[hotair2]

Originally Posted by ridicter

I see what you mean.

I would be incredibly excited, personally, if NWA created a Light Rail system. It just can't be built with any realistic expectation to get a return...

Hopefully it will happen. Plus, I'm not sure if any city really has the culture and demographics necessary--other than Fayetteville (young,progressive), and maybe Springdale (low-income).

It would have to be subsidized, no question. Very few transit systems are paid completely by ridership. The real savings comes from the collateral savings effect. The need for fewer roads and parking facilities. The collateral revenue is the sales taxes from busines with increased traffic from being on the route.

Opponents of rail usually point out the problems with cost versus return on investment without looking at the collateral impact. A lot of the time this is only an excuse for having one. In Atlanta they used that excuse not to take the train system out to the suburbs. The real problem in Atlanta and a potential problem in NW Arkansas is that people don't have a problem with having mass transportation that takes them from their home to shops, but what they have a problem with is that other people will be able to take the train to their neighborhood....the wrong type of people, in their opinion. That could be the problem with Rogers.

I don't know much about the place, but they may be a problem. The best way around that is to give them something they want. Transit to the UA football games. The stadium would have to ge a point on the route. That would be huge.

Light rail uses a different rail system than normal commercial trains. Some places have a combination of both. Light rail would probably be the most cost effective.

[Dr. Foosball]

Originally Posted by hotair2

In Atlanta they used that excuse not to take the train system out to the suburbs. The real problem in Atlanta and a potential problem in NW Arkansas is that people don't have a problem with having mass transportation that takes them from their home to shops, but what they have a problem with is that other people will be able to take the train to their neighborhood....the wrong type of people, in their opinion. That could be the problem with Rogers.

The point you make is the issue with the Dallas area. Dallas has the DART system, but some cities don't use it to keep the "undesirables" out of their area. The worst part is Arlington. Try going to a Cowboys game at the new stadium without paying $20 for parking; Arlington is not connected to the DART and has virtually no public transportation to the stadiums.

It is a good point and I don't completely blame suburbia for thinking this way. But since their is no real city in NWA, this might be a bit different than cities like Dallas or Atlanta.

[hotair2]

Originally Posted by Dr. Foosball

The point you make is the issue with the Dallas area. Dallas has the DART system, but some cities don't use it to keep the "undesirables" out of their area. The worst part is Arlington. Try going to a Cowboys game at the new stadium without paying $20 for parking; Arlington is not connected to the DART and has virtually no public transportation to the stadiums.

It is a good point and I don't completely blame suburbia for thinking this way. But since their is no real city in NWA, this might be a bit different than cities like Dallas or Atlanta.

I agree. NW Arkansas does not have the same level of Diversity of Atlanta and Dallas, which is a good thing for acceptance of the train system.

[marmac]

I doubt NWA has the density/population to even make it feaseable.

Minneapolis built one ,a few years ago, after many years of planning and opposition.

It runs from downtown MPLS, t the metrodome, VA hospital, MPLS/ST PAUL International airport, mall of America.

The ridership turned out to be way more than expected, but it still needs taxpayers money to cover operating expenses.

NWA does not have a major international airport, does not have a pro sports team ( teams) does not have anything resembling Mall of America, does not have a downtown population even close to Minneapolis.

Perhaps a limited commuter train might work .
Light rail won't cuz NWA doesn't have the population density necessary for it to be even close to feasable.

[rackensack]

Originally Posted by hotair2

I don't what it is about busses but people hate taking a bus, but the same people will ride a train. In Atlanta most of my friends would ride the train, but not the bus. I think it had something to do with the perception that only poor people rode the bus, but the sophisticated rode the train. That is the best that I can do, but trains usually are more successful that busses for whatever reason.

Speaking as someone who lived in Atlanta for years with no functioning automobile, I can offer a few reasons for being willing to ride the trains but avoiding the buses.

• Circuitous routes: Aside from a few routes, like the #2 Ponce de Leon, MARTA's buses tend to take routes that wind around through vast areas, connecting apparently implausible points. A big reason for that, of course, is the nature of the road/street systems in the area -- nothing, outside of a very small core area, is laid out on a grid.The roads wind around and follow old Native American trails, cattle routes, locations of river ferries/bridges/fords. This makes it much more difficult to keep straight, without constantly referring to route maps, how to get from point A to point B.
• Time: Closely related to the above, it can take an exceedingly long time to get from any random location to any other. The frequency of bus service varies from about once per hour to about 3 times per hour, with most routes running only 2-3 times per hour. And once you're on the bus, you have to follow the long and winding road that the bus takes. If you have to transfer to another bus, you may have another 30-40 minute wait ahead of you if the timing is wrong. I used to live near Ponce and Barnett and work in Century Center. I used MARTA to get there and back a lot. That meant taking the #2 bus to North Avenue Station, taking the Northeast line to Brookhaven, and taking the #19 bus down Clairmont. Or taking the #2 east to Decatur Station and then the #19 up Clairmont. Either way, it was well over an hour, and you could add another 30-40 minutes to that if your timing was off. Driving distance was under 7 miles -- about 15 minutes.
• Predictability: By their nature, buses are subject to a lot more disruptions in their schedules than trains -- traffic jams, accidents, weather, and a host of other factors can cause buses to be unable to keep their schedule. The trains tend to run a lot closer to their schedules under most circumstances.
• Perception of safety: This relates to the perception you mention that only poor people ride the bus, but it has other aspects also. To get on a train, you have to get to a station, pay your fare, walk through a turnstile, etc. Once you're there, everyone else there has had to do the same, and you're not getting off/out until you get to another station. There are call boxes on every car, and MARTA police officers walking through the cars aren't uncommon. On a bus, in contrast, you can stand on the street at any bus stop and board, and you can much more readily jump off again at another stop and dash away. I also don't think I ever saw a MARTA police officer on a bus. Thus, if you're planning some sort of mischief, you'd much rather be on a bus than a train. Also, the buses -- for all kinds of reasons -- end up with an even higher proportion of passengers who exhibit unusual behaviors, from the merely odd but harmless to the profoundly disturbing. I saw far more weird stuff on the buses than on the trains (not that they don't have their share also).
• Comfort: MARTA's trains aren't always spotlessly clean, and they're pretty utilitarian, but they're generally much more pleasant than the buses. The buses tend to be dirtier, noisier, and generally less pleasant to be on than the trains.

Thus, to make a bus transit system successful, you would need a route system people can understand without having to have route maps and timetables at their fingertips, run frequently along shorter routes, minimize schedule disruptions, make people feel safe, and make the experience as pleasant as possible.

[PurpleLove08]

Originally Posted by hotair2

I see what you are saying in terms of density. However, Ideally you would like to infrastructure in place before the population density become too great and then try to make the rail deal with the sprawl. If you put the rail in early, you will get density around the rail. In other words, instead of trying to make the rail match the sprawl, eliminate the sprawl before it gets out of hand. It is true that it will difficult and underutilized at the beginning, but more businesses and communities will start locating around the rail...if the rail is laid out in a strategic manner. It has to go to where people want to go and you have to have centralized parking locations for people to park and get on the rail.

The rail is the best way to have controlled growth and reduce the amount of traffic and congestion, which will only get worse in that area of the state.

Bingo.

[hotair2]

Originally Posted by rackensack

Speaking as someone who lived in Atlanta for years with no functioning automobile, I can offer a few reasons for being willing to ride the trains but avoiding the buses.

• Circuitous routes: Aside from a few routes, like the #2 Ponce de Leon, MARTA's buses tend to take routes that wind around through vast areas, connecting apparently implausible points. A big reason for that, of course, is the nature of the road/street systems in the area -- nothing, outside of a very small core area, is laid out on a grid.The roads wind around and follow old Native American trails, cattle routes, locations of river ferries/bridges/fords. This makes it much more difficult to keep straight, without constantly referring to route maps, how to get from point A to point B.
• Time: Closely related to the above, it can take an exceedingly long time to get from any random location to any other. The frequency of bus service varies from about once per hour to about 3 times per hour, with most routes running only 2-3 times per hour. And once you're on the bus, you have to follow the long and winding road that the bus takes. If you have to transfer to another bus, you may have another 30-40 minute wait ahead of you if the timing is wrong. I used to live near Ponce and Barnett and work in Century Center. I used MARTA to get there and back a lot. That meant taking the #2 bus to North Avenue Station, taking the Northeast line to Brookhaven, and taking the #19 bus down Clairmont. Or taking the #2 east to Decatur Station and then the #19 up Clairmont. Either way, it was well over an hour, and you could add another 30-40 minutes to that if your timing was off. Driving distance was under 7 miles -- about 15 minutes.
• Predictability: By their nature, buses are subject to a lot more disruptions in their schedules than trains -- traffic jams, accidents, weather, and a host of other factors can cause buses to be unable to keep their schedule. The trains tend to run a lot closer to their schedules under most circumstances.
• Perception of safety: This relates to the perception you mention that only poor people ride the bus, but it has other aspects also. To get on a train, you have to get to a station, pay your fare, walk through a turnstile, etc. Once you're there, everyone else there has had to do the same, and you're not getting off/out until you get to another station. There are call boxes on every car, and MARTA police officers walking through the cars aren't uncommon. On a bus, in contrast, you can stand on the street at any bus stop and board, and you can much more readily jump off again at another stop and dash away. I also don't think I ever saw a MARTA police officer on a bus. Thus, if you're planning some sort of mischief, you'd much rather be on a bus than a train. Also, the buses -- for all kinds of reasons -- end up with an even higher proportion of passengers who exhibit unusual behaviors, from the merely odd but harmless to the profoundly disturbing. I saw far more weird stuff on the buses than on the trains (not that they don't have their share also).
• Comfort: MARTA's trains aren't always spotlessly clean, and they're pretty utilitarian, but they're generally much more pleasant than the buses. The buses tend to be dirtier, noisier, and generally less pleasant to be on than the trains.

Thus, to make a bus transit system successful, you would need a route system people can understand without having to have route maps and timetables at their fingertips, run frequently along shorter routes, minimize schedule disruptions, make people feel safe, and make the experience as pleasant as possible.

I think you are probably right on all of the points. I loved riding the train to the airport.

[PurpleLove08]

Originally Posted by rackensack

Speaking as someone who lived in Atlanta for years with no functioning automobile, I can offer a few reasons for being willing to ride the trains but avoiding the buses.

• Circuitous routes: Aside from a few routes, like the #2 Ponce de Leon, MARTA's buses tend to take routes that wind around through vast areas, connecting apparently implausible points. A big reason for that, of course, is the nature of the road/street systems in the area -- nothing, outside of a very small core area, is laid out on a grid.The roads wind around and follow old Native American trails, cattle routes, locations of river ferries/bridges/fords. This makes it much more difficult to keep straight, without constantly referring to route maps, how to get from point A to point B.
• Time: Closely related to the above, it can take an exceedingly long time to get from any random location to any other. The frequency of bus service varies from about once per hour to about 3 times per hour, with most routes running only 2-3 times per hour. And once you're on the bus, you have to follow the long and winding road that the bus takes. If you have to transfer to another bus, you may have another 30-40 minute wait ahead of you if the timing is wrong. I used to live near Ponce and Barnett and work in Century Center. I used MARTA to get there and back a lot. That meant taking the #2 bus to North Avenue Station, taking the Northeast line to Brookhaven, and taking the #19 bus down Clairmont. Or taking the #2 east to Decatur Station and then the #19 up Clairmont. Either way, it was well over an hour, and you could add another 30-40 minutes to that if your timing was off. Driving distance was under 7 miles -- about 15 minutes.
• Predictability: By their nature, buses are subject to a lot more disruptions in their schedules than trains -- traffic jams, accidents, weather, and a host of other factors can cause buses to be unable to keep their schedule. The trains tend to run a lot closer to their schedules under most circumstances.
• Perception of safety: This relates to the perception you mention that only poor people ride the bus, but it has other aspects also. To get on a train, you have to get to a station, pay your fare, walk through a turnstile, etc. Once you're there, everyone else there has had to do the same, and you're not getting off/out until you get to another station. There are call boxes on every car, and MARTA police officers walking through the cars aren't uncommon. On a bus, in contrast, you can stand on the street at any bus stop and board, and you can much more readily jump off again at another stop and dash away. I also don't think I ever saw a MARTA police officer on a bus. Thus, if you're planning some sort of mischief, you'd much rather be on a bus than a train. Also, the buses -- for all kinds of reasons -- end up with an even higher proportion of passengers who exhibit unusual behaviors, from the merely odd but harmless to the profoundly disturbing. I saw far more weird stuff on the buses than on the trains (not that they don't have their share also).
• Comfort: MARTA's trains aren't always spotlessly clean, and they're pretty utilitarian, but they're generally much more pleasant than the buses. The buses tend to be dirtier, noisier, and generally less pleasant to be on than the trains.

Thus, to make a bus transit system successful, you would need a route system people can understand without having to have route maps and timetables at their fingertips, run frequently along shorter routes, minimize schedule disruptions, make people feel safe, and make the experience as pleasant as possible.

I took the bus a few times last summer just to be more "green" and save on gas money.
I'd continue taking it if it didn't take so much time!
I live less than 10 miles from my college and yes I could take the bus to school but I'd have to take a bus downtown, then catch another bus to take me to school....a 40 minute ordeal just to go less than 10 miles.
I've contacted Central Arkansas Transit about it and that was pretty much a waste of time.
I know a woman who works for Metroplan and she said there needs to be more representation of those who actually use the buses. A lot of the people who deal with transit issues don't even use the system so they have no idea how inconvenient it may be for some people.

Of course I know things would be better if there were funding behind it and hopefully in the next 2-3 years more people in the Pulaski County area will wake up and want to fund transit.

I wish the buses could change traffic signals the same way the trolleys can. That would definitely speed things up.
Bus rapid transit (Bus rapid transit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) is the ultimate goal but I'm not sure if we have the road infrastructure for that. The best I can hope for is the ability for the buses to change the traffic signals.

I felt pretty safe on the buses....I know a lot of people thought I was crazy for wanting to ride the bus but I wanted to experience the bus for myself.

I would be open to riding the both, all that matters is how much it will cost me and how fast I will get there. If the train gets me there faster, I'll ride the train. If I have more free time and it's cheaper to ride the bus, I'll ride the bus.

I think to start off NWA should have a commuter train.
I know some people in Conway were tossing around the idea for a commuter train to run from Conway to Little Rock because of all the people that live in Conway and work in Little Rock but I kept thinking, "Why not just live closer to where you work?"

[hotair2]

Originally Posted by marmac

I doubt NWA has the density/population to even make it feaseable.

Minneapolis built one ,a few years ago, after many years of planning and opposition.

It runs from downtown MPLS, t the metrodome, VA hospital, MPLS/ST PAUL International airport, mall of America.

The ridership turned out to be way more than expected, but it still needs taxpayers money to cover operating expenses.

NWA does not have a major international airport, does not have a pro sports team ( teams) does not have anything resembling Mall of America, does not have a downtown population even close to Minneapolis.

Perhaps a limited commuter train might work .
Light rail won't cuz NWA doesn't have the population density necessary for it to be even close to feasable.

Population density is a problem in the beginning, but historically that has changed when mass transit is put in place. It attracts people and business. As far as a major sports team. No we don't have one, but Razorback games put as many people in the stands as most pro football teams do. As far as no international airport, that is a whole different problem. Arkansas does not have an international airport much less Fayetteville. Little Rock needs an airport expansion, but that is another thread.

[strumpeace]

Light rail is a great idea, but there is no place in AR that has the density to support it.

Here are a couple of other things to consider --

1) Light rail costs anywhere from $70 million to $120 million per linear mile to build. Even on the low end, a 12-mile stretch would push $1 billion. Who pays? Congress? Arkansas is on the low end of federally-funded projects. Our Senators and four Congressmen have very little influence in Washington when it comes to spending. And that's not going to change. AR doesn't bring anything to the table.

2) It is difficult--and in some cases impossible--to convert regular rail lines to light rail. Light rail cars use a different track width. There are cars that will use regular rail lines; however, from what I understand, only one company makes those cars, there is a huge back order for them, and the cost is markedly higher than typical light rail cars.

I hate to be a downer, but those are the realities of the situation.