U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Rochester area
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-30-2010, 03:30 PM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,240 posts, read 12,173,669 times
Reputation: 4183
This what your system could look like one day.
heres some of my pictures form NJ Gold Coast - Hudson-Bergen Light Rail network, which serves 60,000 ppl daily. Once the other 4 expansions are completed by 2025 the network will have 6 lines and serve over 150,000 people daily.
: Jersey City : Paulus Hook
A Shared section of the Network , this part is a one-way street : Essex Street





Jersey City : Exchange Place
A Separated Section , at Grade level : Hudson Street



Weehawken : Port Imperial
An Elevated part of the network



It can post more pictures if you want later of New Jersey's Various light Rail networks.

~Corey
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-30-2010, 03:46 PM
 
107 posts, read 191,334 times
Reputation: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
This what your system could look like one day.
heres some of my pictures form NJ Gold Coast - Hudson-Bergen Light Rail network, which serves 60,000 ppl daily. Once the other 4 expansions are completed by 2025 the network will have 6 lines and serve over 150,000 people daily.
: Jersey City : Paulus Hook
A Shared section of the Network , this part is a one-way street : Essex Street





Jersey City : Exchange Place
A Separated Section , at Grade level : Hudson Street



Weehawken : Port Imperial
An Elevated part of the network



It can post more pictures if you want later of New Jersey's Various light Rail networks.

~Corey
Excellent! I would like to see more. Rochester could take a cue from New Jersey for sure. How did the street conversion work in terms of traffic? I think there are many options in Rochester with turning a two-way street into a one-way shared with the light rail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2010, 04:00 PM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,240 posts, read 12,173,669 times
Reputation: 4183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machino View Post
Excellent! I would like to see more. Rochester could take a cue from New Jersey for sure. How did the street conversion work in terms of traffic? I think there are many options in Rochester with turning a two-way street into a one-way shared with the light rail.
There aren't alot of Accidents with the shared streets , but the impatient drivers at the intersections sometimes cause accidents with are small. Usually doesn't even scratch the train. The trains down accelerate fast. In the separated areas trains are allowed to go to there max of 55mph which takes 10 seconds to get to that. On the shared areas and at graded separated areas its restricted to 10-30mph depending on the time of day. We also were the first state in the US to have Diesel Light Rail and the second in North America after Ottawa's O-train.

~Corey
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2010, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Rochester NY (western NY)
597 posts, read 679,933 times
Reputation: 432
Rochester is nowhere near large enough to require or sustain a system like that. Nor will it ever be large enough without some MAJOR changes that are much farther beyond the scope of any kind of rail system.

By your logic, light rail is the solution to the worlds financial problems.

In a recession? Install a light rail system!

Need more jobs? Install a light rail system!

Losing population? Install a light rail system

Need to feel better about your city and its downward spiral? Install a light rail system!

I mean, c'mon, really man? It's going to take MUCH more than some freaking train to get this city back on it's knees.

Nobody here has yet to explain how exactly a light rail will help Rochester grow. I want specific examples/scenarios provided, because right now I am having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea of a train running around Rochester and the whole 7 mile radius of population I would consider dense. This city, even with the same population we had 20 years ago during the good years of Kodak, Xerox, and other booming small businesses, still wasn't congested enough to benefit from any kind of rail. The only time I think it'd be heavily used would be during the winter, by all of the people that need to take 490 home during rush hour who don't want to put up with the awful traffic conditions. Even then, there would have to be properly placed, equipped, and secure park and rides. And I doubt those would be free, or if they were free, there would be some kind of extra hidden cost added in to the price of a rail ticket to pay for it.

Maybe someone could also take a screenshot of Google maps, draw some lines showing where they think the rail should be utilized, and explain the benefits of those routes. Because right now, I look at 490/590/390 and all the money dumped in to those expressways to make them more user friendly, and I see all the access in the world for anywhere in Rochester. There are no issues at all getting in to anywhere in this city. Nobody has ever said "well, we could put a restaurant on Main, but I really don't know if anyone would want to try and get in to the area and then have to find parking", because none of that is an issue. A rail is good for easing access in to an area that would otherwise be difficult to get in to, like Boston or Denver. We don't fit in to that category though.

And comparing Rochester to Denver, well, if anyone here who thinks that is a fair comparison and have never been to Denver, please go there and then re-think those words. What Denver has that Rochester could use more than a rail is something like the 16th Street Mall and the surrounding few blocks that are absolutely gorgeous. Here are a few pictures from a night I spent there in 2008, this is what Rochester really needs. I'd really love to go back there for a few days now that I've gotten in to photography:





Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 12:09 PM
 
28,792 posts, read 32,684,156 times
Reputation: 5687
That is why I think that a heavy rail sysytem could work. By looking at a map of Rochester, it seems like most of it would be from Charlotte down through the West Side of the city and a line that runs parallel with 490 that could be used.

There is also some rail that runs east of the Genesee near Charlotte to Route 104 too. This line also goes into the northern part of Greece.

Another line runs just south of the city near the Airport, the Henrietta/Brighton town line, the villages of Pittsford, East Rochester and Fairport into Macedon.

rochester, ny - Google Maps (Just follow the gray lines)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 12:24 PM
 
107 posts, read 191,334 times
Reputation: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTaxedInNY View Post
Rochester is nowhere near large enough to require or sustain a system like that. Nor will it ever be large enough without some MAJOR changes that are much farther beyond the scope of any kind of rail system.

By your logic, light rail is the solution to the worlds financial problems.

In a recession? Install a light rail system!

Need more jobs? Install a light rail system!

Losing population? Install a light rail system

Need to feel better about your city and its downward spiral? Install a light rail system!

I mean, c'mon, really man? It's going to take MUCH more than some freaking train to get this city back on it's knees.

Nobody here has yet to explain how exactly a light rail will help Rochester grow. I want specific examples/scenarios provided, because right now I am having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea of a train running around Rochester and the whole 7 mile radius of population I would consider dense. This city, even with the same population we had 20 years ago during the good years of Kodak, Xerox, and other booming small businesses, still wasn't congested enough to benefit from any kind of rail. The only time I think it'd be heavily used would be during the winter, by all of the people that need to take 490 home during rush hour who don't want to put up with the awful traffic conditions. Even then, there would have to be properly placed, equipped, and secure park and rides. And I doubt those would be free, or if they were free, there would be some kind of extra hidden cost added in to the price of a rail ticket to pay for it.

Maybe someone could also take a screenshot of Google maps, draw some lines showing where they think the rail should be utilized, and explain the benefits of those routes. Because right now, I look at 490/590/390 and all the money dumped in to those expressways to make them more user friendly, and I see all the access in the world for anywhere in Rochester. There are no issues at all getting in to anywhere in this city. Nobody has ever said "well, we could put a restaurant on Main, but I really don't know if anyone would want to try and get in to the area and then have to find parking", because none of that is an issue. A rail is good for easing access in to an area that would otherwise be difficult to get in to, like Boston or Denver. We don't fit in to that category though.

And comparing Rochester to Denver, well, if anyone here who thinks that is a fair comparison and have never been to Denver, please go there and then re-think those words. What Denver has that Rochester could use more than a rail is something like the 16th Street Mall and the surrounding few blocks that are absolutely gorgeous. Here are a few pictures from a night I spent there in 2008, this is what Rochester really needs. I'd really love to go back there for a few days now that I've gotten in to photography:





I have to disagree that the 1980s were the "good years" in the context of a downtown revival and the ideas discussed in this thread. The Rochester area had suffered a loss of 80,000 people in the last 30 years and the consequences of these poor decisions that caused the lost were only around the corner, already set in motion. The "Good years" were when the population of Rochester was around 300,000 and our city had the capacity to do great things. We are all at a disadvantage by population loss, and the flawed urban dynamics put in place in the last 50 years. We all are carrying this extra weight in the form of higher taxes and the lessening martket. The frustrating part is that Rochester, in its currently mismanaged and sprawled state, has all the potential to accommodate the growth but not the right leadership. Our city is very able to grow and has plenty of room given the right nourishment. Rochester has a great future as a new transplant city given the right decisions and direction, and that added population will lessen the load on us all and boost our economy, among the other boosts from the smart growth changes.

Have you had a look at the links I posted on page 5? Denver is not a comparison as much as a role model and the link I posted to the "Living Streets" movement encompasses ideas like the 16th street mall, which I agree would work very well, especially with a Light Rail connection (great pics BTW). Another relevant issue to Rochester is an anti-sprawl initiative that has been implemented in 16th street among other places with their mixed use buildings. This is much more influential on the urban dynamic than it is given credit for.

Also take a visit to the SmartGrowthAmerica.org website that I had linked on page 5.

Last edited by Machino; 02-01-2010 at 12:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 11:53 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
7,726 posts, read 3,861,834 times
Reputation: 3160
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTaxedInNY View Post
Rochester has nowhere near the requirements for any sort of rail system, there is plenty of cheap parking in the city in its numerous garages, and everything is centralized within a mile radius.
I would disagree. Any city would benefit from electric traction rail mass transit.
1. The age of cheap and plentiful oil is over.
2. Automobiles will become incrementally more expensive to own and operate.
3. We desperately need oil-free alternatives when the oil spigot shuts down.
4. It was once the dominant land transportation from 1890 - 1920.

The Streetcar Conspiracy - How General Motors Deliberately Destroyed Public Transit (http://saveourwetlands.org/streetcar.htm - broken link)
At the time [1920], 90 percent of all trips were by rail, chiefly electric rail; only one in 10 Americans owned an automobile. There were 1,200 separate electric street and interurban railways, a thriving and profitable industry with 44,000 miles of track, 300,000 employees, 15 billion annual passengers, and $1 billion in income. Virtually every city and town in America of more than 2,500 people had its own electric rail system.

----------
The best way to rebuild urban rail - don't use public funds.
Instead, give a complete tax exemption (including property taxes) to any company (and its employees) who are 100% involved in building, maintaining and operating electric traction rail.

In fact, if we had a national railroad initiative with a Federal tax exemption, we'd have all manner of electric rail projects getting built, nationwide.

And as long as tax money isn't involved, politicians won't muddle up things, or slow it down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2010, 12:05 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
7,726 posts, read 3,861,834 times
Reputation: 3160
Nit picking issue.
"Light Rail" is a broad term, but often refers to multicar trains on segregated rights of way - and does not usually include streetcars (like the PCC streetcar) under its definition. Proponents are often forced to compete with the infrastructure consumed by automobiles, and planners tend to favor the automobile.

A streetcar / tram may be more suited than a multicar train, for an urban rail network.

PCC streetcar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The PCC (Presidentsí Conference Committee) streetcar (tram) design was first built in the United States in the 1930s. The design proved successful in its native country, and after World War II was licensed for use elsewhere in the world. The PCC car has proved to be a long lasting icon of streetcar design, and PCC cars are still in service in various places around the world.
------------

Energy efficiency comparisons of transportation:
strickland.ca - transportation energy efficiency (fuel consumption) (http://www.strickland.ca/efficiency.html - broken link)

Passenger miles / gallon (gasoline equivalent)

Full capacity:
Rail - 2000
Bus - 280
Auto - 100

Typical:
Rail - 600
Bus - 78
Auto - 21

==========
In summation, electric traction railways are the most energy and resource efficient mode of land transportation. Rebuilding them will reduce long term energy consumption while providing necessary transportation in the coming years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2010, 07:14 AM
 
Location: Rochester
200 posts, read 327,296 times
Reputation: 209
OTiNY, those are beautiful pics, but I don't think anyone is trying to compare Denver to Rochester straight up - I think Machino was using Denver as en example of how light rail helps, rather than hinders, a cities growth. Also a pat on the back for the Jersey City pics Nexis (which looks a lot nicer than when I left ~15 years ago) posted. I think Rochester is more Jersey City than Denver - Jersey City was a poster child for urban decay 20 years ago, but has seen growth recently. Rochester can do that. Denver never had the "fall" that WNY and the Midwest has had over the last 50 or so years, while JC had that same rise and fall but has started to rise again.
Jetgraphics also has some good points - environmentally, the impact of light rail is tremendous, and could reduce our dependence on foreign oil. I also agree with points about letting the private sector handle this. Upstate politicians would probably Moderator cut: language up like they have every other creative initiative in the last ten years.

Last edited by bellafinzi; 02-02-2010 at 12:41 PM.. Reason: inappropriate language
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2010, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
7,726 posts, read 3,861,834 times
Reputation: 3160
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron4040 View Post
... environmentally, the impact of light rail is tremendous, and could reduce our dependence on foreign oil. I also agree with points about letting the private sector handle this. Upstate politicians would probably ********** up like they have every other creative initiative in the last ten years.
IMHO:
1. Petroleum based transportation systems are going to increase in cost of ownership and operation. (Automobile use and ownership is going to decrease as the century progresses)
2. Laws of Physics recommend steel wheel on steel rail, and electric traction power. (lowest coefficient of rolling resistance)
3. Rail requires less surface area to operate, and is ideal in high density population areas.
4. Unlike automobiles on roads, track capacity can scale up by adding cars to a train or increasing the frequency of their operation.
5. Rail and rolling stock have a proven record of durability and longevity in service.
6. We can't afford to keep exporting 400 billion bucks annually to feed our "oil habit".
7. Though maglev has less resistance, it consumes far more energy to levitate the vehicle, and since we have a finite fuel budget, it is not recommended at this time.

The overall winner is electric traction rail transit - in all forms: mainline, interurban, commuter, streetcar, light rail, subway, monorail, funicular, cogwheel, and tram.

Minor quibble: folks often confuse "light rail" with streetcars - which is reasonable, since it is a recent term.

Light rail or light rail transit (LRT) is a form of urban rail public transportation that generally has a lower capacity and lower speed than heavy rail and metro systems, but higher capacity and higher speed than traditional street-running tram systems. The term is typically used to refer to rail systems with rapid transit-style features that usually use electric rail cars operating mostly in private rights-of-way separated from other traffic but sometimes, if necessary, mixed with other traffic in city streets.

In many instances, cities don't need "light rail" - they need inexpensive street-running (at grade) streetcars / trams / strassenbahn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Rochester area
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top