> Real cities have metros underground, full stop. European cities usually have these in progression: tram for small cities, tram+train for large ones, tram+tra

> Real cities have metros underground, full stop. European cities usually have these in progression: tram for small cities, tram+train for large ones, tram+train+metro for the metropolis. Having a metro doesn't mean you shouldn't also have a tram. I agree that building everything from scratch may seem cost-prohibitive, but you have to start somewhere. Lifetime of cities is long enough to build these gradually. > Eh the trams are cute, and smooth, but painfully slow. Trams are for shorter trips that metro/heavy rail. They are slower than either of those two, but don't need to be painfully slow -- this depends on the city layout, e.g. Berlin vs. Prague has a large difference in tram speeds (Berlin having the fast ones). > Better passenger experience than buses, but the tracks and overhead cables are a blight on the streetscape and impact drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists alike. Overall, not worth it. Also, strongly disagreeing with this too. Trams look great, including the tracks and overhead lines -- they just belong to a city.