S.P.A.R. COMPLETELY DERAILED - MASSIVE SPAR DEVELOPMENT

[ProjectMaximus]

Thanks, Ock. I'll check out the heritage trolley link later.

[thelakelander]

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 Rail
Graham Currie, Institute of Transport Studies, Monash University
link 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.

There 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).

Noise 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.

Bus 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.

Track 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

BTODs 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)


BRT - Designed by transit planners from a transit minded focal point


BRT - Designed with transit planners, urban planners and community input & desires