Comment 72750

By realitycheck (anonymous) | Posted January 05, 2012 at 16:18:43 in reply to Comment 72742

It would be more cost effective in both a capital cost and an operational expense point of view to maintain a unified maintenance facility. The land is available for a maintenance yard at Upper James and Twenty; alternate locations will require land acquisition costs (not to mention there are not any readily available vacant space sufficient to house LRT maintenance yard along the existing LRT route), and a centralized maintenane facility is much more cost effective than decentralized facilities.

With regards to profitability, the only portion of either route that has urban density high enough to support higher order transit is the stretch of B-Line from James to Dundurn, which would be part of a hybridized A-Line/B-Line first phase of LRT development. Besides, getting a portion of A-Line tracked early on will help ensure future LRT along the entire route.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds