Quote:
Originally Posted by colemonkee
The main argument against keeping it above ground is and will be cost savings.
Of course, the issues are much more complex, and there are additional arguments that could be made for underground, but that's the best way to boil it down.
|
I'll repost something I wrote back of October 2007 when this question was asked. Some of you could use that as your talking points (in your own language of course) when submitting your support of
Alternates 5 and 6 to the connector team and Metro board.
Simple explaination,
Connectivity
1) Enables riders traveling longer distances to more destinations along our LRT system without additional transfers mimicing the freeway networks and adding riders.
2) Relieves operational, capacity and train turnaround constraints to the busy
Blue Line and soon to be busy
Expo Line at 7th Street Metro Center.
3) Allows for
Gold Line riders direct access into Downtown without transfering to the Red/Purple Lines which would dramatically remove the capacity constraints of that line if and when it's extended Westward. So the connector would help allow an extension Westward of the
Purple Line to happen.
4) For the amount of $$$ spent, Downtown Connector (even as a full subway) is the more cost-effective project than the Purple Line westward because you're connecting lines together in a transit corridor hitting important job, recreation destinations. Think of it as our version of
SF Muni Metro or
Boston's Green Line which has it's train lines run from the outer areas into the core and hitting the major stops along the way.
5) Enables future LRT extensions running outward from the Downtown Core to other regions.
Threaded Mode