"And one of the things we're trying not to do is create a cookie cutter, where everything is exactly the same," Rae said. "It really needs to be designed around the local and state needs."I hope that doesn't mean we rid ourselves of standards that make all these lines interoperable. The last thing we need is BART like decisions which make the line so specialized that it becomes more expensive in the long run. I have a feeling it's the issue of different speeds being allowed. Though it would be nice if the FRA would stop being such morons on the issue of split rail operations and buff strength requirements for those vehicles. That's another post.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
What's Cookie Cutter?
I'm not sure I understand. FRA rep Karen Rae (Who was head of Cap Metro in Austin during the first Light Rail Election) has said that they don't want a cookie cutter approach to HSR.
Portland Unveils First American Made Modern Streetcar
Portland Transport has the skinny with photos and a video. With the recent passage of the Eastside Extension, it looks as if there will be a lot more of these coming. I've also heard rumors that Tuscon could order from OIW as well.
As a side note but not entirely unrelated, the Wall Street Journal ran a piece on how places like Portland and Austin are hitting a mid-life crisis. They are getting such a huge influx of past college folks that there just aren't enough jobs for them. But why are people moving there? What makes these places cool?
As a side note but not entirely unrelated, the Wall Street Journal ran a piece on how places like Portland and Austin are hitting a mid-life crisis. They are getting such a huge influx of past college folks that there just aren't enough jobs for them. But why are people moving there? What makes these places cool?
Perhaps a Trend?
Looks like Arnold has stolen over $5 billion. I know a certain gubernatorial candidate who might fit as a follower to this trend. Seems some pranksters called Where's Gavin? have also called for photos of him riding Muni (not in a cable car). I wonder if these types of comparisons will matter in the general or even primary election?
Friday, May 15, 2009
The Mountains Win Again
AYFKM!!!! 4,350 riders for $552 million dollars! What kind of insanity is going on over at BART. Geez you could have built 18 miles of streetcar. 3 miles to the airport and 15 miles in Oakland between all the BART stations there.
The suburbs won again. This does not bode well for real BART extensions (not just overpriced people movers) that would, you know, run in places where there are LOTS of people. (Ahem, Geary). I wonder if a majority on that board will ever get it. It's not likely.
The suburbs won again. This does not bode well for real BART extensions (not just overpriced people movers) that would, you know, run in places where there are LOTS of people. (Ahem, Geary). I wonder if a majority on that board will ever get it. It's not likely.
No Kidding?
Mr. Setty at PublicTransit.US brings us some news about what we already knew. PRT costs are understated. No, that would never happen. You can always build elevated guideway cheaper than tracks in pavement. FACT. Right?
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Texas Legislature Holds Dallas Hostage
It's unfortunate that legislators in Texas choose to keep people from voting on a tax. Not the tax itself, but the ability to pick a fee to vote on to fund transit. Sigh.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
When "Striking a Balance" Means "Fund Less"
Peter Rogoff, the possible new FTA administrator, was on Capitol Hill getting grilled by Senators. However I have a slight problem with what he had to say on the topic of funding. It seems as if he's operating still under the 20th century mindset of autos over transit in saying that we need to balance building new projects with repairing our existing assets. This assumes that capital transit funding will continue along its same path and is not acceptable.
"Some of these deferred maintenance issues quickly become safety issues," Rogoff warned. He urged the senators to strike a balance between funding new public transit projects -- for which "it's a lot easier to garner enthusiasm" -- and repairing the already broken systems in major cities.I agree that we need to fix what we have, but we should be expanding rapid transit at a greater clip. "Striking a balance" to me means fund less. It's already hard enough to fund new transit and there's a huge backlog to the tune of $250 billion, possibly more. What we should be doing is be striking a better ballance between highway and alternative transportation funding, such as Congressman Oberstar is advocating with modal parity.
72% Are Walking
72% of people who use the Orange Line in the R-B corridor walk to the stations.
Labels:
Metro,
Ridership,
Subway,
Walkability,
Washington DC
Oh Parking
Ryan gives us this treasure trove from an industry that doesn't understand its contribution to many ills that plague good development and sustainability in this country.
On the Coalition of Sustainable Transport
We're all in this together, us transit riders and bikers. We're in a fierce fight against the car and the its superior attitude out there that pervades our national psyche. Of course I believe that cars are necessary at some times (I drive one once a week to visit family) and we shouldn't completely rid ourselves of them. I also believe that bikes are real transportation and perhaps would be used more if infrastructure was built more for beginners who are truly scared for their lives when biking on the mean streets. But I can't get on board with comments like those written by Stephen Jones in his bikes article in the Guardian:
I understand that it was probably supposed to be a rhetorical question, but I'd like to think we're in this together against the car culture that keeps modes of more efficient transportation from thriving. Perhaps many cyclists share this feeling, that Muni is not needed, however I believe that would be a dangerous mistake to make, and bust up a winning coalition that seems to have cars on the ropes, even if we do suffer setbacks such as today's budget fail.
For the rest of you: what's your excuse? Why would you continue to rely on such wasteful and expensive transportation options — a label that applies to both cars and buses — when you could use the most efficient vehicle ever invented?First off, a bus is nowhere near as wasteful as a car, especially here in San Francisco where many of our transit lines are electric and powered by hydro plants as well as packed to the brim with riders. Second, while I really love the fog in San Francisco, it's like the humidity in Houston that uses moisture to boil you alive, but instead chills you to the bone. It's not hard to wonder on a cold rainy day why someone might want to have the option of taking Muni. Transportation should be multi-modal to give people options. If we start to think our mode is the best for everything, we're no better than highway engineers and the sprawlagists.
I understand that it was probably supposed to be a rhetorical question, but I'd like to think we're in this together against the car culture that keeps modes of more efficient transportation from thriving. Perhaps many cyclists share this feeling, that Muni is not needed, however I believe that would be a dangerous mistake to make, and bust up a winning coalition that seems to have cars on the ropes, even if we do suffer setbacks such as today's budget fail.
Labels:
Bay Area,
Bicycling,
Bus,
Light Rail,
Muni,
San Francisco,
Trolley bus
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)