-- begin forward --
TS> Seems like a typical hardware heavy approach.
=o= Typical? Well, certainly light rail is being deployed with
gusto all over the world. Heavy? Well, not compared with heavy
rail -- which is a big part of the reason it's being deployed
with gusto all over the world.
TS> I would suggest looping the 7 Haight through the park,
TS> or perhaps a branch of the 5 Fulton. This could be done
TS> relatively inexpensively.
=o= The museum is already quite easily accessible from the Muni
bus lines (5 and 21). Patrons are avoiding these bus lines
in droves, and I doubt that a little loop into the museum will
change that.
=o= But this misses the point. Buses are not attractive: they
do not encourage people to leave their cars behind, nor do they
stimulate the economy along their routes. Light rail, on the
other hand, often succeeds at both.
=o= The historic trolleys seem to be even more attractive than
normal light rail. The F line is extremely popular despite its
having no right-of-way to speak of, and its resultant slowness.
TS> Then if this transit approach is a success in 5 or 10
TS> years we could start promoting an extension of the N.
=o= Unless there's a way to keep the parking lot from being
built for 5 or 10 years, this *really* misses the point!
=o= The success of one "transit approach" is not necessarily
suited for predicting the success of another one. Buses and
light rail are completely different animals.
JD> A few years ago this idea came up during the Master Plan
JD> discussions. Muni said it would cost about $1 million.
JD> Sounded expensive then, but pretty cheap now that a garage
JD> would be over $10 million.
=o= I calculate about a mile of track (a little more if there's
a loop; a little less if there isn't). How much does Muni
usually cost per mile of track?
<_Jym_>
-- end --