Monday, August 31, 2009

On the Subway?

The Bush administration was notorious for hating transit. They hated it so much that at one point they wanted to use new starts money to build HOT lanes on freeways. So funny what happens now:
Southern Methodist University's proximity to DART's rail and bus lines was a key selling point in picking Dallas as home for the library, said Laura Bush, an SMU graduate. She told a Waco TV station in January that the Bush complex would be the only presidential library on a subway stop.
I didn't know being on a subway stop was so important to the Bushes. It's not really a subway stop anyway but light rail in a trench. Apparently the library really won't be on the stop, but instead across a major freeway from Mockingbird Station. They thought about building a bridge but decided against it.

It's a half mile walk from the station using the existing road bridge. If they installed the ped bridge, it would take off .3 miles but would be more exposed to the elements and car traffic on the expressway below. Ultimately it's pretty close to the light rail stop, but why transit matters to a legacy that was down on transit to begin with is beyond me.


Sunday, August 30, 2009

Preservation & Resevations

As a former runner I appreciate trails of all kinds. It's easier on your legs and trails are a good way to get around without having to be in traffic. With that being said, the idea that we should be reserving our right of ways for trails alone instead of trails and transit seems shortsighted. While I applaud the rails to trails folks for what they've been doing, the creation of a trail while the use for rails waits for a project only encourages a permanent trail.

In the case of Whittier, the construction of a trail has likely built up political will and precluded the ROW from ever being used for transit ever again which is a real shame since it would be possible to share. It's also possible that it won't be the best alternative. Eventually though it might come in handy. The trail is on the far right alternative within the city of Whittier.


On a similar note, short term gains should not outweigh long term benefits. In the case of Buffalo, the transit authority is looking to sell some ROW that could be used for long term gain. I understand there are trying times around the country, but these types of decisions that aren't looking at the long term consequences are trouble and it points to the loss of long term thinking in how we make decisions.

Disappointing CAP

I'm a bit disappointed that the Center for American Progress would be pushing natural gas BRT as a strategy instead of electrification with clean energy. They also have the fun generalizations about BRT such as "And construction of BRT systems cost 30 times less than a subway system" and "which operates like a subway system". I believe we've discussed this before in that once you get to the point where you're building real BRT the costs are much much higher than these 30 times claims.

If we're going to assume that BRT is a solution for heavy traveled corridors that aren't dense enough in riders for light rail, there is a case to be made for electrification and trolley buses in terms of public health (particulates) and energy (one power plant vs many). While CNG is much better than diesel, zero particulates should be the goal. We continue to see fossil fuel based solutions when we should be looking even further down the road.

The Politics of Status Quo

Richard Layman covers all of the city races where transportation issues are downing candidates and opposition candidates are making hay of driver unrest and fear of breaking the status quo. Greg Nickels is taken out due to the tunnel and candidates in New York City are already saying Janette Sadik Kahn is out if they are elected. That would be a crime in itself but it shows the fear of change is real.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Wal Mart is Not TOD

Building a supercenter will not anchor TOD. Sorry to say.
Soon, the boarded up store fronts and run down parking lots that make up the mostly vacant Amity Gardens Shopping Center will be torn down to make room for a Wal-Mart Supercenter.

After years of discussions, the mega-chain finalized plans to build along Independence Boulevard Monday night. City leaders hope it will be an economic shot in the arm to the city's East Side.

"I think we have a real opportunity for transit oriented development next door and further out. This will anchor all of those developments," said Nancy Carter, of the Charlotte City Council.

I'm sure Wal Mart would act as a stellar anchor to new real transit oriented development, after it dies a slow gasoline-less supply chain death.

Construction Impacts

One of the complains about new transit is that it will destroy homes and businesses. However with the appropriate strategies the affects are decreased. A new report out states that 85% of businesses were retained along the new LRT line in Seattle. The same won't be said however for some housing in Chandler where a rapid bus line is going in. Not a lot of housing gone, but enough to write a newspaper article about it.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Too Full

The Hiawatha Line is chock full of riders. So much so that upgrades to the stations are underway to make them accessible to three car trains. The FTA models predicted that ridership on the line by 2020 would be 24,000. But now we're seeing that its 37,000 on some days. With more three car trains, I wonder if there will be an even greater ridership bump with more room on the trains. Back during the fight for LRT in Minneapolis, people were saying that this was the train to nowhere. Though it must be taking all those people somewhere!

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Symbolic Gestures

Looks like Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory vetoed the Charlotte streetcar study. But no matter, it initially passed with a 7 to 4 vote, wherin 7 votes are needed to override a veto. It was a symbolic gesture that might win him some local support from the local libertarian set, but ultimately would hold the city back from planning the line which would likely not be constructed for at least another few years, hopefully when the economy is better. Gotta plan for the future.

Monday, August 24, 2009

Related Comedy

"The toll road of denial is a long and dangerous one. The price? Your soul" - J Peterman

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Sunday Night Notes

Kevin Flynn (Formerly of the Rocky Mountain News) reports that the first Fastracks LRVs have arrived in Denver.
~~~
Some in Portland are worried about gentrification and displacement in neighborhoods that Portland plans to run streetcars through. I wonder though if lots of close in neighborhoods get streetcars they will all gentrify. It seems to me that gentrification occurs due to exclusivity. If you built a bunch of lines at the same time, will there still be the same effect? The same issue could arise in Denver where there will be five new lines. Interested to see what other think.
~~~
Why don't we electrify our freight lines. Even if the lines are powered by a bit dirtier pollution, it will still come from only one power plant away from the population center until alternative energy is put in place. That is better than say every engine pushing pollutants into the neighborhoods that freight lines run through. West Oakland is notorious for this very issue. I also wonder how much of the particulates in say the Port of Oakland are due to switchers. What if we just electrified the rail yards first with electric switchers?
~~~
Developers are waiting before they start developing around the new Purple Line.
~~~
My lungs don't care about aesthetics. Speaking of Wien, I wish I were going back soon. I love that city. Memories...

Vienna_LineD

CA - 10 Special Election + Smart Growth

I was looking through the candidates for the special election to replace Rep. Ellen Tauscher in California's District 10 and was struck by the amount of attention was given to "smart growth and transportation" on almost all of the democratic candidates websites.

John Garamendi has a fairly in depth transportation page that discusses TOD, HOT Lane BRT, eBart expansion (we can talk about whether this is a good idea at all later), and cycling. Anthony Woods has a page that mixes transportation and smart growth even if smart growth is never mentioned in the description. Finally Mark DeSaulnier, who helped write SB375, has large descriptions in separate sections on transportation and smart growth.

It's amazing how far the movement has come but I'm reminded by a post by Kaid Banfield at the NRDC switchboard that there is still a long way to go. Density itself has to be designed well to work, and now that the issue of smart growth is getting greater attention, we need to push the issue even further. While the talk of the above candidates is great, I'm still wondering if they actually get it.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Heeey!!! Houston Gets a FONSI

Houston gets into the final design phase for two of its five light rail lines and gets development codes changed to promote pedestrian access to the stations. Not bad for the Texas home of oil industry giants.
The council unanimously approved changes in development codes intended to promote dense, urban-style development along the Metropolitan Transit Authority's Main Street rail line and five planned extensions.
Apparently they could have done more. Now if only they can get those parking requirements out of the way and persuade land owners that their property isn't worth as much as they think it is. One of the issues I heard along the line a few years ago is that property owners with vacant land near stations believed their land was worth way more than it really was because of the line, thus stalling development around some midtown stations. An interesting dynamic without "zoning".

On a somewhat related note, the new starts process acronyms that come with the announcement today are numerous and might as well be their own Klingon language. If we were speaking in transit nerd, we would say: "The two Houston corridors passed their NEPA test after they received a FONSI on their FEIS and obtained a ROD from the FTA. This allows them to enter into FD en route to an FFGA." No wonder everyone is so confused over the process. It takes years just to learn all the acronyms.

NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act
FONSI: Finding of No Significant Impact
FEIS: Final Environmental Impact Statement
ROD: Record of Decision
FTA: Federal Transit Administration
FD: Final Design
FFGA: Full Funding Grant Agreement

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Small Cities Paying for Flights

I'm not really quite sure what to think about this. It seems as if we had a real national rail program that chambers of commerce and cities wouldn't have to be ponying up money to guarantee a certain financial minimum to the airline industry.
With airlines cutting back service in a weak economy, some cities that are too big to qualify for federal help but too small to keep the planes flying in have stepped up with ways to hang on: paying the airlines, either directly or indirectly.
Places like Duluth should have a faster connection to Minneapolis and the airport there. It doesn't really make sense to keep a slush fund that the airline can raid when the economics don't work out for them. There are many even smaller cities out there that depend on Amtrak for their carless connections out of the area. These smaller cities should be on the forefront of regional rail service to larger metro areas with major airports and service.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Sunday Night Linkfest

A Democratic Gubernatorial candidate from Georgia doesn't get how transit interacts with land use:
“I think that what we have to do is to elevate light rail over the interstate highways where we already have the right-of-ways. And every so many bridges, you retrofit the bridges to be stations above.”
No, you don't build light rail on freeways anymore. Someone needs to give folks a crash course in what works and what doesn't at stimulating land use change. It's not transit in freeways.
~~~
Matt Yglesias thinks about what the next big thing could be to spur the economy such as IT did in the late 90's or the railroad boom did in the 1800s. If we're going to spend a lot of money on an industrial policy, shouldn't we do it with something that we know works. Obviously I agree with his thoughts that building high speed rail and metro subways in the densest parts of cities would be a good start. It's also proven to work, so it seems like a no brainer.
~~~
A plan to raise the rails in Houston through the medical center gets a writeup in the Chronicle. It seems to me that the stray current issue has been lots of fear mongering from the opponents of light rail. Also, isn't there something better to spend around $300 million dollars of fixed guideway modernization dollars than on a viaduct for a line that would only be 7 years old? Seems to me there is a $50B backlog that should be addressed first.
~~~
O'Toole ghostwrites an editorial page at the Denver Post that has so many holes it might as well be swiss cheese. So tired of beating back stupid.
That's right. Unless we change energy sources or greatly increase light-rail ridership, we should just drive our cars to work instead.
Really? Maybe people should just not use electricity at all and read by the moonlight. It will be much cleaner. What will they come up with next?
~~~
An interesting idea to get rail to Marin from San Francisco. Extend the Central Subway to Sausalito. How much would an anchored tube cost from end to end? It would certainly be cheaper than tunneling that whole way. But as Rafael says, you have to contend with the freakishly strong currents.

Friday, August 14, 2009

Building Something of Meaning

Mayor McCrory of Charlotte has been complaining about the stimulus for a while. Most of his argument revolves around the fact that its ridiculously hard to build anything of long term meaning. I tend to agree with him on this point and think that if we're going to spend the money, it might as well be on things that are long lasting.
Under the stimulus, there is limited ability to build transit systems or major power generating facilities, upgrade water systems, or undertake significant environmental cleanups. While President Roosevelt built dams and President Eisenhower built an interstate highway system, President Obama's stimulus fills pot holes.

Extended Chicago

Chicago is looking to extend their Red, Orange, and Yellow El lines at their ends. I'm not going to say that I know Chicago as well as some other cities but I'm wondering if 9 miles of rapid transit on the outside edges for $1.7 billion is a higher and better use than greater capacity in the core? Especially with the Olympics coming up.

Considering the North South deficit of rapid transit on the Western edges of the El network, would North-South LRT/Rapid Streetcar lines and dedicated bus lanes be a better use of money? What do you all think?

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Shameless Plug

So at work we're starting a blog. The basic premise is best practices and information on Transit Oriented Development including hopefully posts from experts from around the country and more information about the work we do. I don't mention work here much because well I'd rather this blog stay my own opinion and not drag work into it. But in this instance, I thought folks would be interested in what is going on over there. So check it out if you get a chance.

Think Different

I think Atrios has the right idea:
I'm not saying travel time is not an issue at all, but fundamentally such projects are about reducing car dependency and changing land use patterns. We generally don't talk about them like that, and the Feds mostly don't think about them like that, but that's really what they're about. Simply speeding people from point A to point B isn't the purpose, the purpose is to provide a different way to get around and eventually a different environment in which to get around. If travel time is too important, then basic utility might be sacrificed by, for example, reducing the number of stops.
The feds put way too much emphasis on travel time savings. There is no way that 3A and 3C are going to have the same ridership contrary to what the models say. By skipping one of the densest neighborhoods in Minneapolis, you're reducing the ability of the line to serve more people for more trips as well as change the land use patterns even more. Yonah also makes an important point:
As a result, transit networks are encouraged to extend out into the suburbs, rather than be densified and reinforced downtown. This policy encourages sprawl; though more suburbanites may find themselves taking transit to work, they won’t be using it to go shopping or out on the weekend.
But there's another aspect as well. I believe you have to connect major destinations in a region and this is something the Southwest LRT is doing. Connecting Eden Prarie to Downtown is an important goal, and doing it quickly is important as well. However there is a trade off between the goal of speed and the goal of actually connecting destinations and origins. If there is a corridor that might be a little slower, but ultimately connect many more people, it shouldn't be discounted based on speed, but should increase the value based on access. This is something that is currently lacking in the New Starts process and something that needs to change if we're ever going to build meaningful transit lines that connect people with where they want to go.

Southwest Airlines CEO Fires First Shot

And so it begins. the Southwest Airlines CEO believes that the federal government shouldn't give it a competitive advantage.

After his speech, I asked Kelly whether his company would likely oppose high-speed passenger rail, given how precious every dollar has become to the airlines. Southwest's opposition years ago was a key reason a previous effort to build a high-speed line linking Dallas, Austin and Houston died. (Trains are seen by many as likely to compete with and in some cases perhaps eliminate short-haul flights.)

He said it's too early to oppose any particular plan, but said federal support for bullet trains shouldn't put airlines like his at a competitive disadvantage.

Perhaps if you can't beat them, you should join them. But airlines aren't looking that far ahead yet. Perhaps they'll start screaming when gas prices go back up again. I don't quite understand why they can't see the future in which higher oil prices make life for airlines hard. If last summer wasn't a wake up call, they'll be getting water splashed in their face soon.

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Doubling Down - Town

The New York Times has an article about the railyards in Sacramento changing into a new neighborhood. While the market is somewhat down from mid-decade, it seems as if industrial areas adjacent to downtown are still a hot commodity.
When completed, the old Union Pacific property will become an extension of the downtown, effectively doubling its size...

Although it is playing up the history of the site, Thomas Enterprises plans to make new and old buildings harmonize through the use of similar materials, notably brick and glass.“This will not be ‘suburban urban,’ ” said Mr. Rich, alluding to the faux-historical style of many recent outdoor shopping centers. The Railyards, he said, will be “gritty, like a city.”

This will also be the pass through for the DNA line phase 1.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Future Planning

It looks like Shanghai has long term plans for it's metro system.
~~~
Developers are looking at TOD around HSR stops in California.
“I think not only is it something that is a good thing, it’s certainly going to be a phenomenal planning tool for the next generation of growth,” said Perry Dealy, president of Dealy Development. “The opportunity to take the high-speed stop hubs and convert them to maximize their mixed-use, high-density potential is great. You’d have what I’d call a TOD, transit-oriented design, starting with residential, work-live, retail, entertainment and other kinds of venues that are part of the mixed-use characteristics.”
~~~
Yet another transit line starts out already worrying about costs more than connecting people with places they want to go.

“Dorfman says the projected cost of the line ranges from $1.2 billion to $1.8 billion, depending on the final route. Those numbers put the proposal give the project a Cost Effectiveness Index of $30 per rider for the length of the line, just outside the range required by the Federal Transit Administration for federal funding.

In order to move into the next step which would be to begin preliminary engineering you have to reach that $29 CEI number, so we’re very close to that,” she said.

The CEI is messing up basic planning. I can appreciate getting rid of some of the insane gold plating that is rampant in LRT planning, but I can't understand how a single computer index based on modeling that everyone knows is bs can decide that a route that goes where people want to go is too expensive. So instead, we'll build the cheap route because its cheaper, not because it's better.

We Don't Want Faster Transit

In a recent meeting with Merchants on Geary street, they believe that access would kill their businesses.
The first of their reservations is that construction will scare away customers; and second, that faster transit will encourage bigger buildings which will spell disaster for small businesses. Reservation number one is reasonable; but number two is whaaaaa? Is your argument seriously "we need slower buses because small businesses can only survive if nobody can get to where they're going on time"?
Really? That's the exact reason why I never go to the Richmond. Because it takes to freakin long to get there without a car! Seriously people, how long do we need to go in these circles before we realize that rapid transit in San Francisco would facilitate the movement of not just people, but money into merchants wallets from other neighborhoods. There are many nights when I think I might want to go to the Sunset or Richmond to get a bite to eat but I don't want to waste 2 hours on Muni. Might as well cook at home. Fast transit does not kill business, slow transit does.

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Million Per Metro

Pinning good transit to a metro population level seems like a good idea to me. In India, regions of 1M or more population will now be eligible for 50% federal funding for a metro system if the locals paid the other half. Here in the United States, regions are lucky to get 50% funding for one commuter or light rail line. I think we should go even lower. A region of 750,000 or more should start construction so by the time that other 250,000 moved in they would have options as to where to live along the newly constructed lines.

Imagine if we had metro subways in all of our metro areas over 1 million people as a base for greater transit improvements. Considering between 1990 and 2005 about 45% of new transit trips were made on metro subway systems, it stands to reason that the construction of these networks connecting the major employment and population centers in a regions core will dramatically increase transit ridership. Look what has happened in Washington DC over the last 40 years or so. That is something we should emulate and India gives us a view into how to do it. Where's that type of vision for America?

A Shotgun Wedding?

Meteor Blades has a post on teh Orange Satan that goes more towards the middle of the cash for clunkers argument. He believes that even though our goal should be moving more towards better transportation systems and land use, we're still going to have automobiles until we get those systems in place. He then ties the idea of cash for clunkers with transit.
Money for the CARS program should have its own budget, not taken from spending for renewable energy projects. And every dollar spent should be legislatively tied to a matching dollar added to the federal mass transit appropriation in the following year. Funding for both these projects should come from increased taxes on gasoline.
While the cash for clunkers program that actually makes people double their mileage instead of letting them off the hook might move us towards more efficient vehicles, transit and land use is so far behind that I don't believe a 1:1 add to the fund won't really help much. It seems to me like keeping the status quo, because outside of that funding, 80% of federal monies still goes to cars, plus the other side of the 1:1 cash for clunkers, which is still subsidizing people to buy cars. I can appreciate that people are still going to drive cars. But we didn't get to be a single minded car driving society by the free market alone. There are a lot of subsidies that made it so and the pendulum swung too far, and we're still pushing to that side, when we should be aiding a swing back to the center on both transportation and land use.

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Assorted Quotes

More HSR in Spain:
By then 90% of the population will be within 30 miles of a station. New lines have already been opened to Segovia, Valladolid and Malaga in the last 18 months. New links will eventually connect France and Portugal.
~~~
Madison has a choice between Airport and Downtown Amtrak Station
Moreover, they argue a First Street location has unlimited potential for sparking "transit-oriented" development of apartments, stores or offices that could generate millions in new property tax revenues while providing a catalyst for the long-awaited overhaul of the blighted East Washington Avenue corridor.

"Compare that to the airport, where you have zero opportunity for anything like that," says Barry Gore, a Madison-based urban planner who has previously worked on transit issues in Chicago and the Twin Cities.

Check out the Obama story at the start of the article.

H/T Planetizen
~~~
The Streetsweeper has this to say about the Lazarus piece:
Lazarus at one point says that we will need to make our cities less comfortable in order to force our population into mass transit. Are these Japanese or European cities so uncomfortable that we will stop visiting in such great numbers? Are they so uncomfortable that their own inhabitants are fleeing in droves? I think not. So, why do we visit there (repeatedly) and long for what they have, yet fail to bring it about in our own country. Even our own "world class" cities cannot pull it off with the same panache as they do. I don' t think that we want their comfort level, because we are Americans and we deserve more.
A coworker mentioned the other day that only 20% of Americans have passports. Another lower number actually use them. I wish more people would go and see other places. Just to get a feel of not America.

High Speed Rail for the Masses

Yesterday was such an HSR frenzy that I thought it should be documented:

First, David Lazarus questions whether transit will work in the United States. He talked to some "experts":
He said investments in transit projects need to be accompanied by policies designed to make driving costlier and thus make public transportation more attractive. These policies include significantly higher charges for parking virtually wherever you go and the increased use of toll roads.
I don't like this frame. You mean we need to charge what they really cost. It's not like we would inflate the cost just for the heck of it to some arbitrary number. I guess we could, but really if people just realized how much that garage spot cost or how much the roads really cost things would be much different. Lazarus concludes:
I hate to be cynical, but I simply can't imagine political leaders at the local, state or federal level telling voters that they support a big increase in gas taxes, sky-high parking fees and high-density neighborhoods.
There's a lack of supply of those types of neighborhoods. I really wish people would realize this. It's not that some people don't want to live in these types of environments. It's that for the most part it's illegal. That we need to change.

But a question I had coming out of it is whether HSR can really be called "transit". We don't call air travel transit do we? It seems to me like a kind of grey area. How do you define what transit is and what it isn't. Lazarus was also on NPR's Marketplace.
~~~
The head of Ryanair is obviously going to jump up and down and hold his breath if the UK government states that all short haul flights should be by train. Obviously not all trips can be by train but England really shouldn't be hop skipping inside the country when there is a faster alternative.
~~~
Rob talks Intercity buses. They are cheap and becoming more plentiful. I don't see them being an alternative to rail as some believe. Rob also talks Bent Flyvbjerg. Many people use his work to say we shouldn't do megaprojects. Rob must be back to posting more. Free time?
~~~
That China place is rocking along with their HSR lines. Many places that were super far apart have halfed their travel time between the two. In such a large country, HSR will bring them closer.
~~~
Glaeser. I've heard he's a good economist. How come everything I read from him that's politically tinged is awful. Ryan explains.

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

The First Electric Railway?

While Richmond VA is still the first electric transit system proved in 1888 by Frank J Sprague, apparently Montgomery Alabama was the city with the distinction of the first electric streetcar line in 1886. Or was it? The often unsung electrician was Charles Van Depoele and he opened 11 electric railway lines before Sprague opened his network in Richmond. The first being a demonstration line in Chicago in 1883. However these systems were prone to breakdowns and were often in need of fixing.

Another electrician, Leo Daft, had built electric lines on Pico in LA and in New Jersey, only to have issues with trollers coming off the wires and reliability. It wasn't until Frank J Sprague that systems were finally reliable enough and the invention of the spring loaded trolley pole (with the help of Van Depoele's first troller idea) kept the wire and trolley in constant contact. However Mr. Sprague recognized himself that the first regularly operating trolley line was Mr. Daft's in Hamden Line in Baltimore, constructed in 1885.

Mr. Sprague himself opened a line in St. Joseph Missouri in 1887 but proved himself when he electrified and ran 40 cars in Richmond VA in 1888. He also proved to investors that the vehicles would still work when they were backed up end to end, all pulling electricity from the same wire. He shouldn't get all the credit since there were many that came before him, but he's often credited with being the father of electric transit.

So which was the first? Are we going by reliability? By first operating date? By demonstration? I would say they all win since they all contributed to the cause. It's just unfortunate that they haven't gotten the recognition they deserve for their contributions.

H/T Streetsblog Cap Hill & Urban Mass Transit

Jim Bowie & Davy Crockett Would Ride

San Antonio leaders are very optimistic in saying they will have streetcars in three years. And that would put Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio ahead of Austin in the Transit Space Race.
Henry Muñoz, VIA Metropolitan Transit’s board chairman, said he expects the agency to break ground in two or three years and will announce in the next month a citizens advisory committee to help guide the creation of a starter streetcar system.

DOC Streetcar

Dallas and Oak Cliff have decided to get together on plans for a streetcar. Previously, Oak Cliff and Fort Worth were going to go in together to seek TIGER stimulus funding for new streetcar projects. However Dallas has plans for a streetcar as well, so bringing the ideas together is smart, considering it will lower the overall costs of a system that would likely run just blocks away from the other if allowed to plan separately.

I'm going to take a wild guess and venture to say that they won't get funding for the project. Given the whole country is foaming at the mouth for only $1.5 billion dollars in funds, it would be hard to expect projects like these to get funding over those more established. The low funding with so much interest makes that extra $2 billion from cash for clunkers look silly as well, considering there are transit projects that could help guide new growth that reduces VMT versus paying for people's new cars so they can drive more.

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Governor Good Hair

Does this mean that we can give Governor Perry a hard time for all his contacts within the toll road community? I'm not sure he really wants to start this fight.

Grape Flavors

Governor O'Malley will choose LRT for both the Red and Purple lines tomorrow which has been an awaited decision for a long time. I hope that the Red line will not be another stand alone line like the green line and the existing LRT line. Not being able to share equipment and operating a single line with shops etc for each line in the system seems wasteful to me. Honestly both of these lines should be Metro subway lines, unfortunately these days all we do is look at the cost first and long term benefits and value last. Such is life I guess.

One More Clunker

Perhaps the streetcars of San Francisco were getting a bit upset with the lack of funding coming their way and the silly cash for clunkers program, so they decided to tag team an SUV. In all seriousness, I hope everyone is ok.

Sunday, August 2, 2009

Track Trauma

I've discussed the operator side of suicides on the track before. The Mercury News goes into greater detail with Caltrain engineers.

Alternate Universe

An article on NBC 11 ponders what would have happened if the Bay Area never would have constructed BART. It's an interesting thought, especially considering the alternative they paint in the article.

We'd certainly have an electrified Caltrain running to downtown San Francisco at a faster speed than the current Baby Bullets -- and perhaps running on the Bay Bridge or in a new tunnel under San Francisco Bay to Oakland and beyond. We'd also have real commuter rail from the East Bay to Silicon Valley, the region's most vital employment center -- not the paltry ACE and Capitol Corridor services people have to make do with.

We'd have light rail, a modern version of the Key System, crisscrossing the East Bay. And we'd certainly have faster service in San Francisco, the city most dependent on public transit.

While its a pretty picture do we really think that alternatives to BART would have gotten traction without the existence of BART or a core program? In San Francisco, the construction of BART was also the time that the Muni Metro Market street tunnel was constructed. I often wish that we had built a center cities metro and connected the edges with commuter rail to places like Walnut Creek and Pleasanton. It perhaps could have lowered the cost and increased productivity of the system. But as usual hindsight is 20/20. We won't really know either way.

One thing the article points out that really hits me and should hit everyone in San Francisco.
Isn't it ridiculous that transit commuters take less time to go from Walnut Creek to downtown San Francisco than it does to cross the city?
Yes, yes it is.

Sunday Night Notes

Karlsruhe, notorious for their introduction of tram trains, is looking at nickel cadmium batteries for short segments of the line where there is a switch from Mainline to Tram operations.
~~~
Fort Collins had a street railway until 1951, some of the tracks were dug up under the pavement recently.
~~~
All about priorities:
Luoni said the key is spending priorities, not lack of funds. The money the federal government spent in one year on the Iraq war could have funded 200 light rail transit systems.
~~~
We might be seeing solar ferry service in Hong Kong. At some point the bay area was supposed to have a more robust ferry system, but I haven't heard or seen anything about it lately.
~~~
Gavin seems to not really care. Please go away soon.
~~~
The New York Times editorial on HSR is pretty good. We need a transportation bill, not a stall. And they don't call it the highway bill!

Despite his support of the idea of high-speed rail, President Obama has put off dealing with the national transportation bill for another 18 months. That is a delayed opportunity to move forward on an important new national transportation plan to expand public transit in much the way the Federal-Aid Highway Act did for roads more than 50 years ago.

Until Mr. Obama and members of Congress can enact a comprehensive new transit agenda, both have an obligation to make a down payment on high-speed-rail corridors across the nation.

~~~
Tough times for TOD and Mixed Use projects in Atlanta