Andy Driscoll had this to say -- Of course we've tried it here - and failed - as we always will when people believe that adding lanes reduces congestion. It does not and never will. Add a lane and it becomes as congested as the other. Build it and they will come. Don't build it and alternative transit modes will be used. Why is it always the people on the right who want to enable more pollution, more congestion, more cement, more clear-cutting of built homes, etc.? It really is a curiousity. And what evidence can you point to that indicates that adding lanes is a bad thing? I find it curious that so many people care so little about factual information when it comes to transportation issues. Alternative transportation needs to evolve, but it will do so just as every other form of transportation has evolved over the past two centuries. Forcing alternative transit doesn't work, and there is no evidence that it does work. Reducing tiny fractions or less of the congestion index is not a worthy expenditure of such prodigious amounts of money. Now high-speed rail is being bandied about to Rochester. Just think how much the Hiawatha $1 billion pot of money would help that idea. By the way -- that system would have the same impact on local congestion and pollution as does the Hiawatha Line. By the time the legislature is being asked to consider a state-wide referendum to pay for the operating costs of the Hiawatha Line -- and it will happen, which is the case in every state that has such lines -- the fuel cell will be reaching mass production capabilities. Autos by 2010 will likely have them as optional equipment with federal sales subsidies to make them affordable. Heat and water are the by-products of fuel cell powered vehicles, and they will use IC engines for several decades to come. I've studied how these deals unfold all over the US -- none work as advertised. The Hiawatha line will reach capacity as predicted, but fare box subsidies will become an astounding subsidy nightmare. Did you know that world-wide the most heavily railed cities are in the midst of highway building booms? What do they know, that we don't? Why are these cities turning away from more rail? There are dozens of ways to reduce congestion, at less cost, less environmental damage, less use of land, and less overall hassle. Rail will be essential -- much later. The problem -- read ISTEA -- the federal transportation act -- and your guts will ache. 50 years of central planning needs to be thrown out. Did you ever wonder why we can't have those beautiful east coast auto only parkways that were built in the 20s, 30s, and 40s stopped getting built? Why would the feds forbid a private company from building an exclusive heavy truck only freeway? At no cost to taxpayers!! Happy New Year. Terry Matula Hastings, MN -- a long time commuter _______________________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
