tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1305485489754759960.post7476826224640045775..comments2018-12-06T06:57:22.185-05:00Comments on The Power Generation: Purple Line Greener Futurecolleenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16404462293985480565noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1305485489754759960.post-42118278213515003312009-08-10T13:46:17.651-04:002009-08-10T13:46:17.651-04:00Roger, that picture is exactly what I'm talkin...Roger, that picture is exactly what I'm talking about. Arlington County has been a model of smart growth for years. Illustrative of the difference in planning and foresight between jurisdictions is the Arlington-Fairfax county line. Arlington ran the Orange Line under the streets and put stations relatively close together. Development sprung up around the stations, and then filled the gaps, creating the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor. Fairfax ran their portion of the Orange Line in the median of I-66 and surrounded stations with acres of parking lots, because people had to drive to get to the Metro, even if they lived relatively nearby.<br /><br />On your lifecycle emissions question, I think LRT would absolutely beat BRT on any lifecycle score. Even if the initial construction emissions are greater for LRT, rails tend to require less, and less-intensive ongoing maintenance. Asphalt and concrete roads deteriorate over time, especially when used by heavy vehicles (semi trucks, buses, etc.) I think these costs and emissions for BRT, and anything that runs on roads, push the calculus back toward LRT (all else being equal).The AMThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13363317780940775796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1305485489754759960.post-24532578668173175152009-08-10T10:49:13.205-04:002009-08-10T10:49:13.205-04:00AMT, I think this picture sums up the point you...AMT, I think this picture sums up the point you're making: http://blog.smartgrowthamerica.org/blogimages//arlington_aerial.jpg<br /><br />I'd be interested in knowing if the WRI analysis considered lifecycle emissions. I wonder how construction emissions compare for LRT and BRT--I'd assume LRT would be higher.Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06893990318191297037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1305485489754759960.post-83966411335661308012009-08-10T10:24:02.702-04:002009-08-10T10:24:02.702-04:00Simon, you beat me to the development angle!
I sa...Simon, you beat me to the development angle!<br /><br />I sadly haven't gotten around to reading Schrag's book, yet (though I do know he debunks the "rich people killed the Georgetown Metro stop myth"). But I think one of the reasons planners in the 1960s overestimated ridership may have had to do with transit-oriented development, or rather the lack thereof outside of the District, Arlington, and MoCo. Prince Georges County and Fairfax have done very, very little to promote denser, more walkable development around Metro stations. The end result is more people living farther from the Metro, and more people relying almost exclusively on cars for transportation, leading to the region's famous traffic and congestion.<br /><br />LRT, and other rail-based transit, has a psychological advantage over BRT. Actually, it has several. Besides the stigma that unfortunately plagues buses in this country, if the rails are in the ground, that's where they're staying, and developers recognize this; investment is a lot more likely to flow to areas abutting a fixed route than it is to a bus route that might change at any time.<br /><br />However, I'm with Ryan Avent that a heavy rail Metro line tunneling under downtown Bethesda and Silver Spring (and maybe even crossing the Potomac to link up with the Silver Line at Tysons Corner) would have been a better long-term investment. Still, given the limited universe of options studied, LRT was a clear winner once development and ridership were both considered.The AMThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13363317780940775796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1305485489754759960.post-62009980780038306342009-08-10T00:18:01.778-04:002009-08-10T00:18:01.778-04:00Did the WRI study look at the impacts on developme...Did the WRI study look at the impacts on development of BRT vs light rail (I can't get the link to open)? This seemed to be one of the big advantages of light rail from a lifetime carbon perspective, that I imagine WRI would usually go for, but maybe didn't think was appropriate for a pure value-for-money assessment. If light rail stops nurture more transit-oriented development, leading to the creation of walkable town centers which reduce the need for car journeys over a long time frame. In my neck of the woods, switching the focal point of Riverdale from the grotty intersection between East-West and Kenilworth to the new station might finally spur the redevelopment they've been investigating for decades but never initiated. <br /><br />Of course, it's still not a done deal - federal funding is still needed, and apparently UMD is back to stalling over the 'vibration' concerns they've raised intermittently over the past year or two. Eventually, the damn thing will get built, I'm sure. But I wouldn't put your yard signs away yet...Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12602265056226581605noreply@blogger.com