and population density would seem to go hand in hand. However, I don't this would quite explain Los Angeles and Baltimore if that is the case...those two really have me perplexed. I'd only assume in LA rail cops are probably present, which adds to costs. Still lost on Baltimore and San Jose though.

Just trying to see the flaws and merits of both arguements here.

Comment edited by -Hammer- on 2011-08-04 16:36:19

Still waiting for the Randle Reef mess to get cleaned up, but hopefully not much longer!

http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2012/12/18/hamilton-randle-reef-announcement.html

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds