Board index absolutedsm.com Forums Downtown Development

Downtown Shuttle System

Development news, discussion and photographs in Downtown Des Moines.

Which proposed Routes do you prefer?

Route AImage
13
54%
Route B Image
2
8%
Route C Image
7
29%
Route D Image
2
8%
 
Total votes : 24

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby WaterlooDave on Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:38 pm

couch wrote: I have never seen the passing scheme to work in practice, and it doesn't really make sense anyway. If the reason the first bus is behind is because many stops have many passengers waiting (likely because the last bus was bunched ahead), the overtaking bus will not be able to run any faster and they will simply be passing each other back and forth.


For this scheme to work they have to jump far enough ahead on the route that you don't get the hop scotch effect. I don't know what this interval would be for this route, maybe several block/half mile,etc.

Another option is for the lead bus, which is behind schedule, to run "express" . For example, if both busses are bunched at 7th and Locust, the lead bus would make several announcements that that bus was doing to run express to the State Capital and that anyone needing/wanting a stop inbetween should move to the trailing bus. The now express bus would proceed to the State Capital without stops and the trailing bus would continue on the route making all stops.

The point is in such a relatively simple environment of a downtown loop it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to address a bunching problem. Also, as mentioned earlier, its not acceptable to simply accept that bunching is inevitable.

Yes Chicago is doing alot of ridiculous stuff to try to eliminate bus bunching. I've also not seen that to work effectively either, and most people I talk to there say the same.


The point is they are trying to address the issue. Even if they haven't solved the bunching problem for trying. They also should be commended for the their implementation of GPS real time bus tracking information that is available to users.

http://ctabustracker.com/bustime/home.jsp
User avatar
WaterlooDave
Club I-80/I-35
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 5:38 pm
Location: Waterloo, IA

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby DMRyan on Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:01 am

All has been quiet on the Walnut Street tram/light rail proposal, but it appears the study is still on track.

From the Register:

Downtown tram link to be studied

A Nebraska firm has been hired to study the idea of a tram to link the Western Gateway park and the East Village area in downtown Des Moines. HDR of Omaha is expected to complete the study by spring.

Nationwide Insurance in March committed $250,000 for the study of a "light-rail people mover" to run along Walnut Street.

The proposal is the first step in an effort by local business and government leaders to make improvements downtown based on a plan by New York City architects Diana Agrest and Mario Gandelsonas.

The heart of the plan is to connect the major pieces of downtown, from the Iowa Events Center to Principal Park, and from Meredith Corp. to the Capitol. Other projects envisioned in the plan include an updated Walnut Mall and better connections between the skywalk and the street levels.

Mary Lawyer, president of Downtown Community Alliance, said the study will determine factors such as cost, type/style of tram, routes, infrastructure needs, financing options and a timeline.
Site Admin
User avatar
DMRyan
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11733
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:49 am
Location: SW Side

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby galr on Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:14 pm

I always assumed that the proposed trolley line has to go by Riverpoint West/Greys Landing because that is were DART's garage is located. I didn't even think to ask at the meeting I attended. Does anyone have a concrete answer?
galr
Club Salisbury House
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby Des Moineser on Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:57 pm

What is the time-frame for this project? This is a very exciting project, but of course they have to take this in phases. It would be nice to have this extend out to the suburbs someday. I would assume a University expansion would the first thing to be brought up after the completion of the first phase.
Des Moines: 203,433
Metro Area: 580,255
---
142.6 Hours, 341 Take-Offs, 341 Landings.
User avatar
Des Moineser
Club 801 Grand
 
Posts: 2236
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 1:30 pm
Location: West Des Moines

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby dsmurbanite on Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:11 pm

I know that those of us who live in the Highland/Union/Oak Parks areas aren't maybe the first to come to mind, as those who live in Sherman Hill, Drake, or even the West on Grand/Ingersoll crowds, but I think that our area is being overlooked greatly. First of all, these neighborhoods were laid out to be serviced by streetcars, and in some the lines would be very easy to recreate. Also, many of us work downtown, play downtown, and support downtown. I personally could have lived out west, but chose this area for the potential I see, both from the architectual stand point, and the location. I think, as the speaker suggested regarding redevelopment potential, if the lines were run up sixth, at least to Euclid in Highland/Oak Park and 9th and Hull in Union Park to begin with, this would be very viable for many of the people in the area, not to mention having the effect of possibly bringing redevelopment with it.
User avatar
dsmurbanite
Club Terrace Hill
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:46 pm
Location: Highland Park, Des Moines

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby galr on Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:06 pm

dsmurbanite wrote:I know that those of us who live in the Highland/Union/Oak Parks areas aren't maybe the first to come to mind, as those who live in Sherman Hill, Drake, or even the West on Grand/Ingersoll crowds, but I think that our area is being overlooked greatly. First of all, these neighborhoods were laid out to be serviced by streetcars, and in some the lines would be very easy to recreate. Also, many of us work downtown, play downtown, and support downtown. I personally could have lived out west, but chose this area for the potential I see, both from the architectual stand point, and the location. I think, as the speaker suggested regarding redevelopment potential, if the lines were run up sixth, at least to Euclid in Highland/Oak Park and 9th and Hull in Union Park to begin with, this would be very viable for many of the people in the area, not to mention having the effect of possibly bringing redevelopment with it.


I'm not sure if the trolley project would work for this, especially in an initial stage. However, I think your broader concern is very valid. Highland Park/Oak Park, Union Park, River Bend as well as the more know neighborhoods of Drake, Sherman Hill and the Ingersoll area are very well positioned (in terms of location) for a future world of high energy costs. I wish there was a better plan to renew some of these neighborhoods and market them to families.
galr
Club Salisbury House
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby couch on Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:13 pm

I'd agree with urbanite that our northern neighborhoods are ideal for streetcar lines. They are certainly not the only ones that seem to be ignored: I'm thinking of the near south area originally called Sevastopol, now part of McKinley/Colombus Park and Pioneer Park, as well as the neighborhoods of Capitol East and the Fairgrounds. (I might also add Urbandale to the list of original streetcar towns).

The problem is rather that this shuttle system will be solving a fundamentally different problem than a hundred years ago, at least initially. These neighborhoods are much too far out (unfortunately) to begin planning now at $10 million a mile.

That being said, we do need to figure out what strategy we will use to decide who gets first dibs on a line to their neighborhood.
``Our liberties we prize and
our rights we will maintain''
User avatar
couch
Club I-80/I-35
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:42 pm

couch says:

These neighborhoods are much too far out (unfortunately) to begin planning now at $10 million a mile.


couch, you didn't source your information, but at the library meetings here in DSM the portland consultant mentioned figures between $40-$75 million dollars for a first small (two mile?) installation, confirmed by the DSM Register using those same figures.

many other sources online mention about a $35 million per mile cost, and up to $189 million per mile with grade and other issues.

the smallest figure i have seen is portland, with a $15 million per mile cost building cost, plus $2 million per vehicle, plus operation, depreciation, and maint. costs. (source: http://ecoworld.com/features/tag/trolleys/)

the incredibly high costs (which you are underestimating dramatically) are why this proposal in this thread by more than one poster has been labled pie in the sky.
Last edited by mirage1 on Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby couch on Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:56 pm

mirage1 wrote:couch, you didn't source your information


Sorry, I didn't mean to be authoritative but rather illustrate the grand scale of the project. My numbers came only from this thread.

Better Life dude wrote:
So were all the routes $50 million?

Thats a rough estimate based on an initial system three miles long. My impression is that It doesn't really matter what the configuration is. Over 2/3rds of the money goes toward track construction, about 1/4 towards purchase of the cars. Each car costs about $3 million or more. The rest of the cost is for planning. The cars last forever.


My quick calculation was just that 2/3 of $50 million is $33 million for three miles of track. Probably not entirely accurate.
``Our liberties we prize and
our rights we will maintain''
User avatar
couch
Club I-80/I-35
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby rasmeth on Sat Jan 17, 2009 10:41 am

he incredibly high costs (which you are underestimating dramatically) are why this proposal in this thread by more than one poster has been labled pie in the sky.


mirage1, don't forget the exorbitant costs of the "happy motoring" scheme that I assume is your alternative?
rasmeth
Club Jordan Creek TC
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:48 pm

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:02 am

mirage1 posted January 14, 2009:

I favor a bus based solution; extending the routes where needed....a solution that is far more flexible, far less costly...
]

rasmeth, you don't have to assume. if you read my earlier post, and educated yourself at least minimally before posting, you would know.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby Better Life dude on Sun Jan 18, 2009 12:36 pm

A column today by David Elbert in the Register. I highlighted the why-trams-are-good-for-development section including testimony from a Portland developer on why a fixed rail system is better for development than a bus system.
Link : http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090118/BUSINESS03/901180319/-1/NEWS04

Elbert: D.M. tram system seen as sure-fire spark for development
BY DAVID ELBERT • [email protected] • JANUARY 18, 2009
Read Comments(3) RecommendPrint this pageE-mail this articleShare

The difference between a streetcar that runs on rails and one that runs on rubber tires is economic development. With a tram you get development, with buses you don't.

It's that simple, explained Charlie Hales, a consultant from Portland, Ore.

Hales, who works for Omaha-based HDR Engineering, was in Des Moines last week as part of a feasibility study on whether the city should have a rail-based, downtown transit system.

The system he favors is not cheap. Including streetcars, it costs about $25 million a mile to build. For the two to three miles that Des Moines would need, that's $50 million to $75 million.

Since May, Des Moines has operated a downtown shuttle bus that carries an average of 800 riders a day on a loop between the Capitol and Meredith Corp.

The shuttle is considered a huge success, and a lot of people are wondering why it shouldn't just be left like that for now.

Hales has two reasons.

First, he said, studies show that modern trams are significant catalysts for the type of economic development that could benefit Des Moines in a number of ways.

Second, a once-in-a-lifetime window of opportunity is about to open that could help pay for a new downtown tram.

Historically, federal and state transportation officials have refused to help pay for intracity transit systems. But there's reason to believe that is about to change, Hales said.

Policymakers from President-elect Barack Obama to Gov. Chet Culver are looking for ways to jump-start the economy. And one of the solutions they promote is public spending on infrastructure.

They're looking for what they call transformational projects.

What better way to transform Des Moines into a 21st-century city than by creating a back-to-the-future transit system that has already proved in other cities that it can stimulate housing and retail development?

Downtown Des Moines has made a lot of progress in recent years, but those two key pieces are still lagging.

And beginning next year, there will be a new problem when insurers Wellmark and Aviva move to new headquarters, leaving behind nearly a million square feet of empty office space.

Those concerns helped prompt the tram study that HDR is doing. The $200,000 cost of the study will be paid by private employers, most notably Nationwide Insurance.

Last week, Hales made two presentations at the downtown library, in which he outlined the recent history of tram projects and asked for public input on four options for a route through downtown Des Moines.

Hales was a city commissioner in Portland in the mid-1990s when he helped persuade that city to build a downtown tram system. That success resulted in Hales joining HDR, where he now consults on electric streetcar projects in cities nationwide.

The motivation for Portland's tram was the environment, Hales said. The city wanted a green way to move large numbers of people.

But by the time the streetcars started running in 1997, developers were already at work.

"People say that buses are just as effective," said Portland developer John Carroll. "My take on that is, if the community makes the commitment to put the infrastructure in, it signals permanence, which means that the streetcar isn't all of a sudden going to take a left-hand turn one day. That's a very strong catalyst for development."

The four projects Carroll has built in downtown Portland in the past decade are all within a block of the streetcar line and all are full, he said.

The development that follows streetcar routes is residential, Hales said, but it can be tweaked. Before launching a tram route here, he said, officials may want to do what Portland did: pass a zoning ordinance that requires 50 percent of first-floor space be storefronts.

Some of that first-floor space was slow to lease at first, Hales said. But now, with the nearby housing full, the storefront space is considered golden.

Studies in Portland and other cities that have added trams during the past decade show that development occurs much faster and in higher densities along streetcar lines than in adjacent areas, Hales said.

It's the same thing you see on interstate highways, he said, where development sprouts at every intersection.

One example he likes to cite involves a Portland bookstore.

The owner initially opposed the streetcar plan because he did not want to give up two parking spaces in front of his store, Hales said.

So, someone took a count of the number of pedestrians who passed the store. Before the streetcar, it was an average of three per hour. After the streetcar, it jumped to more than 900 per hour.

Today, the bookstore owner is one of biggest backers of Portland's tram, Hales said.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi
User avatar
Better Life dude
Club 801 Grand
 
Posts: 2800
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:07 pm
Location: Sherman Hill

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Sun Jan 18, 2009 1:41 pm

BLD posted:

I highlighted the why-trams-are-good-for-development


seems to me if you have read any of the above postings by now you would know those "good for development" studies have been totally debunked by serious researchers. (http://ecoworld.com/features/tag/trolleys/).

there is no way to take out the development millions in assistance to the project (tram or no tram) or to say that putting in a bus system on the same paramaters would not have been equal (or even significantly improved?)development.

even MORE surprising is this is used as a justification by the sherman hill buffs who want the line to run to that area. i was surprised to learn there is new (yet non announced) overwhelming new development planned for that area that a new tram would be responsible for. could you tell me which of the old blocks of homes are going to be torn down in sherman hill for all of this new development that even your own residents are now using for tram justification?

pro-tram development is simply driven by nostalga buffs, and under no circumstances can be justified by studies with as poor a methodolgy as presented by the portland consultant.

it's still pie in the sky, with equally pie in the sky "studies". once again, nineteeth century solutions are not appropriate for a twenty-first century society. there WAS a reason DSM paved over the rails in the road.
Last edited by mirage1 on Sun Jan 18, 2009 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby dogbo on Sun Jan 18, 2009 2:07 pm

Mirage1, I’m not saying you don’t have some valid points, but the demise of public transportation in the past didn’t happen in a vacuum. If we would have simply let the free market decide the winners and losers (i.e.…not had a policy of funneling huge amounts of tax money towards more and more road construction) I bet we’d have a much different landscape than we do today.

The saddest part of all this is that mass transit used to be owned and operated by private companies/individuals. They were eventually driven out of business in large part due to heavily gov’t subsidized road construction which encouraged auto transportation over mass transit.
dogbo

Read it on:
http://www.desmoinesreport.com
"Not flashy, just interesting & informative."
User avatar
dogbo
Club 801 Grand
 
Posts: 4870
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:11 am
Location: NW Des Moines

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby QuadCityImages on Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:21 am

The Phoenix metro just got their $1billion+ light rail system running last month, and its been popular so far. I know this is anecdotal as can be, but in an area hit hardest by the economic downtown, it did seem like there were a lot of projects along the route. Whether that's projects following the light rail, or light rail running through hot development areas, I do not know.

I do think its indicative of Phoenix's "grew too fast for itself" feeling that they're developing this around the same time as a city 1/10th the size. Kind of like how DSM has a taller building than PHX....
Quad Cities' 100 mile radius population: 2,632,400

quadcityimages.blogspot.com
User avatar
QuadCityImages
Club Iowa State Capitol
 
Posts: 1391
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:43 pm
Location: Davenport

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby couch on Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:20 am

dogbo wrote:heavily gov’t subsidized road construction which encouraged auto transportation over mass transit.


encourages. We continue to spend several dozen billion a year on the highways. Gotta love the auto and oil lobbies.

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/budget-numbers.php?BA_or_O=O&O_year1=2004&O_year2=2004&mode=agency&agency=021&bureau=15
``Our liberties we prize and
our rights we will maintain''
User avatar
couch
Club I-80/I-35
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby vauxhall on Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:37 pm

Per mirage1: "nineteeth century solutions are not appropriate for a twenty-first century society. there WAS a reason DSM paved over the rails in the road."

Feasibility issues aside, I disagree with the context of that statement. Many cities now regret some of the rail infrastructure that was torn out to accommodate our car society. Clean, quiet, electric-powered trams are a perfect complement to 21st century movement of people. Frankly, fume-belching, noisy buses circling the downtown core scream 20th century and single occupant cars are becoming too extravagant as cities and nations grapple with carbon emissions, parking, rush-hour gridlock, and stress (yes, stress). Admittedly, Des Moines does not suffer greatly from any of these by-products of the auto age, but I take this study of alternative public transit as a sign that Des Moines leaders and major employers intend to stay competitive with other cities concerning future growth, amenities, and quality of life issues.
User avatar
vauxhall
Club I-80/I-35
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 8:37 am
Location: North side of Chicago

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby couch on Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:33 am

vauxhall wrote:Frankly, fume-belching, noisy buses circling the downtown core scream 20th century and single occupant cars are becoming too extravagant as cities and nations grapple with carbon emissions, parking, rush-hour gridlock, and stress (yes, stress).


I assume when mirage refers to a bus-based system he means electric busses. That is what you meant, right mirage? It's hard to tell from your random potshots and deriding people for not doing their own research.

mirage1 wrote:Nor did the consultant today have ANY answer when asked as a bus based system is 9 times less expensive than a tram/trolley, and a van based system is 27 times less expensive than the proposed tram/trolley, why those would not be feasable alternatives. He simply mumbled something about "development not being the same with those systems"....something impossible to prove.


Impossible to prove but there's a pretty clear correlation. It makes sense: a bus route doesn't command the same sort of lasting respect. Cities rarely do it but there's always the threat of a bus line moving. Track in the ground is something of a guarentee of regular business. Residential properties near tram lines have higher value.

Read about the Portland tram (e.g. this document: http://www.portlandstreetcar.org/pdf/development.pdf). Though they are a few times our size, they are not that big to not expect Des Moines could see somewhat proportional effects. What's really interesting is the similarities in their project and ours, especially proposal D: connecting two new development areas and also providing transportation to the CBD.
``Our liberties we prize and
our rights we will maintain''
User avatar
couch
Club I-80/I-35
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby dsmurbanite on Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:20 pm

Just some quick math. I usually am not one to do research in this manner, so I did it quickly and will cite where I got the figures:

I-235 is aproximately 14 miles long (http://www.aaroads.com/midwest/i-235_ia.html)
$426,000,000.00 was spent on renovations/remodeling the freeway per information provided before construction started by the I-DOT. (http://www.iowadot.gov/morgue/news2002/02260201.html)

By my figures, that comes to $30,428,571.42 per mile to rebuild the freeway, before any increase in costs are figured in. While I am not arguing that this was not needed, or that it didn't benifit the city, my point is that this is just one of MANY roadway construction projects. So the figures of $15 to $30 million per mile for the tram doesn't sound all that bad to me.

Now, on top of that, how much does it cost to maintain that roadway for the next 25 to 40 years before it comes time to rebuild it again? And how much would it cost to maintain the rails, and the cars? I believe I read previously that with proper upkeep the cars and rails can last almost indefinately, not to mention being better for the enviorment and doing a lot to reduce congestion and stress.

And I too was at that meeting, and to say that the moderator mumbled his reply is a bit misleading. His voice didn't waiver, nor was it any lower then his original presentation. He did say, clearly (I was in the back of the room, further away from the speaker then yourself Mirage, and I had absolutely no problem hearing him)that this is more of an economic development issue then transportation. Granted, I am sure that you can argue this, but to say he mumbled completely changes the perception of what was said, as if this speaker was trying to be dishonest, which is not the impression I got at all.
User avatar
dsmurbanite
Club Terrace Hill
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:46 pm
Location: Highland Park, Des Moines

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:31 pm

couch, i see you are at it again.....not at all slowed down with your claim of trams being a 20th century invention (totally debunked) you come back for more.....with more made up "facts" out of thin air....

a bus route doesn't command the same sort of lasting respect. Cities rarely do it but there's always the threat of a bus line moving. Track in the ground is something of a guarentee of regular business.


i don't even know where to start with that. i guess i would start with showing me that "respect" link of information and studies. secondly, show me the many cases where the bus line moves OUT of where it is needed vs. the tram line staying...and thirdly, i can't wait for that guarantee document....is that in pdf form?

as for your example of a successful tram in portland, which by the way is 533% OVER the construction budget, and 250% OVER the operating budget......try again. (http://www.debunkingportland.com/Transi ... Budget.htm) your example reminds me so much of when the project destiny supporters (the few that there were) brought in the ousted mayor of pittsburgh to show and tell us how to raise taxes like he did to make a successful city, before they nearly declared bankruptcy, the unions erupted, and he was outsted. laughable.

check out Buffalo (2-4 car trains powered by an overhead line)....."Some downtown business groups occasionally call for the removal of the transit system so that they can return to normal vehicle traffic and curbside parking, hoping that this measure might recreate the prosperous days of the past. Without extended branches in the suburbs, the system serves primarily a declining city population and those suburbanites who take buses or cars to one of the outer stations" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_Metro_Rail)

hmmm..a declining city population without extended branches in the burbs. sound familiar anyone?

again, I urge you to do much more in-depth research, and please use facts before posting. using rah rah documents with misleading information that have been totally debunked (see several above posts on "do trams bring development?") is less than a convincing argument.

here is a wild out of the box idea. why don't we take this $50-75 million dollar pie in the sky project, shelve it, and put that money toward fixing the dsm sewer system like was supposed to be done years ago, but couldn't be done because it was never capital budgeted correctly.....
Last edited by mirage1 on Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby dogbo on Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:15 pm

mirage1 wrote:couch, i see you are at it again.....not at all slowed down with your claim of trams being a 20th century invention (totally debunked) you come back for more.....with more made up "facts" out of thin air....

a bus route doesn't command the same sort of lasting respect. Cities rarely do it but there's always the threat of a bus line moving. Track in the ground is something of a guarentee of regular business.


i don't even know where to start with that. i guess i would start with showing me that "respect" link of information and studies. secondly, show me the many cases where the bus line moves OUT of where it is needed vs. the tram line staying...and thirdly, i can't wait for that guarantee document....is that in pdf form?

as for your example of a successful tram in portland, which by the way is 533% OVER the construction budget, and 250% OVER the operating budget......try again. (http://www.debunkingportland.com/Transi ... Budget.htm) your example reminds me so much of when the project destiny supporters (the few that there were) brought in the ousted mayor of pittsburgh to show and tell us how to raise taxes like he did to make a successful city, before they nearly declared bankruptcy, the unions erupted, and he was outsted. laughable.

check out Buffalo (2-4 car trains powered by an overhead line)....."Some downtown business groups occasionally call for the removal of the transit system so that they can return to normal vehicle traffic and curbside parking, hoping that this measure might recreate the prosperous days of the past. Without extended branches in the suburbs, the system serves primarily a declining city population and those suburbanites who take buses or cars to one of the outer stations" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_Metro_Rail)

hmmm..a declining city population without extended branches in the burbs. sound familiar anyone?

Again, I urge you to do much more in-depth research, and please use facts before posting. using rah rah documents with misleading information that have been totally debunked (see several above posts on "do trams bring development?") is less than a convincing argument.


Is there a reason you didn't directly address my comment to you? My main issue with this is the fact that gov't policy drove out mass transit in the past , not the free market.
dogbo

Read it on:
http://www.desmoinesreport.com
"Not flashy, just interesting & informative."
User avatar
dogbo
Club 801 Grand
 
Posts: 4870
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:11 am
Location: NW Des Moines

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:29 pm

dogbo..don't mean to ignore you, but your recent discussion focuses more on the big picture of highway subsidies, and your opposition to that. in this forum i have been focusing a bit on the more immediate situation and not that bigger picture which could be its' own thread.

you might want to refer to the few years old study that shows that highways are FAR less subsidized than transit, on many measures. (source US DOT, http://www.debunkingportland.com/Roads/RoadSubsidy.htm)

and no, i am not about to disagree with you about how history might be different. it might be and you could very well be right.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:03 pm

Mr . Saba [planning bureau] said during the 10 years MAX has been in existence, the City has seen no mixed-use developments adjacent to the light rail lines .


Wayne Rembold, Portland contractor, said tax abatements are essential to getting these projects built as otherwise they do not pencil out


He [Commissioner Hales] said it is a myth to think the market will take care of development along transit corridors, noting the many vacant sites along the current MAX system


source of all the above, 10/23/1996 Portland City Council minutes......

yes, that Hales quote is the same consultant in des moines now saying exactly the opposite. which is it mr. hales? should we believe mr. hales as a council member with no conflict of interest, or now as a paid transit consultant?

devastating.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby SharpHawkeye on Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:35 pm

I hesitate to jump in to the middle of this heated discussion, but I think there is something that needs cleared up.

Portland MAX is not the same as Portland Streetcar.


The MAX is a 3 line, 64 station, 44.3 mile light-rail system. It extends from a downtown hub out into different residential areas of Portland, running on reserved lanes, medians, and exclusive railbeds. From my understanding, it doesn't interact with the Portland Streetcar route except at one eastbound stop and one westbound stop (some kind of transit plaza setup, it appears).

Here is a picture of a typical MAX car in operation. (via Wikipedia)
Image

The Portland Streetcar is a 6 mile closed loop streetcar system. It runs in mixed traffic on streets and plazas, entirely in the downtown and near downtown area.

Here is a picture of a typical Portland Streetcar in operation. (via Wikipedia)
Image

Here are the Wikipedia pages of each system, for more information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_MAX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Streetcar
Iowa City: All our creativity went into the name
User avatar
SharpHawkeye
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:33 pm
Location: Chariton, Iowa

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:19 pm

first of all, that very question (purposely) was asked to the consultant mr. hales during the meeting i attended to clarify it...and he clearly stated that in the US as far as he was concerned he considers you can use light rail interchangably with tram/trolley systems. he considers both the streetcar system and the MAX system light rail. you have to take his word for that.

second of all..i would refer you to this site:

http://www.debunkingportland.com/StreetcarPlan.htm

that will take care of the myth of development following streetcars.
Last edited by mirage1 on Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby SharpHawkeye on Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 pm

I'm not arguing one way or another on this. I just wanted to clear up what seemed like a misconception.
As for the consultant...I guess you could use the words interchangeably, but in practice they are usually very different systems.
Iowa City: All our creativity went into the name
User avatar
SharpHawkeye
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:33 pm
Location: Chariton, Iowa

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby couch on Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:17 am

mirage, do you even read the links you post? Here is the entirety of the most recent one:

Streetcar Facts

Portland says streetcars are for developers, not transportation

"A successful Streetcar System will ... Provide an organizing structure and catalyst for the City's future growth along streetcar corridors" and a "successful Streetcar Corridor will ... Have (re)development potential [and] community support to make the changes necessary [redevelopment & growth] for a successful streetcar corridor."
Here is the original text found in July 2008 at http://www.portlandonline.com/transport ... m?c=46138&
Portland Warns That Density Causes Congestion
(then tries to hide the statement)
"Neighbors along a potential streetcar corridor need to ne aware of the potential for increased traffic congestion due to higher density of development."
(Portland Streetcar Workbook, page 34, April 2008 edition - removed from Version 2)
Portland Warns That Streetcars Caue Congestion

"... temporary traffic back-ups may occur where the streetcar stops at a curbside station, where leftturns occur on a two-lane street, where vehicles wait for pedestrian crossings to clear, and when vehicles parallel park."
Portland Streetcar Workbook (page 33)

As the City grows, land uses change, a streetcar corridor becomes more vibrant and economically vital, neighbors need to be aware of the potential for increased traffic congestion.
Portland Streetcar Workbook (page 34)
Hiding the Cost & Who Pays for It
"[Owen] Ronchelli [program director of the nonprofit Lloyd District Transportation Management Agency] says he has suggested to the “district working groups” of citizens who are talking to various neighborhoods about the streetcar expansion idea to not yet talk about costs, or how the costs might be paid." The Portland Tribune, Jul 17, 2008


This series of unconnected quotes does nothing to "take care of the myth of development following streetcars". If anything it serves to prove the point. "(re)development potential", "higher density of development", "more vidrant and economically vital". Sounds pretty horrible.

And regarding the Road Subsidies article: I don't think anyone is arguing the basic fact that road users pay highway taxes. That article points out that cars actually have a negative net subsidy! So we should encourage everyone to drive and make the government more money!
``Our liberties we prize and
our rights we will maintain''
User avatar
couch
Club I-80/I-35
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby Better Life dude on Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:02 am

Mirage1 wrote:
"...that will take care of the myth of development following streetcars."

Well, that fixes that! I'll just roll over and believe anything you say is true. :roll:
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi
User avatar
Better Life dude
Club 801 Grand
 
Posts: 2800
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:07 pm
Location: Sherman Hill

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby mirage1 on Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:36 pm

Let me be very clear, as you are mixing two very different issues.

I am in full agreement that development has happened around light rail, tram, and bus lines. We couldnt agree more on that topic, and I agree with those posters here that claim that.

What I do disagree with is the proponent's claim (including Mr. Hales) that development HAPPENS or OCCURS because of the light rail or tram lines, vs. a bus based system. You will see many of my links above that debunk those claims, and instead point to the fact millions of dollars of development subsidies were poured into those ajoining developments, and there was no study that examined the differences that a light rail/tram or bus based system would have. the facts so far that we know are from the work that has been done is that trams dont create development, incentives have created that development.........

Frankly, making that unsubstianted "trams create development" claim is the only ticket to punch for proponents to at all make any of the lousy economics barely tolarable to those that financially question a tram system. Debunking that "holy grail" claim makes the lack of tram economics stand on their own.....as they should.....and then proponents like the paid consultants will have to answer the "how much will it cost question" directly.
User avatar
mirage1
Club Gray's Lake
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:06 am
Location: suburban DSM

Re: Downtown Shuttle System

Postby fostprei on Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:28 pm

I have to ask.

Mirage, do you ride any of the current bus routes in the proposed areas? Not to spite, but I'm just curious.

I live downtown/work downtown and to me, the current bus system isn't a desired mode of transportation for intra-downtown area. The reason is, I don't think any buses effectively service the residential areas of downtown. (also why I'm a fan of option #3). Why walk 3-4 blocks to wait at a bus station for 5-10-15 -who know's how many minutes only to be taken 8-12 blocks to get out and walk 4-5 more?? I might as well of walked or driven the 12 blocks anyway! I see the tram as a consistent and reliable substitute for the downtown shuttles, not to mention a unique novelty for the area. The routes are better catered to those who will actually use it as a mode of transportation, hopefully the hours will better serve as well. I suppose you could change the bus routes, but the bus link area on walnut would be potentially left out.

Like you say Mirage, the tram might not spur growth along the route, but the proposed routes are set up best where potential development can occur, unlike the bus system. If development of housing/retial continues to blossom in the Court Ave. corridor/East Village/W. Gateway, the tram system will be positioned for success.

Another question. The upfront capital is definitely higher with the Tram system no question, but what are the operating costs vs. a bus long term?
fostprei
Club Salisbury House
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:38 am
Location: Milwaukee

PreviousNext

Return to Downtown Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hawk61401, wmjindsm and 0 guests