tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post2428874020699466012..comments2024-01-12T00:32:20.149-08:00Comments on The Overhead Wire: Not a Train, Never Will BePantograph Trolleypolehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17833159138533550544noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-73197160479350385072008-11-26T13:45:00.000-08:002008-11-26T13:45:00.000-08:00I forgot: The Union Station we had here in Ottawa ...I forgot: The Union Station we had here in Ottawa is now the <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Conference_Centre" REL="nofollow">Government Conference Centre</A>. The <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Capital_Commission" REL="nofollow">National Capital Commission</A> (NCC), a federal government agency responsible for planning in the Ottawa/Gatineau area (by the way, Gatineau used to be <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull%2C_Quebec" REL="nofollow">Hull</A> until 2002) had a preference for moving rail lines from downtown. They relocated the station to a less convenient location. We might as well have been "Autowa".<BR/><BR/>Certainly, I prefer converting busways to rail, but it won't be an easy task. This is my desire. I've seen some on the Internet make this their preference in visions. I also oppose building busways first under a false pretense (see my comment above).<BR/><BR/>There is really is a plan to convert the Transitway to rail, but only partly. And in my last comment, I meant "paving over".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-56467612022111262422008-11-26T07:59:00.000-08:002008-11-26T07:59:00.000-08:00They shouldn't be paving any more rail lines for u...They shouldn't be paving any more rail lines for use as busways. It sickens me. I can't believe that here in Ottawa, we shut down the Union Station and moved rail lines out of downtown, in addition to paving over a rail line for BRT.<BR/><BR/>If they really do want anything "rail like", they should just go with rail. I can't stand the idea that BRT can be "convertible" to rail "when ridership gets high enough".<BR/><BR/>Muni's proposal for BRT on Geary, BTW, is ill considered in this era. Why are we convinced that we can "substitute" buses for trains? To quote Homer Simpson, "D'oh!"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-57188268819049606132008-11-25T17:48:00.000-08:002008-11-25T17:48:00.000-08:00Everyone seems to use the Seattle Bus Tunnel but f...Everyone seems to use the Seattle Bus Tunnel but fail to mention its only a short stretch downtown and they put the tracks in, only to have to rip them up later which caused great annoyance. The annoyance is what merchants etc want to avoid. They won't want to tear up their street twice.<BR/><BR/>I'll see if i can't find that diagram.Pantograph Trolleypolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17833159138533550544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-21897195200183028882008-11-25T16:10:00.000-08:002008-11-25T16:10:00.000-08:00Rail-Ready Geary BRT:"No BRT projects have yet bee...<A HREF="http://www.sfcta.org/images/stories/Planning/GearyCorridorBusRapidTransit/Geary_App_B.pdf" REL="nofollow">Rail-Ready Geary BRT:</A><BR/><BR/>"No BRT projects have yet been<BR/>converted to LRT, largely because it remains a new mode of transit service, particularly in the U.S. Though existing<BR/>operations were not full-featured BRT, the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel project currently in progress is illustrative,<BR/>as it represents the first conversion of a bus transitway to rail service. LRT requirements incorporated into design and<BR/>construction of BRT projects should, at a minimum, incorporate the structural (loading) and horizontal and vertical<BR/>geometric needs of LRT. Beyond this and a few other investments, however, the marginal benefits of preinstalling<BR/>and/or preconstructing additional structures and systems for future LRT alignments are minimal unless all such systems<BR/>are installed. With this most elaborate level of rail-ready BRT design, however, the project cost would be nearly double<BR/>the estimates of the needs assessment and the Client’s consulting team. <B>These higher costs result in a considerable<BR/>narrowing of the marginal savings associated with a BRT deployment over an immediate LRT construction on Geary.</B>"<BR/><BR/>(emphasis mine)<BR/><BR/>Also, I'll be your best friend if you can find a bigger version of <A HREF="http://www.sfcta.org/images/stories/Planning/VanNessAvenueBusRapidTransit/tpn-labels-regional-web.jpg" REL="nofollow">this</A> :-)Pedestrianisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03067236246319422235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-9166677250891677042008-11-24T19:44:00.000-08:002008-11-24T19:44:00.000-08:00Pittsburgh may eventually convert the East Busway ...Pittsburgh may eventually convert the East Busway to light rail, largely because they've overwhelmed the capacity of the busway (!), and they keep talking about it over and over again. Even did a study on it recently (but decided to get to the North Shore first, which is actually more important, so reasonable).<BR/><BR/>But again, the problem is that the bus-to-rail conversion costs nearly as much as building the rail line fresh. You can't even reuse many of the elevated structures. And the busway cost a bundle to start with. <BR/><BR/>A "convertible" busway is just like a "convertible" superhighway, a power line corridor, or any other old right-of-way, for the purposes of getting rail into it. It's a substantial loss compared to building the rail immediately, assuming the rail is cost-effective within a few decades.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-43999731402812124942008-11-24T17:25:00.000-08:002008-11-24T17:25:00.000-08:00I think BRT on Geary is an awful mistake. Others ...I think BRT on Geary is an awful mistake. Others might have more info on this than I. I would suggest checking out Eric's Transbay Blog for more info. I'll write something up about it soon.Pantograph Trolleypolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17833159138533550544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-28366563581437778202008-11-24T16:47:00.000-08:002008-11-24T16:47:00.000-08:00So how about BRT on Geary?My understanding is they...So how about BRT on Geary?<BR/><BR/>My understanding is they are studying several different options, including at least two BRT configurations - one being built specifically to make it easier to convert to light rail.<BR/><BR/>I'd be a fool to think that's the option they'll choose, since it will obviously cost more without providing any more immediate benefit.<BR/><BR/>But is that a good sign? Is it worth working harder to pressure SFMTA to just do it right the first time? Is Nat Ford more willing to revisit that than Michael Burns would have been?Pedestrianisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03067236246319422235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-27639618724790386952008-11-24T14:32:00.000-08:002008-11-24T14:32:00.000-08:00Ottawa's O Train runs on previous freight tracks. ...Ottawa's O Train runs on previous freight tracks. I don't think there is a plan to replace the BRT lines with Light Rail though there is a light rail network proposal.Pantograph Trolleypolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17833159138533550544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-77796269151383773662008-11-24T14:25:00.000-08:002008-11-24T14:25:00.000-08:00Didn't Ottawa recently replace a BRT line with a D...Didn't Ottawa recently replace a BRT line with a DMU line? Or maybe they just custom built? <BR/><BR/>Not sure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-24259495864637278902008-11-24T11:54:00.000-08:002008-11-24T11:54:00.000-08:00I don't think you can use Seattle or Portland as e...I don't think you can use Seattle or Portland as examples as Seattle had rails installed in the ground (and had to be ripped up again anyway) and Portland was a downtown bus mall and not BRT. I can see bus malls being replaced and perhaps that it what will happen in Minneapolis as well, but as far as a whole or part of a BRT route, it has never happened.Pantograph Trolleypolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17833159138533550544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-21267380774432214162008-11-24T11:07:00.000-08:002008-11-24T11:07:00.000-08:00"There is no example of BRT ever being taken out a..."There is no example of BRT ever being taken out and replaced by rail."<BR/><BR/>Seattle Bus, I mean Transit Tunnel.<BR/>Portland Bus, I mean Transit Mall.<BR/><BR/>It *has* been done. The trouble is that it costs just as much to convert a busway to a rail line as it does to build the rail line fresh. (At least in the Seattle Tunnel they didn't have to dig the tunnel again, but everything else had to be rebuilt.) The BRT spending is a *total waste*.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-90180135276726370622008-11-23T11:50:00.000-08:002008-11-23T11:50:00.000-08:00Ac's BRT project traces back to a study they order...Ac's BRT project traces back to a study they ordered on how to comply w/ the 1990 Clean Air Act. The consultants studied 7 major routes/corridors San Pablo Av, College/Broadway, Macarthur, Telegraph, two East Oakland routes, and an Airport route. While the report studied Light Rail and Electric Trolleybues both of which would have greater ridership potential than enhanced bus (BRT before the snappy name), the net results have been the BRT Lite on San Pablo and Telegraph/East 14th. At one of the community dog and pony shows some years back, the citizenry cheered Light Rail; but the AC Board decided BRT was the goal. As to sharing the bus lanes, AC isn't even smart enough to put the signal preempt hardware on local buses on the Rapid routes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-39812347909967557992008-11-22T21:59:00.000-08:002008-11-22T21:59:00.000-08:00The 98 B-line bus in Vancouver, BC is being replac...The 98 B-line bus in Vancouver, BC is being replaced with the Canada line automated metro which is grade seperated. <BR/><BR/>While the B-lines are not true BRT (somewhere between an express bus and BRT) there were various bus priority measures, the stops were very far apart and a busway was built for the outer portion in the suburban municipality of Richmond.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-15597921403970353882008-11-22T15:42:00.000-08:002008-11-22T15:42:00.000-08:00very well said. i agree these convertable busway/b...very well said. i agree these convertable busway/brt to rail claims have been made for years, yet never happen and never will. i know convertable busway to lrt was mentioned in LA with their master plan 25 years ago and may have also been made with pittsburgh's busways. if anything it will be like portland's mall as johnwirtz said and as seattle did in the bus tunnel... by combining bus and rail. seattle still kept their south seattle busway and just built LRT next to it.<BR/><BR/><BR/>its too bad the east bay BRT wont be LRT though. i would bet it would be received much better in the community. so are other AC Transit bus lines going to share the busway or is it solely going to be used by the BRT bus line buses only?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6609536178570975752.post-72635597873021122682008-11-22T15:31:00.000-08:002008-11-22T15:31:00.000-08:00They did put rail in on the Portland bus mall, but...They did put rail in on the Portland bus mall, but obviously that's not a replacement for an existing BRT service.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com