Light Rail Boom

[jaxg8r1]

Originally Posted by Okstate

Of course they would have developed anyway...but NOT as fast as they have and concentrated as STRONGLY where they have. Are you suggesting it is mere coincidence development is paralleling the streetcar lines simultaneously? Why are more streetcar lines planned & currently under construction in Portland...because of the very very low ridership!? I ride the streetcar twice a day FIVE days a week & it fills to the brim every single time.

Thats been my experience as well. I usually don't even bother to try and ride it up by PSU because you can't get on (too crowded).

[mhays]

Seattle has a mix. The current line from the edge of the CBD outward for a mile or so through South Lake Union is both a response and an aid to that area's booming development as a mixed-use, midrise district. It doesn't run often enough or far enough to be very useful for me, but it's good for lazy people. Some of its role is to "brand" the neighborhood. Its biggest role is in the future, when service can be more often, and they might extend the line. To extend the line they need to rebuild a stretch of arterial that's on piles over the lake, but if they do that they can take it to the Eastlake neighborhood or even the UW. Building the first segment gets that difficult part out of the way.

Next year we'll start construction on a second line that'll go from the King Street Station / ID Station node at the south end of Downtown to First Hill and Capitol Hill. When Capitol Hill's underground light rail station opens in 2016, the streetcar will basically connect two light rail stations from the same line, but via a totally different route. With good density and connections to other transit, ridership will be very good even before 2016.

Seattle used to have a historic streetcar line from Pioneer Square (starting near the same stations as the planned line) to the north end of the downtown waterfront. This went away when its barn site was needed for the Olympic Sculpture Park, and if it still existed, would need to go away for a while when the viaduct comes down. Around 2016 when the viaduct is gone, there's a general idea of bringing it back, but that hasn't been a major discussion yet. Its location at the bottom of a hill along the waterfront means its a bit of a trudge to the core of the CBD or Belltown, so it wasn't a high-use line except for tourists.

Tacoma has a free 1.5(?) mile streetcar line from its main transit node (express buses, commuter rail, near Amtrak) to/through Downtown. This serves existing districts, but is also about economic development. Unlike the Seattle lines, it's free to ride.

[Nexis4Jersey]

NJT and other agencies are building a Light Rail and DMU Rail network to slowly fill in the gaps in its regional Rail system....

Penns Grove line - 30 miles
Salem line - 37 miles
Glassboro - Vineland line - 35 miles
Riverline to West Trenton line - 6 miles
Sparta line - 40 miles
Cross-County connector - 16 miles
Northern Branch Corridor - 10 miles
Newark - Paterson line 12 miles
Newark - Elizabeth line 8 miles
Union Cross County line - 5 miles
Cross Middlesex line - 18 miles

Most of those have there own street separated ROW and some have Grade Separated ROW.

[whiteford]

[QUOTE=miketoronto;4982170]I think it should be noted that no LRT system in the USA has achieved the ridership that Heavy Rail lines have attracted.
MARTA in Atlanta by far still has far better ridership than most other LRT systems despite its smaller length in most cases.

The whole question is whether LRT is really the only option that should be built, which is what is happening now. Are we not attracting the numbers we could to transit because we are bent on only using one mode of transport at this time(LRT)???

That is the question to ask?????

Could Seattle have been carrying 100,000 a day if they had built a MARTA type line instead of surface LRT in the middle of the road, which can not compete with auto travel.[/QUOTE
ridership for the Calgary lrt system is nearing 300.000 per day. Calgary's total metro area is only 1.2 million. those are some high ridership numbers.
there is no reason that a properly planed lrt cant handle high ridership. when some of the new lines are in operation, it should surpass 300.000 per day. I cannot understand why any american city that has a much larger population than Calgary, couldn't easily surpass those numbers.

[cabotp]

[QUOTE=whiteford;5028600]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

I think it should be noted that no LRT system in the USA has achieved the ridership that Heavy Rail lines have attracted.
MARTA in Atlanta by far still has far better ridership than most other LRT systems despite its smaller length in most cases.

The whole question is whether LRT is really the only option that should be built, which is what is happening now. Are we not attracting the numbers we could to transit because we are bent on only using one mode of transport at this time(LRT)???

That is the question to ask?????

Could Seattle have been carrying 100,000 a day if they had built a MARTA type line instead of surface LRT in the middle of the road, which can not compete with auto travel.[/QUOTE
ridership for the Calgary lrt system is nearing 300.000 per day. Calgary's total metro area is only 1.2 million. those are some high ridership numbers.
there is no reason that a properly planed lrt cant handle high ridership. when some of the new lines are in operation, it should surpass 300.000 per day. I cannot understand why any american city that has a much larger population than Calgary, couldn't easily surpass those numbers.

That 300,000 isn't the number of riders it is the number of boardings. Which are two different things. Each rider will usually board at least twice per day or more.

The question isn't LRT vs metro. It should be whether or not the system is at grade or not.

If you look at Calgary's overall transit boarding. While the number of boardings on the LRT is great. The number of boardings onto buses drops right off.

[whiteford]

[QUOTE=cabotp;5028895][QUOTE=whiteford;5028600]

That 300,000 isn't the number of riders it is the number of boardings. Which are two different things. Each rider will usually board at least twice per day or more.

The question isn't LRT vs metro. It should be whether or not the system is at grade or not.

If you look at Calgary's overall transit boarding. While the number of boardings on the LRT is great. The number of boardings onto buses drops right off.[/QUOTE

those are rider numbers.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by whiteford

those are rider numbers.

It would depend on whether you consider a rider to be a boarding or a trip.

Generally trips aren't counted as it is hard to tell when and where each individual boards. Which is why that 300,000 is the number of boardings. If you consider a boarding to be a rider that is fine. But that doesn't mean that number of trips is 300,000.

[whiteford]

Originally Posted by cabotp

It would depend on whether you consider a rider to be a boarding or a trip.

Generally trips aren't counted as it is hard to tell when and where each individual boards. Which is why that 300,000 is the number of boardings. If you consider a boarding to be a rider that is fine. But that doesn't mean that number of trips is 300,000.

how the hell could anyone actually count the number of actual riders on a lrt system? 300,000 boardings still is more than 100.000 riders no matter how you look at it. what is some of them 100.000 riders, riding like 10 times per day? or is that 100.000 rider's just like the Calgary number only reflecting the number of actual daily boardings? i would like to see some real data before i am convinced.

[mhays]

I'll hit the same old points on Seattle. The ridership of the current line is low because the line doesn't hit much density, doesn't have parking, and doesn't have connecting rail lines. Also its peak capacity is limited because a tunnel expanson at the northern end is limiting trains to two cars rather than the three four that are otherwise possible, and because sharing the Downtown Transit Tunnel means trains can only run every 7.5 minutes. And of course we don't have NY-style mode splits.

Very little is due to the sort of rail system it is.

Ridership is about 90% of the 2010 target. Ridership is projected to quadruple when the next two stops are completed northward in 2016...because they'll finally hit density, and due to the effect of new destinations in helping the existing portion too.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by whiteford

how the hell could anyone actually count the number of actual riders on a lrt system? 300,000 boardings still is more than 100.000 riders no matter how you look at it. what is some of them 100.000 riders, riding like 10 times per day? or is that 100.000 rider's just like the Calgary number only reflecting the number of actual daily boardings? i would like to see some real data before i am convinced.

Well I don't know the travel patterns for people using the LRT in Calgary. However I will give an example of why boardings and not trips are counted using Vancouver.

Ok basic example someone jumps on skytrain at King George Station that is one boarding. They go all the way downtown and do what they need to do. Later on that day they get back onto skytrain to go back home. There is another boarding. So in this case you have two trips with two boardings.

Second Example. Someone gets on at King George Station 1 boarding. They ride all the way downtown and get off. They then get onto the Canada Line to go to Richmond same trip 2nd boarding. They get to Richmond and do what they need to do. They they reverse commute back home. See how even though there are 2 trips one from home and one two home. There are actually 4 boardings.

I'm not sure where you came up with the 100,000 number though. All I'm saying is the 300,000 is the number of boardings. Or number of times people have gotten onto a train. Whether that person just got off another train and is in the middle of transferring is irrelevant. If they get off and then on it is a new boarding.

If you look at the apta quarterly ridership report for the 2nd quarter of 2010. You will see Calgary at 268,000 which is below your 300,000 but will ignore the fact that the 300,000 number might be something you mistakenly heard. If you look at Vancouver's number it is at 356,000 for the AG. Which is the comparison for LR. I know the 356,000 is the number of boardings. Thus the 268,000 is also the number of Boardings.

Here is a link for the APTA report.

http://www.apta.com/resources/statis...rship_APTA.pdf

[M II A II R II K]

California Cities Desire Streetcars


Read More: http://www.cp-dr.com/node/2816

If a new generation of transportation advocates and federal officials has their way, California will soon have miles of brand-new rail lines, strategically sited to enliven cities, increase real estate values, and whisk passengers several whole blocks at speeds of… nearly 20 miles per hour. High-speed rail, it’s not. But $40 billion, it’s not either.

While the state plans for its proposed high-speed rail network, a raft of California cities are pursuing a more twee type of rail travel. Ubiquitous in the early 20th century, trolleys and streetcars are emerging as a newly popular form of intra-city transit. But even the staunchest rail buffs admit that transportation is only part of the benefits that over three dozen cities across the country – and more than a few in California -- are seeking as they to join the streetcar trend.

The streetcar bandwagon, which has picked up dozens of cities nationwide, including Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, and Santa Ana, is fueled not only by nostalgia but also by new attitudes about both urbanism and transportation planning.

In transportation terms, streetcars play the same role as downtown shuttle buses – they are “circulators” connecting places in close proximity to one another. Many planners see streetcars not as transportation projects at all and are instead “place-making” devices, according to Maureen Pascoe, capital improvement manager for the City of West Sacramento. Pascoe is in charge of the Riverfront Streetcar Plan, which is being developed in cooperation with the City of Sacramento.

“The (transportation) paradigm is changing from mobility to accessibility,” said Gloria Ohland, the Los Angeles-based author of Street Smart: Streetcars and Cities in the Twenty-First Century. “Accessibility is really about things like streetcars….so you can be in one place have access to a lot of things without having to drive from point A to point B.”

Streetcars have been proposed for downtown Los Angeles’ Broadway, which is lined with underutilized historic buildings. The effort is supported with up to $10 million in redevelopment funds and Los Angeles County Metro released a request for proposals seeking firms to conduct an initial environmental study.

The City of Oakland would replace its Broadway Shuttle bus with a streetcar that would link Jack London Square to the rest of downtown and at least one BART station. Long Beach and Pasadena officials envision streetcars for their respective cities’ historic downtowns. A streetcar has even been proposed for the edge city of Warner Center, in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley.

Meanwhile, officials in West Sacramento see a streetcar as the catalyst that will enable it to share more of its big sister’s vibrancy; its 1.2-mile segment would originate at City Hall, cross the Tower Bridge over the Sacramento River and connect with a system that the City of Sacramento is planning.

[whiteford]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Well I don't know the travel patterns for people using the LRT in Calgary. However I will give an example of why boardings and not trips are counted using Vancouver.

Ok basic example someone jumps on skytrain at King George Station that is one boarding. They go all the way downtown and do what they need to do. Later on that day they get back onto skytrain to go back home. There is another boarding. So in this case you have two trips with two boardings.

Second Example. Someone gets on at King George Station 1 boarding. They ride all the way downtown and get off. They then get onto the Canada Line to go to Richmond same trip 2nd boarding. They get to Richmond and do what they need to do. They they reverse commute back home. See how even though there are 2 trips one from home and one two home. There are actually 4 boardings.

I'm not sure where you came up with the 100,000 number though. All I'm saying is the 300,000 is the number of boardings. Or number of times people have gotten onto a train. Whether that person just got off another train and is in the middle of transferring is irrelevant. If they get off and then on it is a new boarding.

If you look at the apta quarterly ridership report for the 2nd quarter of 2010. You will see Calgary at 268,000 which is below your 300,000 but will ignore the fact that the 300,000 number might be something you mistakenly heard. If you look at Vancouver's number it is at 356,000 for the AG. Which is the comparison for LR. I know the 356,000 is the number of boardings. Thus the 268,000 is also the number of Boardings.

Here is a link for the APTA report.

http://www.apta.com/resources/statis...rship_APTA.pdf

most likely, most boardings are of the same person twice. some of the boardings are not. so the actual number of people using the system should be a little more than half of the total boarding number. in the case of Calgary's lrt. the number should be slightly higher than half of 268,000. right?

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by whiteford

most likely, most boardings are of the same person twice. some of the boardings are not. so the actual number of people using the system should be a little more than half of the total boarding number. in the case of Calgary's lrt. the number should be slightly higher than half of 268,000. right?

Yes

It would be hard to tell what the average number of boardings is per person. As that would depend on the travel pattern of people in the metro area.

Once we get smart cards. Not sure if there are any plans to do so in Calgary. They then would tell the system exactly where each person got on off transfered etc. You would then know the exact number people to boardings.

[miketoronto]

You guys are making the boardings thing more complicated than it should be.

At the end of the day, Calgary's LRT carries more people per km than Vancouver's Skytrain. We have to remember Calgary's LRT is vastly shorter than the Skytrain. So the ridership the C-Train pulls in is amazing compared to the length of the system.

We actually just had a presentation from a Calgary Transit planner today at school. He was saying that Calgary was really not expecting transit to be this popular at all. It fully caught them off guard, and their BRT routes are also carrying very healthy loads of passengers. Some of the BRT's routes also carry almost 20,000 riders a day.

He did say the very strong downtown core compared to other cities, helps with the high ridership.

[M II A II R II K]

Streetcars coming back to Atlanta


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4001281.story

For the first time in more than six decades, this traffic-choked Southern city expects to see streetcars rumbling once more along its downtown streets.

For some Atlantans, the city's $72-million streetcar project — funded largely with a Department of Transportation grant awarded last month — is reason to celebrate and a welcome throwback to a time when, much like the old days in L.A., a trip across town meant riding the rails.

Once completed in 2013, the 2.6-mile rail line will cater to tourists, connecting downtown's Centennial Olympic Park — home to a Coca-Cola museum and the Georgia Aquarium — to the popular, but less-centrally located Martin Luther King Jr. National Historic Site.

But critics, who say the downtown loop will do little to ease tie-ups in the metro area, are definitely not on board. The rail loop will do little to alleviate traffic in a metro area burdened with the nation's third-worst commute, according to a February analysis by Forbes magazine.

For metro residents like Randy Mattox, the effort seems like a matter of misplaced priorities. "Will it help Atlanta as a whole? Absolutely not," said Mattox, 49, whose round-trip car commute from suburban East Point to Atlanta can be as long as two hours.

[M II A II R II K]

Can streetcars save America's cities?


Read More: http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/17....html?hpt=Sbin

In a down economy, pursuing the American dream can be challenging, but restaurant owner Todd Steele was willing to take a chance. For nearly 20 years, Steele worked all levels of the restaurant game, from dishwasher to general manager, before partnering with his mom and opening his own eatery called Metrovino on Portland, Oregon's, 11th Avenue streetcar line.

"I would not have picked this spot if it weren't for the streetcar, and my business has certainly benefited from our location," Steele said. "Streetcars are also a romantic way to travel, and they are fun to watch from inside Metrovino." While America lost much of its love for streetcars as public transportation during the 1960s, a few cities have kept the romance burning. The heart of San Francisco includes its nearly 140-year-old electric cable car system. In New Orleans, the location for Tennessee Williams' "A Streetcar Named Desire," many tourists are drawn by the picturesque St. Charles Avenue Line.

But not everyone is a fan of streetcars. "This is a waste of money," said Ron Utt of The Heritage Foundation. "Streetcars certainly create jobs, but they are a poor investment and create little lasting value," he said. "Because it requires extensive ongoing subsidies, it is also unsustainable. Improving roads would be the better bet in most communities."

CNN iReporter Raymond Becich is a supporter. "Sure, Portland paid incentives to businesses to build along the streetcar (line)," he said. "But how is this any different than any governmental jurisdiction giving tax breaks and other incentives for businesses to relocate to a city or state?"

Streetcars have transformed a "blighted warehouse district ... into a vibrant area of shops, grocery stores, restaurants and apartments that provide entertainment and employment," he said. But there's nothing streetcars can do that buses can't do better, faster, safer and for far less money, said CATO Institute senior fellow Randal O'Toole. "Even though a single light-rail train can hold more passengers than a bus, a bus route can move more passengers per hour than any light-rail line."

If that's the best sources they can come up with for naysayers then streetcars must be a pretty good deal

[mhays]

Articles like that are generally poorly done all around.

[Beta_Magellan]

^Agreed—and the fact that the best supporter they could come up with is basically a glorified internet commenter doesn’t give me much confidence, either (even if I generally agree with him).

It’s an interesting little article to unpack, though—note that Steele says that he wouldn’t have picked his spot if it weren’t for the streetcar, not that he wouldn’t have started the business without it.

Also note that Mr. Heritage Foundation says the money would be better spent on roads, but doesn’t mention that their funding sources are becoming more and more unsustainable as well. And whenever I see a Heritage Foundation making an anti-transit argument, I always think about Paul Weyrich, who helped found the place and was a major supporter of rail. I don’t think he would have been very fond of the Portland streetcar—two of his favorite systems were Chicago’s Metra commuter rail and St. Louis’s Metrolink, are pretty dependent on park-and-ride and he was pretty skeptical about subsidizing TOD. Although I’m not as fond of park-and-ride as Weyrich, his writing’s certainly a blast to read (who else peppers a policy paper about rail with German epigrams? Oh, to be back in the days when conservatives were also intellectuals) and it gives you an idea of how our transit debates should unfold—not whether or not to build transit, but how we should build it.

[Jasonhouse]

Originally Posted by Ron Utt of The Heritage Foundation discussing streetcars

"Because it requires extensive ongoing subsidies, it is also unsustainable. Improving roads would be the better bet in most communities.

Dip, meet shit.

[Pavlov]

But not everyone is a fan of streetcars. "This is a waste of money," said Ron Utt of The Heritage Foundation. "Streetcars certainly create jobs, but they are a poor investment and create little lasting value," he said. "Because it requires extensive ongoing subsidies, it is also unsustainable. Improving roads would be the better bet in most communities."

Obviously. Once you build a road, it lasts forever, maintenance-free! They police themselves too!