|
Post by culvercitylocke on Jul 21, 2014 22:40:01 GMT -8
And I say that they opportunity cost of redoing orange line infrastructure vs expanding the valleys overall rail infrastructure access is pretty clear. Expand access to transit infrastructure first for more of the valleys then worry about redoing bus lines to rail.
Shoot redoing the gold line to be on or under Colorado in Pasadena instead of sitting a useless half mile away in the middle of the freeway would be a much better opportunity cost tradeoff than an orange line do-over. There'd be a much higher return on investment in moving the gold line out of those miserable, pain inflicting ridership discouraging, freeway hell holes. Riding a bus is far better in my experience than the life crushing misery of waiting for a train in the middle of a freeway
All typ0s courtesy of Samsung.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jul 22, 2014 10:04:28 GMT -8
This is getting tiresome. You are just here to argue and attack other posters with your belligerent posts. No wonder the mods won't approve your account.
|
|
|
Post by Crayz9000_guest on Jul 22, 2014 17:54:58 GMT -8
Shoot redoing the gold line to be on or under Colorado in Pasadena instead of sitting a useless half mile away in the middle of the freeway would be a much better opportunity cost tradeoff than an orange line do-over. There'd be a much higher return on investment in moving the gold line out of those miserable, pain inflicting ridership discouraging, freeway hell holes. You know what sucks? There was a perfect opportunity to do just that back when I-210 was built. The SP ROW at that time ran along Walnut, within walking distance of Colorado. SP wanted to abandon it due to speed and crossing issues, so when the 210 was built they were able to get the concession of its current alignment as long as they were provided new right of way in the median. With a little foresight, the old right of way could have been preserved for future public transit.
|
|