Report a Comment

"But I would say that most of the benefits noted in the link are either not projected to produce ridership benefits (in this case) to justify the added cap cost,"

Has anyone done an estimated LIFE CYCLE Cost - take the EIS numbers and add maintenance and vehicle replacement? cause if, as I suspect, the life cycle costs are relatively close then it makes more sense to use
"development outcomes rather than purely transportation ones" in determining the preferred option.

I go back and forth - a heavy rail option is really what we need more, and would have far more dramatic impacts on corridor development (after some cycling amidst the less lovely low density suburbs a bit further out on columbia pike I was feeling this rather strongly) - but then we come back to the large scale resources needed to make heavy rail real, and the lack of will to do it (arlington cannot do heavy rail almost alone)

by AWalkerInTheCity on Jun 18, 2012 3:57 pm • link • report