Gore Takes the Subway...When There is a Choice

Last year for the Oscars I was annoyed that they closed the entrance to the Red Line Subway. It was a little ironic due to the fact that Al Gore won the Oscar for An Inconvenient Truth. But when given the chance, Al will make the right move. It's representative of course, of the choices that most Americans don't have...good transit.

Proposal for a Seattle Streetcar Network

Some profs over at the University of Washington have done a report on how the streetcar network in Seattle can expand into 5 different neighborhoods. Their proposal doesn't give costs but lays out the amount of development that could possibly contribute to a local improvement district (LID) and TIF to pay for the expansion. The corridors would connect a larger part of the downtown to the light rail system thats currently under construction and provide a push for development close to downtown. Very interesting stuff. The Seattle Times has more. The graphic below shows the lines from the study.

A Real San Francisco Metro

After the Oakland Map, here is the San Francisco version. I came to think that at $250 million a mile for a subway, this project might cost around the same as Denver's massive Fastrax expansion which is scheduled to cost $4.7 billion dollars. With such a massive expansion in mobility, it allows for a massive expansion in ridership. Muni currently carries about 700,000 trips a day but only 146,000 of those on the Muni Metro. But Washington Metro has get's almost 900,000 riders with its Metro system. I imagine such a system with the inclusion of Oakland's metro could push ridership way above that. Now this map was created as a BART connected system which would probably make the most sense. But I imagine some of these lines could be Muni Metro also.

Those BRT Lovers at the FTA Again

Update: Here is a copy of the letter sent to Metro in Houston. I encourage you to read it as it shows the FTA's BRT bias. They had no problems changing from LRT to BRT but balk when Houston wants to go back.

These guys are ridiculous. Houston was told by the FTA that they would have to resubmit engineering forms for Preliminary Engineering now that they've gone to LRT from BRT. The annoying part is that these guys don't quit trying to water down transit. I can't wait for this administration to be gone so this crap stops happening.

But perhaps the thing that annoys me the most is that these lines were to be planned to always be LRT. In fact the EIS was supposed to have a convertible alternative in it where they would build the line and run buses on it. The FTA can't call takebacks on this as its in the New Starts Report for Houston. So they decided to change the timeline and go LRT early. It's not like the FTA didn't know they were going to do it eventually. This is a stall tactic and I'm wondering if someone named Culbertson isn't behind the details. The current congressional delegation needs to step up now and set it straight.

An Oakland Metro

Using Eric's comments and some of my own ideas, i've come up with a Metro that goes everywhere that I would ever want to go in the East Bay. The beauty of it is that the initial BART system can still act as an express route to the city while the other lines while high speed, make more connections around the city aiding in development and fast connectivity while not compromising the connection to San Francisco. San Francisco is Next...

Initial Ridership Figures for CATS

It seems that CATS is off to a good start with Light Rail ridership. They predicted 9,100 riders on an average day in the first year. After a slow start Monday they were at 8,029 riders Tuesday. According to folks in the industry, the first weeks are lower than the average for the year after startups so this looks very promising. I wouldn't be surprised if they surpass their 2020 ridership number early like Minneapolis and Houston already have.

A Real Bay Area Metro

Eric over at Transbay Blog made some comments in the Livermore Thread that rang true for many people in San Francisco and other big cities with half finished metro lines. I too wish we had a real metro system in the Bay Area. It certainly would make getting more places much easier. And I have a feeling that it would increase ridership dramatically.

Why do I think we should invest more in urban subway systems? Because these lines have been driving national ridership gains over the last 15 years. (data here). Heavy Rail has produced about the same gain as bus, light rail, and commuter rail combined. Obviously there are different modes for different purposes. But some corridors need a metro, more than BART has now. Perhaps we should start a campaign? The Urban Subway Expansion Project. Any other cities that should join? I nominate LA first.

So where should we put new subways? In the Bay Area.... we'll just make a map. Any corridors? I'll start with Geary haha.

Transit Effectiveness Project

I went to a meeting tonight where there was a presentation on the transit effectiveness project in San Francisco. I wish I would have had my thumb drive as there were some fascinating maps with great data. I found them but they aren't high quality. Here is the link to the Geary data showing where people get on and off the bus. If only all transit agencies went and got this type of information, we would know a lot more about operations. The following maps are located in this presentation. All the screen shots below are courtesy of Muni.

Operating Speed: This shows where Muni is really slowed down by traffic. No Surprise that Van Ness and Stockton are some of the worst. I wish we would have had this data before the 3rd Street LRT project was started. Take a look at that street. Green. This is why data is important. It makes political decisions much easier. Now thats not to say that it won't get more congested as the are grows around light rail and it needed to become rail at some point, but there are many pressing needs in the city, mainly Van Ness and the long orange Geary.



Boardings: This shows where people board the buses. The most effective transit is on the main corridors and major traffic generators. It's interesting to note that where there is a high capacity spine, there are a lot of boardings. Most noticeable is along Mission BART. It shows how system boardings would probably improve if BART was expanded to Geary then down 19th such as proposed by SF Cityscape. It would improve boardings on the bus lines connecting to the stations.



Trips: The above observation is proven below in that there is a missing link between the Sunset and Richmond districts. The red dots are total trips between districts. Since there are a lot of trips North from the Richmond South towards SF State it would make a lot of sense to have rapid transit fed by east west buses.




Data. It's an amazing thing. According to one AC Transit board member at tonight's TALC meeting, they will be doing this soon as well which should bring some even more interesting results.

New Blogs for the Roll

Just thought I would share a few new blogs with folks. Give them a click.

Jacksonville Transit - Transit News from Jacksonville Florida.

Light Rail AZ - Discussing Phoenix Light Rail Issues.

Light Rail in Grand Rapids - A Discussion of Grand Rapids Transit Progress.

Street Heat - LA Transportation News.

Austin News and Flashback

Update: Krusee is going to Retire and will most likely be Toll Road Czar. He should not be on the CAMPO committee now.

I'm just going to link to some stuff...

M1ek talks about the good and bad of CAMPO taking rail planning away from Cap Metro. Discussions about Mike Krusee (A bit of a shady character), should not be had without also noting that Lee Walker is back for 2 more years. Some locals believe he was a major part of the 2000 election loss because of some pre-election decisions to not do more outreach and the fact that he and others gave in to demands from Republicans in the state house on Commuter and Light Rail.

Here's a fun flashback from my Master's PR/Thesis.

In the 1999 legislative session, Mike Krusee, a State Representative from Round Rock, authored new legislation that would let Capital Metro keep half of its cent sales tax and let voters decide what to do with the other half. The bill died in committee due to Capital Metro’s urging because the transit authority convinced lawmakers that they would have an election in 2000 and that the voters should be able to decide the fate of rail before another raid on Capital Metro’s sales tax revenue.
...

As 2000 loomed as the year for the final decision, the Capital Metro board was grappling with whether to hold the election in May or November. The main concern was getting federal funding and giving the community enough time to understand the details of the light rail plan. There were even attempts to satiate the road warriors that included Gerald Daugherty’s ROAD group. Mayor Kirk Watson floated an idea of putting road bonds on the ballot along with the rail election but it was criticized once again by Daugherty as insufficient. Daugherty still wanted money from Capital Metro for road building.
...

In 2003, another interesting development occurred in rail planning. State Representative Krusee, the new chairman of the Texas House of Representatives Transportation Committee was quoted at a private transportation meeting as saying that he would like to see a commuter rail system in Central Texas. Preferably, the lines would be located on existing Capital Metro right of way as well as the Union Pacific right of way located between San Marcos and his constituency in Round Rock. Representative Krusee proposed a starter red line replacing the 1998 consultant’s green line light rail in 2000. Consultants in 1998 believed that the green line was a better route for ridership production however it was turned down by the voters in 2000. It seemed that commuter rail was on Senator Krusee’s mind even before the 2000 election. In a 2000 Austin American Statesman article, he was quoted, “I wish they would be more open-minded to alternatives to light rail”.

In more news, the Statesman claims Capital Metro needs to be clearer in its book keeping after an article by Ben Wear about costs of the new commuter rail line. It's just another attack, but they better get used to it as it's gonna keep on coming with this line.

Jim Skaggs, Gerald Daugherty's best buddy, also penned an already debunked article also. I'll bring you a few of the debunkings soon but this gets so tiring. When can advocates go on the offensive already?