Minnesota transit

A commentary ran in todays Star Tribune in favor of PRT, personal rapid transit. The following is my counterpoint that I wrote. It won't make the paper, my stuff never does.

The commentary on PRT left out the problems with access, and egress.

The Americans with Disabilities Act applies to transportation modes. Access for wheelchairs must be made for the demographic stated in the commentary. Elevators, and level-floor boarding are not currently built into design models.

The local Fire Department is in charge of enforcing the egress laws that are on the books. From carnival rides to mass transit, the rules are the same. Immediate egress must be provided for all passengers in the event of a fire. On elevated rail, this would generally involve a catwalk designed to hold wheelchairs.

By conforming to these regulations, the PRT will be larger, and merging rail lines would be limited, due to the catwalks.

The monorail has the best safety record for any mode of transportation. Safer than walking, biking, flying, or other types of rail. But by no means should these regulations be waived because of such a record.

As a footnote, Peter Bell, head of the Met Council, has in the past given construction costs for elevated light rail. He is disingenuous in this regard. An overhead supported light rail hybrid vehicle would make a good demonstration project, say from the central corridor to the back of the multi-modal station in St. Paul. This would refute the cost issues, not just for Minnesota, but the rest of the world as well.