Just a few years ago, the streetcar revival was all the rage in cities across the country. Portland, Ore., seemingly set the trend with its 11.5-mile system, which opened in 2001 and was said to spur economic development while carrying 16,000 passengers on weekdays.
Elsewhere, New Orleans is extending its streetcar lines, while Atlanta, Tucson and Salt Lake City have also moved ahead with similar systems, almost always pegged to the promise of transit-related economic growth.
Yet, while several cities inaugurate new systems or expand older ones, the streetcar revolution, faced with fiscal and operational challenges, has stalled elsewhere. Last July, San Antonio abandoned its planned streetcar system after a change in mayors, reallocating to other projects the $92 million it had set aside.
Even the most ardent streetcar supporters acknowledge that the challenges are daunting, though they argue that the rewards far outweigh the costs in terms of the economic development and quality of life that make cities more livable and attractive.
www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/business/streetcar-revival-is-wavering-in-some-cities.html
This quote from the article pretty much identifies a major problem and one many have provided the answers to since this site was founded a decade ago:
QuoteWilliam S. Lind, director of the American Conservative Center for Public Transportation and a strong right-leaning voice for streetcars, said that trolleys remained "not only a viable but an essential component" of successful cities. "That said, there have been some blunders." These include, he said, building short lines "that don't go anywhere," infrequent service and excessive and widely varying costs per mile, from $5.1 million in Kenosha, Wis., to $67.5 million in Washington, D.C.
Go "no-frills" (like Kenosha, Little Rock) with a route/headways that actually efficiently takes transit riders to pedestrian oriented destinations (like Portland or New Orleans). Also, what's just as important is to not mix streetcars with regular automobile traffic (Tampa is a good example, but with poor headways and route). On top of this, you can't forget about establishing supportive land use and zoning regulations along the corridor. If you're not going to do these things, you might as well be honest with your community and do something else.
Thanks for this story Finehoe. The comments section is very interesting with this New York Times story; There's not alot of sunshine pumping for streetcars in it. I'm not gonna act like I'm some transportation know it all, but the way I see it for the most part, streetcars are an uppity millennial version of a bus; They don't wanna be seen on the 'lowly' buses, so they prefer to ride streetcars. A regular Joe like me and the majority of people would hop on a bus in a second, without worrying about any socio-economical backlash.
I'm also tired of the politicalization of streetcars "In order to be 'progressive' you must have streetcars, versus the evil 'conservative' omnibus". It's safe to say that the US streetcars success stories are few and far between. Don't take it for me, read the comments (with people who like streetcars, but realize that many systems are failing). IMO a streetcar system is the last thing that a mainly blue collar city like Jax should be worrying about.
^^^I'm talking about the streetcar systems in place that are under performing...Streetcar 'fixed' stations have it's disadvantages too, if they don't get it right...Why don't you say what's your opinion on this, instead of attacking someone's opinion like always?
^^^I agree with I-10east here. It's a glorified bus either for tourists, upper class Millennials living in expensive apartment areas trying to get to their nearest upscale market without having to walk 5 blocks, or both.
I can't think of one streetcar that has the same effect as a LRT line, HRT line, or commuter rail. The streetcars I have ridden are all either tourist traps, or they are really no different than a bus except they are "not a bus".
Streetcars are for "progressive" sunbelt/new growth cities trying to be progressive. I could see it working in Jax if the route is extensive enough to go deep into Avondale and if it is built to replace a bus line with better headways (but good luck seeing "economic development" in a historic single family home neighborhood such as Avondale where you'll never see true mixed-use or higher density replace the homes that are there).
A skyway extension to the stadium would be just as much of a waste as an ill-planned or not-substantial-enough (i.e. cheap) streetcar system in Jax, in my opinion.
Just keep in mind Atlanta's streetcar that exists today was a fallback. Not their desired plan or intent. It was pretty much a waste of money all in the name of "show" (to I-10east's point about cities trying to be progressive).
Personally, I see a streetcar as a smaller version of a train rather than a bus on fixed tracks.
It runs on electric power, is more flexible in terms of length - just add / remove cars as needed, higher passenger comfort...
And yes, obviously a street car needs to go where people want to go and from where they can either continue on foot or with other means of transportation. And it also needs to be planned properly.
Streetcars are an integral piece of Melbourne, Budapest, Berlin, Amsterdam, Lisbon, Hong Kong, Toronto, and many other cities transit infrastructure.
That other countries are able to make them work suggests it is a political, not a technological problem.
What you're doing Stephen is funneling the conversation specifically about San Antonio's situation. San Antonio actually did the right thing by not starting the system to begin with. The story was about the bigger picture of wavering US streetcar systems that started already; Cities like Tampa, Salt Lake City, Tuscon etc. San Francisco is a totally different situation with streetcar success, and you know it; The epitome of the American streetcar is in San Fran, with it's strong identity, and long time history.
^^^I don't know what your boldfaced 'I gotcha, you wasn't paying attention' highlighting was for, but whatever. Talk about a word salad...
Quote from: I-10east on March 17, 2015, 01:49:38 PM
What you're doing Stephen is funneling the conversation specifically about San Antonio's situation. San Antonio actually did the right thing by not starting the system to begin with. The story was about the bigger picture of wavering US streetcar systems that started already; Cities like Tampa, Salt Lake City, Tuscon etc. San Francisco is a totally different situation with streetcar success, and you know it; The epitome of the American streetcar is in San Fran, with it's strong identity, and long time history.
You're correct, I-10east. San Francisco's neighborhoods currently served by the E and F streetcar lines actually predate the streetcar lines and are and have always been very dense. It's sort of the opposite situation of most modern day streetcar lines in America, which are used as economic development tools to densify neighborhoods (ultimately to much lower densities than those already existing in SF's case). So it's tough to compare SF's streetcars to most modern day streetcars.
Also, I think it's tough to compare European tram systems to those in America. European systems are often really built out, to extents that are not politically or feasibly possible in America. They also serve in-place density much greater than nearly anything achieved in America outside of maybe 5-6 cities. So I don't believe they are a legitimate comparison, though they are something to strive towards? Maybe?
I think American cities look at streetcars in a bubble moreso than European cities, or SF as it kept 2 of its lines.
That said, even in San Francisco's case, the 2 streetcars are often jam-packed with tourists, and as a rider of one of the lines that heads from downtown up into some Upper Market neighborhoods, it's a bus choice for me. It comes down to (based on visual cues or my MUNI Watch app) which comes first for where I'm at and what's traffic like at the surface level at the time?:
MUNI Metro (LRT subway...super effective during rush hours, though super crowded)
Any number of traditional bus lines
F Line streetcar
There is virtually no difference to me or really anyone else save for tourists between the F and about 5 different bus lines that can take you from the same Point A to about the same Point B. Same speed. Same seating. Same setup. Same stops. In fact, the tourists can really get in the way and bog it down because they are clueless and slow. So I prefer a local bus because clueless tourists will not be getting on to nearly the same extent.
^^^Thanks for sharing that SF perspective Simms.
Quote from: I-10east on March 17, 2015, 12:59:19 PM
Thanks for this story Finehoe. The comments section is very interesting with this New York Times story; There's not alot of sunshine pumping for streetcars in it. I'm not gonna act like I'm some transportation know it all, but the way I see it for the most part, streetcars are an uppity millennial version of a bus; They don't wanna be seen on the 'lowly' buses, so they prefer to ride streetcars. A regular Joe like me and the majority of people would hop on a bus in a second, without worrying about any socio-economical backlash.
I'm also tired of the politicalization of streetcars "In order to be 'progressive' you must have streetcars, versus the evil 'conservative' omnibus". It's safe to say that the US streetcars success stories are few and far between. Don't take it for me, read the comments (with people who like streetcars, but realize that many systems are failing). IMO a streetcar system is the last thing that a mainly blue collar city like Jax should be worrying about.
You are are so right, I10. Yeah, look at the great things we get with buses. Flexibility. That's what buses give you. You can change the route almost daily if you wanted to. Yep, as long as you can change the system to your liking year after year by just redrawing the route, buses are the way to go. So what if you kill three retail shops every time you do it. So what if you give the guy in Mandarin an extra 40 minutes in commute time every morning and every evening. And did I mention that buses are pretty cheap too? Why spend money on giving those that don't have a car a way to get around. Heck, why don't they have a car, are they un-American?
Here's what I know for a personal fact. We once had a store on Main St. They moved a bus stop one day and we lost 25% of our business. If we had a store on Main and the stations were fixed rail, we would probably still have that store. In fact, if we had managed to get in on the ground floor of a new fixed rail system, we probably would have had to grow the store. (OK, so the rent probably would have grown too high and we would have moved.) The point is, as has been proven time and time again, buses are not development generators. They can't be. Too flexible. Fixed rail has proven that it can be
if done right.
You can find cities that have done it right, you can find cities that have done it wrong and you can find cities that actually have the density that it doesn't matter. The development will happen or has happened anyway in those high density cities. But it seems many of the cities have indeed expanded their fixed rail systems - including Street Car.
The urban core of Jacksonville needs a lot of help to get the development it needs to be a viable modern urban city. It needs more that rhetoric, it needs more than NSP, CBGB or whatever the latest Federal help program may be called as we got those and nothing happened, except we got told we can't handle the money...sort of evident when you ride around the urban core.
I am all for Street car and not because I think it is the best way to move people. I think it is the best way to get the needed development, which will include good places to work, live and have fun, all within the street car's route. Which will mean lots of people will end up riding it. Seems like a nice little self-fulfilling circle of transportation oriented development to me.
And it will take a long time for that to happen. We have spent the majority of the last one hundred years in Jacksonville moving away from fixed rail and good public transportation and urban living to individual transportation and suburban living. It will take close to that long to get all the way back. But it would be nice to start that particular journey sooner rather than later.
^^^Strider, I think that buses in Jax generally have mainstay routes, with a few exceptions; JTA even has a longstanding NIMBY-esque route going down St John's Ave in upper crust Avondale. I'm just for whatever makes the most economical and practical sense, just like the green energy issue. I'm I against green energy? No. Is green energy currently less than 15 percent of the overall energy? Yes.
If Jax had an strong hipster/millennial enclave within the heart of a the city (lots of upper tier residential, Whole Foods etc) maybe I would change my tune with streetcar. If Jax had a San Francisco, or even St Augustine touristy atmosphere downtown, I probably would change my tune. Many of these new age US (monkey see monkey do) streetcars aren't going well as planned; Them being 'under funded' was mentioned earlier, but doesn't a 'Phase 1' have to start from somewhere? A Populous architect said a great quote not that long ago on the radio (paraphrased) You need locations before adding fixed transit.
Quote from: finehoe on March 17, 2015, 01:45:50 PM
Streetcars are an integral piece of Melbourne, Budapest, Berlin, Amsterdam, Lisbon, Hong Kong, Toronto, and many other cities transit infrastructure.
That other countries are able to make them work suggests it is a political, not a technological problem.
This!
Quote from: thelakelander on March 17, 2015, 08:13:25 PM
Quote from: finehoe on March 17, 2015, 01:45:50 PM
Streetcars are an integral piece of Melbourne, Budapest, Berlin, Amsterdam, Lisbon, Hong Kong, Toronto, and many other cities transit infrastructure.
That other countries are able to make them work suggests it is a political, not a technological problem.
This!
Part of the politics is general land use planning, though. It's not a matter of the freedom and funds to simply build a streetcar system. A few things have to be in place:
1) Preferably existing density to be served - maybe a super busy bus route or two was replaced with street car (and there are no "busy" bus routes in Jax).
2) If no density yet exists (in Jacksonville's case and many "today" cities' cases), a plan has to be in place to adequately promote and allow for both density and form that promotes vibrancy, walkability, and a shift away from cars.
In my opinion, the killer of all of this is either:
a) in-place low density that is not likely to ever be replaced by higher density (as is the case with most of Jacksonville's historic neighborhoods which have a highly defendable, popular, and important single family building stock, often inhabited by well to do middle class families who are not giving that neighborhood characteristic up for Millennial apartments, artists lofts, and high rises any time soon)
b) in-place zoning that allows for and even promotes horribly planned higher density (such as cut off podium style high rises or wrapped garage hybrid apartments of low quality and poorly thought out integration into existing communities).
Gone are the days of small lot sizes and true infill - the kind of zoning that allowed for walk-ups and smaller developments to be constructed that promote true walkability and vibrancy. Instead, S&P500 developers are the "infill" game in most cities, particularly sunbelt cities just now densifying, and their financial model, which conforms with zoning, is to put up pretty much self-contained communities with lots of units and lots of amenities, with high parking ratios.
We've seen how this is "effective" in Charlotte and Austin. But our standards are low.
Consider their systems' ridership numbers and put that into perspective. Thousands of "infill" units craved by folks on this site (think dozens of 220 Riversides) have been built alongside those fixed rail lines, so economic development has occurred, but are we REALLY talking about a significant amount of people actually taking and depending on public transit? Not really. It's a talking point. It's an attractor of Millennials into new apartments. It's a huge upfront cost for taxpayers, but eventually repaid by additional tax revenue from large projects. But it's not really a true urban lifestyle like people are pretty much forced (and generally happily forced) to live in our nation's 5-6 truly urban cities.
So yes, it's politics. The technology works. But the politics is deeper than just anti-rail sentiment or a system in America that makes building new public transit of almost any kind prohibitively expensive. It's a politics that even after rail is put in, the politics of creating a city that is conducive to actually using that rail is not there.
Quote from: strider on March 17, 2015, 07:11:28 PM
You are are so right, I10. Yeah, look at the great things we get with buses. Flexibility. That's what buses give you. You can change the route almost daily if you wanted to. Yep, as long as you can change the system to your liking year after year by just redrawing the route, buses are the way to go. So what if you kill three retail shops every time you do it. So what if you give the guy in Mandarin an extra 40 minutes in commute time every morning and every evening. And did I mention that buses are pretty cheap too? Why spend money on giving those that don't have a car a way to get around. Heck, why don't they have a car, are they un-American?
I just want to point out that many cities have insanely high bus ridership across all economic spectrums, so when you subtly refer to bus riders as lower-income and thought of as "less-important, why spend money on those people", just consider that I don't think that's necessarily what it's about.
The simple fact of the matter is that in Jacksonville, after accounting for incomes and poverty levels, car ownership is super high and bus ridership is super low. Perhaps there is more of a "stigma" in southern Jax of riding the bus. But there's also hardly a population, even of poor people, that NEED the bus. There are more rich people in San Francisco that literally need the bus to get to work than there are poor people in Jacksonville that have no car and need the bus to get to work or around. Two similar size cities (population wise). We can break down those numbers.
Some of Jacksonville's peers actually have developed highly ridden bus routes and some have gone on to replace them with fixed rail. Jacksonville has no highly ridden bus routes.
Part of that problem is that JTA doesn't spend enough money on its BUS system to make it actually worthwhile to more people. It's not necessarily that JTA should spend $$$ on fixed rail so that Springfield businesses aren't killed or so that guy in Mandarin (that guy, singular, is key) doesn't have another 40 minute commute. Part of the problem is that there just isn't much a population that either needs transit or would willingly choose it. That makes it difficult to justify funding for anything transit-related, and because buses ARE cheaper and can be just as effective for serving the population of transit riders/potential transit riders Jax DOES have, it makes sense to allocate transit funding to that system.
Quote from: strider on March 17, 2015, 07:11:28 PM
Here's what I know for a personal fact. We once had a store on Main St. They moved a bus stop one day and we lost 25% of our business.
This is where facts stop, and after this conjectures begin. And we're taking you on good faith as an honest and faithful poster here that the day the bus moved, 25% of your business ceased to stop.
I don't want to poke holes in the touchy subject of your business closing, but a single bus line in Jax provided 25% of your business in Springfield?
I think that's more evidence of the lack of business in Springfield in general if a bus line in Jax provides that percentage of business than it is a reflection on a bus line moving.
The other things I have to wonder - what kind of business was it? The reason I ask is because I AM a daily bus rider, so I know what awaits me at the end of my route and at the beginning. Those are the businesses I hit up. I don't get off midway for any particular businesses and then wait for another bus, get back on, and then complete my route. And in my world, headways are 2-15 minutes tops. In Jacksonville headways are an hour. Something isn't adding up in my mind.
Finally, to consider, did the city move the route over a block or two, or did they move the route over like 5 blocks? Or did they eliminate the route?
If they eliminated the route, even for Jacksonville there wasn't much traffic on that bus, and so if that bus alone was 25% of your business, I again question the bus or if you had 4 customers, 3 of which were 3 of the few or so residents in Springfield and the 4th was the guy who rode that bus. Follow me?
If they simply moved the bus route a block or two, then you should not have lost your customers. They would know to get off there and your business was on Main. It's not like 1-2 blocks over are competing businesses. People in that area would still need to get to Main St.
BUT, if Jax people couldn't take an extra 1-2 block walk for your store, then I think that's more indicative of how far we've slipped as a car culture.
Quote from: strider on March 17, 2015, 07:11:28 PM
If we had a store on Main and the stations were fixed rail, we would probably still have that store. In fact, if we had managed to get in on the ground floor of a new fixed rail system, we probably would have had to grow the store. (OK, so the rent probably would have grown too high and we would have moved.) The point is, as has been proven time and time again, buses are not development generators. They can't be. Too flexible. Fixed rail has proven that it can be if done right.
I would probably be as optimistic as you if I were in your position. But there's really no proof in what you're saying. To construct a streetcar or LRT through there, they would have torn up the street in front of your business for years at a time, eliminated parking, and possibly made business worse. Fixed rail construction is far more lengthy/involved than the roadwork that JTA does around town that people complain about immensely and that business owners blame for their demise.
Quote from: strider on March 17, 2015, 07:11:28 PM
You can find cities that have done it right, you can find cities that have done it wrong and you can find cities that actually have the density that it doesn't matter. The development will happen or has happened anyway in those high density cities. But it seems many of the cities have indeed expanded their fixed rail systems - including Street Car.
The urban core of Jacksonville needs a lot of help to get the development it needs to be a viable modern urban city. It needs more that rhetoric, it needs more than NSP, CBGB or whatever the latest Federal help program may be called as we got those and nothing happened, except we got told we can't handle the money...sort of evident when you ride around the urban core.
I am all for Street car and not because I think it is the best way to move people. I think it is the best way to get the needed development, which will include good places to work, live and have fun, all within the street car's route. Which will mean lots of people will end up riding it. Seems like a nice little self-fulfilling circle of transportation oriented development to me.
And it will take a long time for that to happen. We have spent the majority of the last one hundred years in Jacksonville moving away from fixed rail and good public transportation and urban living to individual transportation and suburban living. It will take close to that long to get all the way back. But it would be nice to start that particular journey sooner rather than later.
See, at the end of the day, the reality is that a streetcar is a development tool. It's not as effective a tool at revamping a former sunbelt city into a vibrant, walkable, urban city as we all say it is. Though it can have positive effects in that regard, as well.
I just think people have begun to separate "transit effectiveness" from "economic development tool" (they certainly did during the runup to the TSPLOST vote in Atlanta in 2012). In theory, it's no different from the TARP/stimulus program. It's a relatively short term fix to incentivize private development, and through that there is a hope and likelihood that there are some noticeable/material long term benefits.
^^^I won't disagree that experience is worth something (though you discount mine when my very own experience is also in the real estate development world, in many cities both in the US and outside of the US, where I must be familiar with the various facets that shape a new development and make it feasible or the various facets of an existing property we acquire that has existing tenants and users that are similarly impacted by external forces such as means of arrival/departure and other connecting points, not to mention my own experience as an actual bus rider, probably one of a select few on this website I might add).
From Metrojacksonville's own article base, the busiest transit routes in the city:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-dec-jacksonvilles-busiest-transit-routes/page/1
How about you go back in recent time to one of your website's own articles.
Notice how I never said "you're wrong", but merely pointed out that there is something odd about the claim that a bus route that was either rerouted or eliminated in Jacksonville led to the demise of a business, 25% of it inferred to derive from users of said bus route. Look at the numbers, Stephen. If this claim is true, then I am astounded. This implies that these users aren't existing in the neighborhood with or without said bus route and can continue to frequent the place, but that these users are riders of this one particular bus route that happens to traverse Springfield, and that they must have gotten off of the bus to be users or customers of said business, but that they live elsewhere wherever the bus route originates. I was also thinking that IF this were one of these top 5 bus routes where only ~2k riders a day use the bus, that the city wouldn't cut it or reroute to the extent it took a whole new route and went nowhere near the old. That's pretty sound logic. So then it likely was a lesser used bus route, perhaps with a couple hundred riders like many of Jacksonville's routes. Then a large percentage of that route was a customer at this shop.
Not coincidentally, there is little to no foot traffic in Springfield, depending on the business, little to no in-place local customers, and lots of hopes and dreams that fail due to the neighborhood itself.
Look at your own description of an experience with Jacksonville buses where you wrote so eloquently, both for the FTU as linked below, and as a blog in greater detail for this website, where the bus system was about the most perilously ineffective way for moving people in this city:
http://jacksonville.com/forums/community/notes_from_the_city_moderated_by_stephen_dare/181310
And regarding my response to Lake, who I love having these sort of intellectual debates with, because he offers up meaningful points, I said nothing that Lake hasn't said in the past about land use tying in with transit and the movement of goods and people. The politics goes wayy beyond just whether or not there is a political will to lay track. Politics and general changes have led to a land use system that is not very conducive to the kind of environment that promotes high ridership, whether or not track is laid and whether or not there is decent density or not.
My own experience is also as a daily bus rider. I know what it's like to actually depend on and ride the bus. With the hour long headways you wrote about, who is going to get off of their bus halfway through their trip in order to frequent a business not near their destination? In my experience, even with minutes long headways, I am not getting off of the bus just to go to some place on the way. I will look for a similar place that is near my point of origination/destination, not midway.
To be clear, I'm aggressively asking what the nature of Strider's business was that made it so dependent on one particular bus line that cut through the neighborhood along Main, bringing people to and from downtown and the area to other neighborhoods.
I'm curious as to how far away that bus line re-routed and why. I note that all 5 of Jacksonville's busiest transit routes touch Main Street at some point between DT and Springfield and then cut up N-S a couple blocks from Main (close enough to walk easily in 2-3 minutes), and one (the 2nd busiest, and the busiest bus route) runs right up Main. Is this a new route that wasn't in place when Strider's business was on Main? Does this route hit neighborhoods that had riders that simply weren't visitors to this business? And if so, why would there be a difference amongst neighborhood folk? What makes the CT1 neighborhoods and its riders different from other bus routes in Jax? I'm actually intrigued and curious.
Was it the Northside's only H&R Block? (JK) I'm curious as to what businesses in Jacksonville are so dependent on captured transit riders coming in from other areas.
And to further my point that a lot of these sunbelt rail systems are simply lip service and economic development generators at best, Jacksonville's busiest bus route, the CT1, carried over 3,400 passengers/day at time of article. As dismal as Jax bus service is, as inefficient and slow as it is, and as long as the headways are, this daily ridership number still exceeds the following heralded, modern streetcar systems:
Seattle
Salt Lake City
Atlanta
Little Rock
Memphis
Dallas
Tampa
That's all but Portland's system and the systems in SF and Philly. In fact, the ridership on this bus line exceeds several commuter rail systems, including those of Austin's (which has dismal ridership despite all the new apartments along it) and Nashville's. It nearly matches Norfolk/Hampton Roads' light rail system and has a large percentage of the riders on Charlotte's and Buffalo's light rail systems. This on a Jacksonville bus route with hour long headways.
I look at the numbers and I'm baffled as to how a single bus route in Jacksonville can have that much of an impact on a business. However, I also look at the numbers and I see a basic bus in Jacksonville showing up better ridership than streetcars and some commuter rail lines, and comparable ridership to some light rail lines.
That tells me that there's power in buses and a super cost effective way to get people on transit. A WAYYYY more cost effective way to get people on transit than investing a fortune on a fixed rail line that will spur new building but won't necessarily have meaningful ridership.
I'm getting ready to go back out into the streets of Queens and Brooklyn, so I don't have time to read up on everything posted in this thread. However, I did want to point out that comparing short tourist oriented modern streetcar systems to a bus route stretching the length of a county is about as apples and oranges comparison as one could make for anything transit related. One could make the same argument with the Skyway, which is only 2.5 miles and blows away the CT1 and these streetcar systems in ridership. However, no one would suggest this means invest in significant Skyway expansion. BTW, the CT1 runs on 20 minute headways. That's better than many of the tourist trolleys and ineffective commuter rail lines mentioned above.
Btw, LRT and Streetcars are essentially the same technology. The largest difference is LRT is typically designed to operate as rapid transit and while streetcars are typically operated as slow moving circulators (making them no more effective than local buses). There's nothing out there stopping any community from planning and operating a streetcar like LRT.
New Orleans RTA and Cleveland's Blue & Green Lines are two examples of historic streetcar lines that operate differently from the lower performing expensive tourist lines build in recent years. In Cleveland, PCC cars were replaced with small LRV in the 1980s. In New Orleans, they still run historic and heritage streetcars (much cheaper than modern streetcar vehicles). With both systems (excluding a small segment in DT New Orleans) both systems run on their own dedicated ROW instead of sharing lanes with cars.
If we want fixed transit to succeed in the Sunbelt or anywhere else, we have to set it up and operate it in a manner that provides it with the best opportunity to do so.
Quote from: thelakelander on March 18, 2015, 09:20:13 AM
I'm getting ready to go back out into the streets of Queens and Brooklyn, so I don't have time to read up on everything posted in this thread. However, I did want to point out that comparing short tourist oriented modern streetcar systems to a bus route stretching the length of a county is about as apples and oranges comparison as one could make for anything transit related. One could make the same argument with the Skyway, which is only 2.5 miles and blows away the CT1 and these streetcar systems in ridership. However, no one would suggest this means invest in significant Skyway expansion. BTW, the CT1 runs on 20 minute headways. That's better than many of the tourist trolleys and ineffective commuter rail lines mentioned above.
^^^Yes, and I agree. However, those commuter rail lines, such as Austin's, and even Charlotte's LYNX light rail line, travel a great distance across many neighborhoods and are adjacent to now countless "Millennial-oriented" apartment complexes and distance wise are very apples to apples. And yet I'd argue pound for pound Jacksonville's CT1 bus line performs better (Austin's commuter rail is 32 miles on 30 minute headways running til 1 in the morning), especially when you compare capacity of a bus on 20 min headways to capacity of a light rail on 10 min headways or commuter rail on 30.
At the end of the day, I agree with I-10east, a rarity I might add, that people on this site think fixed rail like they've read about or seen in some of Jacksonville's peer cities is some holy grail that Jacksonville hasn't found yet. In the Sunbelt cities, it seems to be a Holy Grail for development of apartment complexes, not a Holy Grail for increasing transit ridership to any significant.
Just read Strider's post. Maybe he's right, maybe if there were light rail or a streetcar circulator running up Main between Springfield and Downtown his business would be booming right now, or business in general in Springfield so much so that he'd be "priced out(!)", and in his mind, a single bus route through Springfield was rerouted and killed his business because buses are inherently bad transit because of their flexibility and the ability for the city to move the routes, which took 25% of his business away from him. I'm just trying to understand THAT. As a bus rider myself, I'm trying to understand situations in my own mind where I might frequent a place along a bus route, even if I don't live nearby. What kind of business would it be? Same with a rail transit - what kind of business would it be such that I am getting off between my point of origin and destination to go to said business? I see no difference there between rail and bus, but I'm trying to get there in my mind.
Quote from: I-10east on March 17, 2015, 12:59:19 PM
...but the way I see it for the most part, streetcars are an uppity millennial version of a bus; They don't wanna be seen on the 'lowly' buses, so they prefer to ride streetcars. A regular Joe like me and the majority of people would hop on a bus in a second, without worrying about any socio-economical backlash.
From my observations, the millennials are the ones who don't seem to regard buses as 'beneath them'. It's the Gen-Xers and (especially) Boomers who are more likely to look down on buses as a lesser form of transportation.
simms3, I have been busy and have not had time to answer you.
Yes, we lost 25% of the gross sales immediately following a route change. Basically, we had the stop at which many switched lines going to and from Shands on the same block. That stop got closed, the route changed and the next closest stop was two plus blocks away and not nearly as used. That means that just as the years of Main Street construction ended, we lost 25% of the base business and Main Street being what it is, a completed main street was not much different that one under construction. It did not help having a local organization going around telling people falsehoods as to what could and could not be on Main St., often chasing off the very types of business the majority of the area needed and would use. So there were a lot of factors the caused the demise of the store. Not just JTA. And yes, I purposefully did not state what kind of store it was as I see no way that matters. We had a target clientele. We were far more successful when that targeted clientele could easily get to us without really trying so that they made purchases at our store more for convenience than we were anything special. Most urban stores are that way. If you remove the convenience factor, it hurts the business. Moving routes around will most likely hurt business.
Is this little story of fact the defining proof that buses do not promote development but street car (fixed rail) can? I'd say yes actually. After reading what the experts have to say, after seeing what seems to happen WHEN IT IS DONE RIGHT, seeing it personally proves it for me.
I think the question for Jacksonville should not be if fixed rail makes sense here but rather if Jacksonville can possibility do it right to start with. If we can, it will help the urban core.
I am certainly no expert, but I have learned a lot from folks like Lake and Ock and even you. Being educated on issues from both sides of the equation is key to understanding what might be best for Jacksonville.
Fixed transit can work in Jax, as long as it isn't done half-assed. This means changes in land use along transit corridors are just as important as the transit routing and infrastructure investment.
Quote from: strider on March 18, 2015, 11:18:42 AM
I think the question for Jacksonville should not be if fixed rail makes sense here but rather if Jacksonville can possibility do it right to start with. If we can, it will help the urban core.
I couldn't agree more. We are retiring in two years, and relocating to Jax. The ONLY thing that is missing from our wish list here is a mass transit (i.e., light-rail) system to easily get us downtown and back, to see concerts, sporting events, dining, etc. I know that we will never see it in our lifetimes, but I do hope that it is done someday, and done right.
QuoteDistrict of Columbia officials might not realize it, but other major cities around the United States are watching how the local government in the nation's capital deals with its streetcar debacle.
They're waiting to see how the District government resolves the management problems that have plagued the delivery of the long-promised transit line that sits essentially complete but could be killed off inches from the finish line before any of the bold red streetcars transport a single passenger along the route.
http://www.govexec.com/state-local/2015/03/dc-streetcar-bowser-ddot/107799/
(http://cdn.govexec.com/media/img/upload/2015/03/17/dc_streetcar_blunder/medium.jpg)
In Jacksonville headways are an hour. Something isn't adding up in my mind.
[/quote]
At one time this was totally true. Now 2/3 of bus routes in Jax have 15-30 minute headways.