Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Growing grass around the tracks seemed pretty popular in Germany. Several stretches of surface track in the Munich area was through the grass. It cleans up the whole area, and makes it look greener.
Quick google image search of "gleis auf gras" (German for "tracks on grass") found this image:
The difference, you'll find, between places like these, and implementation in America, is social responsibility. Notice the first video, the trams go on the streets, with traffic. There's no bollards or fence to keep people from walking in front of the tram. No dinging, lights, or anything as the tram glides through a crosswalk. In our sue-happy society, something like this won't exist. There's too high a risk of someone hurting themselves, so the system would be near ruined.
One of Boston's light rail lines (http://www.flickr.com/photos/awwoodruff/6224604968/ - broken link) runs on it's own right way through a strip of parkland; all road intersections are grade separated. A nice contrast to the city, and faster than the street running line. Within a half a minute walk you're back in developed land.
We have a "test section" of grass track here in Baltimore. The Red Line, which is expected to be operational by 2019 or so, may a significant amount of grass track.
Nice looking train but I don't know why the city of Baltimore refers to it as light rail, which might be stretching the definition a bit. It looks more like a heavier commuter train than light rail. The width of it looks substantially wider than an LRV or tram, indicating commuter rail. Probably too wide for it to make a left or right turn around a street corner like trams are capable of doing. Correct me if I'm wrong. If it passes through the downtown area at all I'm guessing it probably goes straight through without making any right angle or sharp turns.
I don't know why the city of Baltimore refers to it as light rail, which might be stretching the definition a bit. It looks more like a heavier commuter train than light rail. The train looks substantially wider than an LRV or tram, indicating commuter rail. Probably too wide for it to make a left or right turn around a street corner like trams are capable of doing. Correct me if I'm wrong. If it passes through the downtown area at all I'm guessing it probably goes straight through without making any right angle or sharp turns.
That is not commuter rail. Commuter rail uses much larger heavier stock and cannot run on the street. A hybrid that performs a similar function is an interurban; which isn't too common these days. The baltimore light rail is short can run on the street; it's light rail. You don't want commuter rail interacting at intersections. Here are two examples of commuter rail:
It's definitely smaller than Caltrain. More comparable to BART in size which is also commuter rail but smaller than Caltrain. A better term might be medium rail.
It can run in two car sets, So it's light in that regard. I think these are common cars for its age (about 20 years), no?
It operates in all three categories of grade separation.
It looks no different than any other light rail I've ever seen - different style but same general dimensions.
In fact, to me it even almost looks identical to the Green Line in Boston.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.