[All] A Rapid Streetcar Form of Light Rail ?

[Robert Milligan]

Hi All,

This was just sent to a regional politician:


"The rapid streetcar concept takes the same features of light rail -  
speed, attractiveness, permanent tracks which draw large private  
investment and dedicated lanes - but uses slightly smaller vehicles  
and doesn't require massive relocation of underground services due to  
the lighter vehicles." (See
below inclusion)

This looks interesting as a possible way to lower costs, maintain  
performance, increase stop frequency & quiet critics?

Robert

PS: This is from a recent email (slightly improved) that I sent to  
GREN about T4ST.

"...  Susan recently wrote an op-ed pro light rail article because  
most members support it.  However, the complexity of LRT suggests  
likely room for improvement in our position. Because the larger  
community may have some unique LRT insights, it is to GREN's advantage  
to solicit & hear all criticisms and ideas. Especially when some of  
their concerns appear to be valid -- or a large # of people think they  
are -- then they should be given serious consideration. Unaddressed  
angry "taxpayers" can be very disruptive of necessary social &  
environmental advancement -- as the "tea baggers" in the US demonstrate.

As my previous email on Light Rail said, I agree with members of T4ST  
-- most of whom will likely never use any form of transit unless they  
lose their job &/or have to work in the GTA -- who say that Light Rail  
as currently designed can cause some "grave problems". However, I  
differ with their implied exaggerated conception of a "grave problem".  
For example, their co-chair has a business on King St. between the K&W  
downtowns. His "grave problem" is that taxpayers -- including he, his  
wife & their clients -- will be inconvenienced by the new equivalent  
one-wayness of King street & a raised track. To me this is a very  
minor sacrifice that some taxpayer-drivers will be asked to make for  
the sake of LRT speed & safety (exclusive car dominance has existed  
for too long). ...

A "grave problem" for me would be for foresightless planning to make  
-- on key arteries -- unnecessarily decreases in road capacity (King:  
4 lanes to 2) or  necessary road capacity increases difficult  
(Ottawa:  2 lanes to 4). And this with new environmentally-neutral car  
propulsion systems & growing core-populations!  Being more future- 
sensitive, we will need all the road space we can muster in order to  
avoid developing local traffic jams (making this area less desirable  
to live -- with attendant property value decreases [but resulting  
lower property taxes?] -- & visit). A very successful LRT will both  
attract more higher-level people as users but also not anger drivers  
in their green vehicles from transit-caused insufficient road  
capacity. Then we will better signify to the World that Waterloo  
Region has arrived as a modern municipal player on the World Stage. (I  
agree with T4ST on 1 thing though:  using the name Golden Triangle.)

This group certainly merits watching especially as they want to have a  
Rapid Transit referendum as part of the 2010 municipal elections.  
Maybe we should invite them to address GREN? Try to attend their  
meeting this evening & speak your thoughts."






Hamilton Light Rail

Light Rail. Right Now.
Home
About
About HLR
Introduction
Privacy Policy
Case Studies
A Ride on Bordeaux's LRT
Contact
Getting On the Right Track
Grenoble Rebalances its Transportation System
Grenoble's Lessons for Hamilton
Light Rail Lessons from Buffalo
Metro de Porto, Portugal
Ottawa's BRT Transitway: Modern Miracle or Mega-Mirage?
Portland Light Rail System
Possible Routes for Mountain LRT
Proposal: Light Rail on Main Street
Update coming from city for planned rapid transit neighbours
Variability in Light Rail Costs Per Kilometre
Why Developers Like Light Rail
Resources
An Economic Case for Light Rail
Eight Reasons Everyone Should Support Light Rail
HLR Presentation Video
Light Rail and Downtown Revitalization
Light Rail Presentation
Light Rail Quotes
LRT Endorsements
Presentation: The Case for LRT Made in Hamilton - DRAFT
Published Light Rail Reports
Publications
Economic Case for LRT
The Case for LRT "Made in Hamilton" - DRAFT
Why Everyone Should Support Light Rail
Sign Up
Log In
Getting On the Right Track
We can learn from Toronto and other cities and develop the right  
system for our city without the obstacles and negative side effects  
being incorporated.
By Jason Leach

  Toronto Star article discusses the ongoing battle in Toronto over  
dedicated streetcar lanes and their impact on neighbourhoods.

Our proposal for a streetcar line from McMaster to Eastgate is  
affordable and efficient, and will have a great impact on surrounding  
neighbourhoods. Here's why:

1. Cost

  'rapid streetcar' using modern streetcar vehicles is much cheaper to  
build than a full LRT system. Toronto is proposing an LRT system,  
which, of course, is much cheaper than a subway.

The rapid streetcar concept takes the same features of light rail -  
speed, attractiveness, permanent tracks which draw large private  
investment and dedicated lanes - but uses slightly smaller vehicles  
and doesn't require massive relocation of underground services due to  
the lighter vehicles.

2. Dedicated lanes, not Walls, Curbs and Obstacles

  rapid streetcar plan such as the one proposed to run both ways on  
Main Street would see streetcars in their own lane, but would still  
allow cars to make left turns at most streets and cross the tracks  
easily and safely. The raised curbs that are a feature of Toronto's  
streetcar lanes are rather clumsy obstacles for pedestrians, cyclists  
and vehicles.

In Portland or most European cities with modern streetcars it is  
common to see street parking on the "other side" of the tracks against  
the curb as well as pedestrians crossing the tracks with their  
groceries or cyclists crossing the tracks as necessary.

Obviously the train has the right of way, but we aren't talking about  
a bullet train speeding along killing people. Streetcars are designed  
to fit perfectly in the urban environment, not act as obstacles.

Streetcars blend into the cityscape. Feel like jaywalking, crossing  
the tracks on your bike or dropping someone off? Make sure no train is  
coming and go for it.


See more photos at Urbanplanet.

Note - the above photos from Portland show a streetcar that uses the  
same lanes as cars. Regardless, a double solid yellow line and signage  
would allow the same design to be used with a system using dedicated  
lanes. No curbs required.

3. Neighbourhood/Retail Impact

et's be brutally honest here. Main street is a shell of what it used  
to be and what it could be. In Toronto, some shopkeepers feel that the  
high curbs in the middle of the road and lack of parking have resulted  
in bad news for business in areas like Spadina that have always seemed  
to boom.

In Hamilton, five-lane freeways, tiny sidewalks and timed lights have  
killed once-bustling retail streets. We have parking coming out of our  
backsides, but few customers and many less shops than there should be.

Rapid streetcars would slow down the vehicle traffic on Main. Curb  
parking would be retained on the south curb along its entire length  
and folks could easily turn onto and off of side streets to find more  
parking.

More importantly, people and businesses would begin to show up in  
large numbers as a result of the streetcar line. The line shown in  
Portland in the photos above has seen $1.5 billion in private  
investment within a five minute walk of the tracks since opening.

Hamilton's east/west corridor has many underused lots and buildings. A  
streetcar along with a more pedestrian-friendly environment (think  
trees and benches along the entire corridor) would revitalize  
neighbourhoods that have been ignored for too long.

LRT spaces stops apart quite far. A rapid streetcar would take a  
medium approach, having stops spaced out further than a typical bus  
route, but not as great a distance as with LRT.

4. Transportation Options

ven though walking or cycling aren't directly mentioned as a benefit  
of a rapid streetcar, they are natural byproducts of this project.  
Right now people have one realistic option for traversing Main Street  
- their car. Streetcars still allow for two eastbound vehicle lanes,  
but having lights controlled for the streetcars instead of autos would  
make it quicker to get from downtown to Eastgate or Eastgate to Mac in  
the streetcar.

Furthermore, balancing the transportation modes on Main Street would  
automatically result in more cyclists and pedestrians. Cyclists would  
feel safer to ride their bikes on a normal city street whereas right  
now Main Street is not much different than the QEW. More shops,  
condos, restaurants and streetcar users means more people getting on  
and off trains, running errands, going out for coffee or just walking  
the dog.

Main Street would start to look like a proper, urban street once  
again. Public art, benches, trees, flowers, patios and sidewalk  
displays would turn an empty, concrete canyon into a wonderful street  
for local residents and visitors.

Hamilton is establishing a rapid transit office at city hall. I  
strongly urge those involved in the Transit Steering Committee and in  
this new transit office to research the modern/rapid streetcar  
concept. Bus Rapid Transit will be well-used east/west along the  
Mountain and various north/south routes such as Centennial/Hwy 20.

Our urban east/west corridor is the most logical place for a modern  
streetcar system. The financial benefits would be incredible and the  
impact on Hamilton's economy would be fantastic.

We can learn from Toronto and other cities and develop the right  
system for our city without the obstacles and negative side effects  
being incorporated. Hamilton's future is in the tracks.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20091112/571de004/attachment.html>