(http://stephenrees.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/1231_at_crosing_point.jpg)
Heritage Inter-Urban, TRANSIT and ATTRACTION in one vehicle!
Last night the SPAR (Springfield Restoration and Preservation) of Jacksonville argued that the "PCT TROLLEY" of JTA was going to not only save Springfield, but cause a restoration rocket ride. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN FOLKS. Here are the facts from two sites: Light Rail Jacksonville and the American Public Transportation Association (quoted), on the subject. Check them for yourselves and don't allow JTA to delude your thinking.
Frankly when is the last time that you went to Savannah to ride the FAUX TROLLEY? Maybe St. Augustine? How about Orlando? Funny, but I'd bet the answer is NEVER! A bus is a bus, is a bus, is a bus... No amount of plywood will change that into a streetcar. Likewise, no amount of plywood is going to bring you the life-blood that the businesses seek. Here is the quote:QuoteFrequently asked questions about trolleys.
Does a trolley have rubber tires?
Strictly speaking, No. Trolley cars or streetcars have steel wheels and run on rails, which are often laid directly in street paving.
Today many cities use rubber tired vehicles which are decorated to look somewhat like trolleys, but these vehicles are not real trolleys nor streetcars and are not the subject of this website. Some people may feel they can obtain the benefits of a heritage trolley line by using these inexpensive faux trolleys, but the economic, developmental, and visitor attracting benefits are not generated by these bus trolleys. Authentic rail based systems are required to achieve the benefits. (The American Public Transportation Association Website)
The only cure is to get behind the plans to BRING BACK THE REAL STREETCARS! Then SPAR will enjoy the benefits of $2-3 BILLION dollars in development such as EVERY city that has restored streetcars along their path. Don't forget my friends that SPAR and Main Street was once the home of "THE MOST BEAUTIFUL STREETCAR LINE IN THE WORLD". Let's bring it home to Jacksonville. http://jacksonvilletransit.blogspot.com/ or direct to lightrailjax@gmail.comOCKLAWAHA
Just to be clear, the organization did not argue the merits of the faux trolley vs. real rail. A comment came up in the meeting that attempted to compare the faux trolley with real rail. The individual's point was instead of agressively pursuing real rail, why not settle for the faux trolley since its cheaper and can be implemented quicker.
I don't know how clear I was in explaining the difference, but my response focused on economic development and the importance of planning with a much larger vision in mind. Across the country, its clear that faux trolleys don't spur transit oriented economic development, increase property values, create urban vibrancy or pave the way for real streetcars. If that were the case, downtown would be a booming mecca today, considering the little green school buses have been parading around the core for years. Nevertheless, there are many people out there who don't understand the benefits of specific modes of mass transit. As we continue to push for rail based mass transit solutions, I think this (teaching the basics) is something we still need to focus on in educating the community.
Ock, you and I both know that real streetcar (steel on steel) are the way to go. I believe in the interview you did with JTA on streetcars you covered that, right? All one has to do is look at examples around the country and see for themselves the results of streetcars. The newest segment of JTA On the Move will cover this, correct (due to air this month)? I dont think anyone believes the "Faux trolley" is going to be the savior of Springfield, not even JTA.
There are people out there that question if its better to spend years working and paying for a real system verses focusing more immediate effort for the fake ones. Personally, I'd say yes, because the time to plan is now. With a dedicated plan in place, recent history (Austin & Charlotte come to mind) has shown that even proposed rail corridors stimulate transit oriented development and infill. Also, by addressing the issue upfront, you also speed up the time to implement. Our lack of making rail a priority is the major reason we're going to miss the opportunity to fund it with Obama's stimulus plan.
On the other hand, its also important to realize what the faux trolley really brings to the table. They are most successful when they serve areas that are already destinations where sufficient parking may be an obstacle. They can provide an alternative way to get around the core, but they will not spur economic development. To that effect, I guess you could say, like everything else, you get what you pay for.
Does anyone have the 2008 ridership numbers for the Riverside Trolley? Here's the Beaches:
QuoteA look back: success by the numbers
The Beaches Trolley pilot service that ran from late Juneâ€"Labor Day “absolutely shattered†initial ridership projections, said Council Member Art Graham. Mike Miller, Jacksonville Transit Authority director of external affairs, also called the service’s run very successful in terms of ridership.
Friday Saturday Sundays
Weekend Forecast:
Friday - 350
Saturday - 700
Sunday - 350
Actual Daily Average Ridership
Friday - 1,112
Saturday - 1,791
Sunday - 630
Percentage Difference from Daily
Friday - 218%
Saturday - 156%
Sunday - 80%
Month-to-date performance
June 2008 total ridership (one week): 2,964
July 2008 total ridership: 14,395
August 2008 total ridership: 15,062
Total: 32,421
Busiest ridership weekend Aug. 1â€"3
Friday 1,352
Saturday 2,323
Sunday 663
Note: Each individual day was the busiest of its run.
Statistics provided by Jacksonville Transit Authority
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=51087&text=riverside%20trolley&type=theseexactwords
FSU, I think we are on the same page here, we both seem to believe that the facts speak louder then the hype. "Dolly Trolleys" or "PCT TROLLEYS" Do NOT bring new development. Any part of town that bets the bank on that is going to lose big time, big, huge!
I am still looking for the Old Pueblo -vs- PCT Trolley numbers, so far can't find it, but I KNOW IT's SOMEWHERE! The Old Pueblo in Tuscon was a bunch of railroad/trolley nutz that built a mile or so of streetcar from the university toward downtown's club district. (Only they ran out of money half way and had to quit). So the City came in with a PCT trolley that ran 24/7 from the clubs and downtown hot spots to the university. Meanwhile the rail nutz had only a weekend volunteer operation. The PCT City Rubber Tire trolley was like .50 Cents, and the REAL STREETCAR which ran ONLY on weekends was like $5.00. At the end of the year the real streetcar doubled the "dolly trolley" ridership. UNBELIEVABLE but true!
Your Friend / tonight at 6:30, Hola's my friend!
OCKLAWAHA
I am happy that I found this thread as it answers a few questions I had. After I left the SPAR Council board meeting, I found myself thinking that it seemed rubber tired faux trolleys can only really work when used to increase traffic to an existing destination, but can not be expected to create a destination. As Springfield is anything but a destination, it makes much more sense to push for a real streetcar in a quicker time frame that may spur the development needed to make Springfield a true destination.
As a developer, rubber tire faux trolleys would mean nothing to me as the route could be changed or eliminated at will while any type of rail investment has a sense of permanence that inspires the confidence one needs to make large capital investments in an area. One has to wonder why a existing developer in Springfield would not see that and want something less for the future.
The people of Springfield need to be careful that the current SPAR Council does not work to derail true potential development in favor of a few "favorite sons" desire for a short term "looks good" idea that actually costs Springfield dearly in the long run.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20STREETCARS%20TROLLEYS/MainStreetWithCar-1.jpg)
(http://www.lockport-ny.com/images/Lockport_Towpath_Trolley.jpg)
"Arise calmly, Grasshopper, and wipe the indignity off your face, you must choose and choose wisely."
- Master Po
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: strider on February 11, 2009, 06:51:30 PM
As a developer, rubber tire faux trolleys would mean nothing to me as the route could be changed or eliminated at will while any type of rail investment has a sense of permanence that inspires the confidence one needs to make large capital investments in an area.
This view has been proven to be correct nationwide. Nobody is willing to invest money to build around a transit line that could disappear or relocate to another corridor whenever the transit authority decides. These systems are two different animals that should not be mentioned in the same sentence. If you want to stimulate vibrancy, attract infill development, and really move transit riders, you go with the real thing. If you want to connect existing destinations with something cheap and quick, buy a shuttle bus or faux trolley (personally, I'd prefer an electric shuttle...a reduction in gas emissions).
(http://www.geography.ryerson.ca/bardecki/blog/Chattanoogablog_files/image009.jpg)
Free Chattanooga Shuttle
QuoteOne has to wonder why a existing developer in Springfield would not see that and want something less for the future.
The people of Springfield need to be careful that the current SPAR Council does not work to derail true potential development in favor of a few "favorite sons" desire for a short term "looks good" idea that actually costs Springfield dearly in the long run.
I think everyone means well, but it really boils down to continued education on the topic. In a city like Jacksonville, mass transit can be a pretty confusing subject, even for JTA. So my advice would be to keep pounding away with the truth, real life examples of success and failure. Eventually, people will latch on.
Hey Lake, Ock, or anyone, is there easy access to some numbers that prove the difference between fixed rail and bus? How one spurs private development and the other doesn't? It would come in handy whenever people challenge that fact.
Jump on Light Rail Now website, search window, TOD, Bus vs LRT, BRT vs LRT, Bus Ridership etc...
http://www.lightrailnow.org/
Hope this helps.
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on February 11, 2009, 10:37:38 PM
Hey Lake, Ock, or anyone, is there easy access to some numbers that prove the difference between fixed rail and bus? How one spurs private development and the other doesn't? It would come in handy whenever people challenge that fact.
I think Lake pointed out a very important reason...
"Nobody is willing to invest money to build around a transit line that could disappear or relocate to another corridor whenever the transit authority decides."
Once rail is laid and running, it's good to go.
If you watch the two Making Moves stories on streetcars (currently available on the JTA website) - and like FSU states - streetcars are the future focus downtown - not trolleys. After the segment featuring what Portland is doing with streetcars and the development that has occurred (to the tune of $2.3 Billion) within 3 blocks of the streetcar line there - Mike Blaylock states that JTA is wanting to replace trolleys with streetcars downtown as it would certainly be a better economic driver. So i think there is no misunderstanding on JTA's part about the benefits of streetcars - and a point that Ock also made very clear in the Jacksonville portion of the TV segment. Something like $1200-$1 benefit per dollar spent. Worth a look. Its on the new February 09 show in the News section. here's a link if anybody wants to watch it. http://www.jtafla.com/News/showPage.aspx?Sel=43
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on February 11, 2009, 10:37:38 PM
Hey Lake, Ock, or anyone, is there easy access to some numbers that prove the difference between fixed rail and bus? How one spurs private development and the other doesn't? It would come in handy whenever people challenge that fact.
Quote from: Johnny on February 12, 2009, 04:56:31 PM
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on February 11, 2009, 10:37:38 PM
Hey Lake, Ock, or anyone, is there easy access to some numbers that prove the difference between fixed rail and bus? How one spurs private development and the other doesn't? It would come in handy whenever people challenge that fact.
I think Lake pointed out a very important reason...
"Nobody is willing to invest money to build around a transit line that could disappear or relocate to another corridor whenever the transit authority decides."
Once rail is laid and running, it's good to go.
Quote from: exnewsman on February 12, 2009, 05:42:09 PM
If you watch the two Making Moves stories on streetcars (currently available on the JTA website) - and like FSU states - streetcars are the future focus downtown - not trolleys. After the segment featuring what Portland is doing with streetcars and the development that has occurred (to the tune of $2.3 Billion) within 3 blocks of the streetcar line there - Mike Blaylock states that JTA is wanting to replace trolleys with streetcars downtown as it would certainly be a better economic driver. So i think there is no misunderstanding on JTA's part about the benefits of streetcars - and a point that Ock also made very clear in the Jacksonville portion of the TV segment. Something like $1200-$1 benefit per dollar spent. Worth a look. Its on the new February 09 show in the News section. here's a link if anybody wants to watch it. http://www.jtafla.com/News/showPage.aspx?Sel=43
Thanks for the good words on the TV show we taped on streetcars.
As for the difference in Rail and Bus in terms of attraction of riders you can check the numbers for yourself at: http://www.lightrailnow.org/
For the difference in development attraction, "PCT Trolley buses vs REAL STREETCARS" WITH NUMBERS check out: The American Public Transportation Association web pages on "Heritage Trolleys"
http://www.heritagetrolley.com/planBenefits.htm
Long interesting FEATURE STORY on "Bring Back The Streetcars" from the APTA.
http://www.apta.com/research/info/online/weyrich.cfm
You want the TRUTH about streetcars? I HOPE THE TIMES-UNION SEE'S THIS!
Streetcar Myths
Myth: Overhead wires will be an eyesore.
Fact: Streetcars use a single overhead wire 1/2 inch in diameter.
Myth: Bikes and streetcars don't mix.
Fact: Portland and Philadelphia are bicycle-friendly cities; we can learn from them how to integrate streetcars and bikes.
Myth: Streetcars will harm bus service.
Fact: Buses replaced by streetcars can be used to provide new and expanded services. Streetcars can increase overall transit ridership.
Myth: People who don't ride buses won't ride streetcars.
Fact: In San Francisco, 7,000 people/day rode the electric bus; 21,000 people/day rode a streetcar on the same route.
Myth: Streetcars are more expensive to operate than buses.
Fact: There are trade-offs; buses last only 8 years, streetcars last 40 years.
Myth: Streetcars are too slow to attract riders.
Fact: Streetcars are designed to provide convenient, accessible, comfortable transportation.
Myth: Streetcars won't reduce car trips.
Fact: They will reduce short, wasteful car trips within the area they serve by providing a predictable, comfortable alternative.
Myth: Fixed tracks make streetcars less flexible, and therefore a waste of money.
Fact: Building a permanent infrastructure for streetcars encourages retail and residential development. Buses do not.[/color][/b](Madison WI Trolley Source)
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: Johnny on February 12, 2009, 04:56:31 PM
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on February 11, 2009, 10:37:38 PM
Hey Lake, Ock, or anyone, is there easy access to some numbers that prove the difference between fixed rail and bus? How one spurs private development and the other doesn't? It would come in handy whenever people challenge that fact.
I think Lake pointed out a very important reason...
"Nobody is willing to invest money to build around a transit line that could disappear or relocate to another corridor whenever the transit authority decides."
Once rail is laid and running, it's good to go.
Well, it stands to reason this way. But I wanted solid numbers that prove that rail spurs private development that bus lines would not, so I can show them to the pessimists.
Thanks, Ock. I'll check out the heritage trolley link later.
Examples of fixed rail attracting infill transit oriented development to neighborhoods like Springfield and Downtown can be found all over the country, even in Jacksonville. However, proving that buses (PCT trolleys are a form of local bus) have just as much power is much more difficult, if not impossible. For those seeking more information on the strengths and challenges of Bus transit oriented development (BTOD), this is a great document to read and research.
Bus Transit Oriented Development - Strengths and Challenges Relative to RailGraham Currie, Institute of Transport Studies, Monash Universitylink to document: http://www.nctr.usf.edu/jpt/pdf/JPT%209-4%20Currie.pdf
You get what you pay for. Capital costs for fixed rail may be higher upfront, but in the long run, it will make it easier for the host community to reap the benefits of transit oriented development.
QuoteThere is some evidence that implementing successful BTOD is more difficult than RTOD. "Making bus TODs work will require a focused approach and an extra level of leadership and intervention than a comparable rail TOD" (CDOT 2002).
Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 9, No.4, 2006 - page 6 of PDF document
Have you ever ridden on a PCT Trolley or have had one pass you, while trying to make it through a yellow light? If so, you'll realize they aren't any more appealing than regular buses, despite the faux exterior. They spew out exhaust fumes and sound like school buses. Noise and Pollution combine to be kryptonite for attracting transit oriented development (TODs).
QuoteNoise and Pollution
Noise and fumes emitted from transit vehicles are generally associated with bus,not rail. Rail usually has the advantage of "clean" electric power over diesel-based bus. While rail vehicles, particularly heavy rail vehicles, can often be noisier than buses, it is the closer on-street proximity of buses where pedestrians roam and the frequency of bus movements that generates greater noise impact. Rail-based vehicles often generate noise on rights-of-way, which are remote from major pedestrian areas (e.g.,tunnels).
There is some substance to this issue. Where buses use alternative fuels or operated in areas removed from pedestrians, these issues may not be so important. However, in general, this is rare.
The significance of this issue on the performance of BTOD is "moderate" to "high." Successful TOD requires an environment in which people want to live and work. Bus noise and pollution, unless appropriately managed, creates places which are not attractive.
Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 9. No.4, 2006 - page 10 of PDF document
Everyone knows that buses come with a negative stigma. After all, putting lipstick on a pig is the basic concept behind the idea of BRT. Outside of tourist areas, local bus (PCTs included) come with the stigma as well. While this may not be major factor in already developed, vibrant commercial districts, its something that Springfield should take a close look at.
QuoteBus Stigmatization
Buses have a bad image. "The bus rapid transit program is trying to change this, but buses are still stigmatized as second-class forms of transport" (CDOT 2002). A key question is: Does bus stigmatization affect potential TOD investors and TOD transit customers?
The effect on customers has been illustrated by Currie (2005a), who examined empirical evidence on how transit riders perceived travel by on-street bus, BRT, light rail and heavy rail. A preference for rail over on-street bus was evidenced; an average benefit valued at between 4 to 10 minutes of travel time was indicated. However, this work also demonstrated similar preferences for BRT compared to on-street bus (although BRT research evidence was limited). This suggests that BRT shares passenger preferences of rail above on-street bus.
This evidence does not concern investors in TOD. It is possible that TOD developers have negative views of bus compared to rail and that developers influence TOD as much as transit riders.
While the significance of bus stigmatization is currently "high," it does not need to be a long-term issue. It is likely to afflict on-street local bus services more than BRT systems.
Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 9. No.4, 2006 - page 10 of PDF document
Another thing to consider is track record. Its proven that rail spurs development. Communities like Springfield, Riverside and San Marco are proof. Neighborhoods reaping the economic benefits of new rail lines in Tampa, Dallas, Salt Lake City, Austin and Charlotte are examples that rail still attracts urban development. However, with buses, the jury is still out. Even after they replaced most American streetcar systems 70 years ago. Nevertheless, when it comes to buses, research has shown that BRT is superior to local bus (PCTs included) in stimulating BTODs. So, if JTA is going to run a bus rapid transit system through Springfield to access Shands and VA Clinic, it will bring more prosperity to the community than PCTs will. This is why it is important for the community to make sure the proposed BRT stations are properly integrated in Springfield. If the stations can at least become attractive high pedestrian traffic destinations, they could benefit small retailers in the area.
QuoteTrack Record
BTOD does not have as long a record as RTOD. Also, little is known about the impacts of BTOD. Some doubt the performance of BTOD. "Experience in California, like the rest of the country, tends to be somewhat mixed regarding bus TODs" (CDOT 2002). Others provide positive reports (Duffy 2002; Cervero et al. 2004). Objective independent assessment of BTOD schemes is rare, so some caution is appropriate. Some are likely assessing the performance of BTOD, particularly BTOD associated with suburban bus, in similar terms to RTOD. The evidence from the discussion in this article suggests that local bus TODs are unlikely to perform as well as RTOD. But this does not mean that BTOD, in these circumstances, is not a positive program to implement.
Overall lack of a track record is considered to have "moderate" to "high" significance for all types of bus services. While it might be theorized that BRT is likely to show good performance relative to rail, evidence on its track record is limited.
Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 9. No.4, 2006 - page 11 of PDF document
QuoteBTODs have a limited and unclear track record. There is a need to build knowledge and gain and share experiences to better develop, learn, and sell the potential benefits of BTOD to the community and the transit and urban development industry.
Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 9. No.4, 2006 - page 18 of PDF document
Last, but not least, here are a few charts from the report showing the pros and cons of bus types in attracting transit oriented development.
Local Bus (PCT transit would fall in this area)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/476178561_f2nyr-XL.jpg)
BRT - Designed by transit planners from a transit minded focal point
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/476178560_LrqKg-XL.jpg)
BRT - Designed with transit planners, urban planners and community input & desires
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/476178592_Pqp93-XL.jpg)