Build the Transit First! (compared, property, electric, environment)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Compare that to Seattle's "25 million" (ignoring planning, environmental review, maintenance facility) per mile. Seattle's streetcar carries <3,000, or less than one fifth of what a two-lane urban road with bike lanes would cost. That's "ideal capacity" for a two-lane arterial, not theoretically capacity.
The real world doesn't give two hoots about theoretical capacity. "High Capacity" BART Trans-Bay Tube took decades to take off. No one road it for the longest time. Why? It was too slow. BART hasn't gotten any faster, but all other routes have gotten a lot slower. People naturally gravitate to the transit that makes the most sense. With parking, time sitting in traffic, tolls... BART suddenly makes sense, which is why so many people use it. People aren't dumb, they'll use what makes sense, which is usually the car. What made BART attractive was congestion of vehicle traffic. Now, like everything else in the Bay Area, it's at capacity or beyond at peak hours. Cost of an expanded Trans-Bay is estimated at $5-10 billion, eerily similar to the Bay Bridge is costing. It's only a matter of time until it happens. $10 billion so another 100,000 can work in San Francisco and live in suburban communities... small price to pay. That's $100,000 a worker. Seen the cost of housing in San Francisco vs middle-class parts of the East Bay? $100,000 isn't that much.
Streetcar lines like Seattle's are intended as starter lines to be expanded--the cost of $50 million for a mile of track ignores the fact that the track only costs a fraction of that amount--most of the cost is for the basic infrastructure, vehicle service facility, transformers, and vehicles. So expanding won't cost $50 million a mile, since the basic infrastructure is there and the service will reach more people. And, generally, modern streetcars are used as a development tool--one end is where people already want to be, like a CBD, and the other end is in an area where you are trying to promote denser development. Having the streetcar already there means you don't have to make so much room for autocentric infrastructure because there is an alternate transit mode. Note that this doesn't mean "don't build streets," but it does mean you don't have to provide as many parking lots, driveways etc. which takes away from overall building density and walkability.
Wikipedia gives some costs of light rail and highway construction. Light rail (that is not in Seattle) doesn't seem too pricey; the bigger problem is the ridership is often rather low.
Seems like in general US construction costs are higher. Alon Levy gives some examples for rapid transit (mostly underground); including that 7 line extension that's a modern day example of building transit first:
I'd be very surprised if N-Judah, which is San Francisco's busiest light rail line, carries 13,000 passengers an hour. And note that N-Judah is so overcrowded it requires buses at peak commute hours. If one assumes a two-hour rushour on each end, 13,000 per hour means negative 7,000 people board during the rest of the day. The NX express buses run from 6:30-9 am and 4-7 pm during "peak" hours and are carrying 5-7k a day, which is included in the N-Judah 45k daily ridership, so that's actually negative 12k-14.
I'd be very surprised if N-Judah, which is San Francisco's busiest light rail line, carries 13,000 passengers an hour. And note that N-Judah is so overcrowded it requires buses at peak commute hours. If one assumes a two-hour rushour on each end, 13,000 per hour means negative 7,000 people board during the rest of the day. The NX express buses run from 6:30-9 am and 4-7 pm during "peak" hours and are carrying 5-7k a day, which is included in the N-Judah 45k daily ridership, so that's actually negative 12k-14.
Maybe the 13,000 is Caltrain?
I assumed the 13,000 per hour peak direction is when most of the lines converge together under Market St. Ditto with Boston's 9,000 per hour, which uses light rail similar to San Francisco (surface in the outer parts, then the line converge to one underground as a subway in the city core).
I don't know much about Seattle, but the current route doesn't seem to make much sense. 1.3 miles is a very short distance, if you have to wait more than a couple minutes for the streetcar, or if point A or point B are a bit East or West of the route, you might as well walk. For it to work, there should be very low headways (less than 5min), which is insanely expensive if you don't have a high ridership. Therefore, it only really makes sense if you have a route that's connecting very major destinations, like a major transit hub and a very dense office district, and other destinations within 1-2 blocks of stops.
And who wants to pay $2.50 one-way fare to go such a short distance?
Doesn't make sense to me. It's been five years and still only 1.3 miles has been rolled out. That has to be a new world record for sluggishness on an infrastructure project, worthy of the third world. But that would be an insult to the third world which is probably faster. China builds HSR at the rate of hundreds of miles a month in contrast to one mile of a simple streetcar line in five years lol. I wonder if my kids would still be alive by the time Seattle starts and completes work on the next mile long segment? At this miserable pace the system is basically useless while tying up vast amounts of money.
It's not that there isn't anything along Seattle's streetcar, but there is a lot less. It mostly connects the CBD (but doesn't go through it) to a moderate amount of residents, a few stores and a small office district. There does seem to be a fair bit of development around the streetcar, so ridership will probably rise, but in order to be truly successful, I think the streetcar should be extended along Eastlake, as is planned. This will connect it the University of Washington, as well as some moderately dense neighbourhoods. The main thing though is that the areas at either end of this extended routes are too far apart to walk, and major destinations.
When I was in Seattle, I never noticed the streetcar. The light rail and electric? buses go through an underground tunnel with 5 stops through the CBD. It's free in the underground zone. If you get on one of the buses in the CBD, it's easier to stay on them after they exit the tunnel rather than switch to the streetcar system.
It may be that TOD will simply change form a little. I think some of it right now is a nostalgia movement to go back to the "good old days", which weren't really all that good for all that many people.
Perhaps. But an interest in some things that were common 100 years ago doesn't mean an interest in recreating lifestyles or even nostalgia of the "good old days". For example, I almost always prefer towns and city laid and built up a long time ago rather than recently; I generally (but not always prefer) old home styles rather than new ones. The town I live in was mostly built up by 100 years ago. Its age, or at least having a layout that was common in that era rather than today, might be one of the reasons I specifically chose to live here. But while I have a bit of interest in history, I have no interest in things being the way they used to be; other than the buildings the culture of where I live has changed drastically in 100 years.
Housing and health conditions were often poor in cities a long time ago but in the same areas today they are usually much better due to better living standards in general and technology.
I also don't see TOD as old-fashioned or a novelty since there are places in the Northeast I'm familiar with TOD that were built in the "old days" and still function well and the transit is still there. Don't see why there can't be more similar development today; it's more ignored than outdated in my view. It never went completely out of style in Europe; the original post on this thread was a European example. Here's another (probably much older):
I think it would be helpful for there to be a standard definition of "Transit Oriented Development". But I guess that's like trying for a standard defintion of "suburban", probably a pipe dream.
Actially, IIRC, the train stations of my youth actually were in kind of seedy areas of town, with no frou-frou coffee shops, boutiques, etc surrouding them. Of course, my hometown didn't have much of that stuff period.
When I was in Seattle, I never noticed the streetcar. The light rail and electric? buses go through an underground tunnel with 5 stops through the CBD. It's free in the underground zone. If you get on one of the buses in the CBD, it's easier to stay on them after they exit the tunnel rather than switch to the streetcar system.
Hybrid buses that were specifically designed to run in "stealth" mode through the tunnel on electric power only for both noise and pollution reasons.
The Streetcar runs along Westlake between Roy and Stewart. There's honestly not a whole lot there that a tourist would go to see. It's a weird mixture of corporate glass (Amazon, biomed, condos) and old brick (warehouses, autoparts stores). Vivace/Alley24 and the REI area was busy when I was there (2008). I always preferred the old Vivace Roasteria in Capitol Hill, which was seized along with Twice Told Tales to dig the hole for the LINK UW extension which is scheduled to open in 2016. Eventually they have plants to actually build stuff on two non-contiguous city blocks that are part of the Capitol Hill station. Ground floor retail, maybe some offices, and affordable housing.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
