In Search of a City: Cleve’s First Guest Blogger
This week Cleve welcomes guest blogger, Steve Sevell. He shares his thoughts on public transit, along with some cool pics.
And a disclaimer (please read this in your head at a very fast pace like those TV commercial speed-talkers): the views and opinions expressed by guest bloggers may or may not reflect the views and opinions of DowntownColumbus.com and its affiliated parties.
STREETCARS OFF ON THE WRONG TRACK
I believe there are problems for electric streetcars in Columbus, especially in the Short North and OSU, where the first streetcars would run, such as:
- taking up critical lanes of traffic;
- cutting down on the very limited parking;
- rails catching bicycle tires and women’s heels;
- the overhead electric wires they run on are exceptionally ugly;
- the 2.8 mile stretch of track, costing $103 million, is outrageous; and
- they can only run on expensive tracks, limiting routes and destinations.
So streetcars aren’t nearly as cool as they might seem at first.
If we considered the next generation of futuristic electric buses, we could achieve all of the good with none of the bad. Delft University of Technology (Netherlands) has designed a “Superbus”, which looks like something Batman would use to commute to work. Being on wheels, it requires no new, expensive infrastructure.
Matter of fact, turns out Las Vegas has taken steps to improve their mass transit. Take a look at their new buses! Congratulations LVTA!
How about Columbus riding into the 21st century with some new sets of wheels? So instead of being like other cities, we could do something different. Something better.
Tags: Downtown Columbus, Public Transportation, Short North, streetcars
January 12th, 2010 at 11:17 am
I was in favor of the streetcars primarily because I have seen them be successful in other cities such as San Francisco and Portland Oregon. That success may not necessarily translate here, though. The primary corridors for streetcars would be radically transformed to accommodate them and not for the better (as outlined in the article). All told, I do see buses as the solution. To be a real harbinger of change, we would need to push for what is appropriate for 2010 and beyond. My fear, though, is that buses will open the door to compromise and we end up with the same old COTA. Too many in this town are satisfied with mediocrity and we seem to eager to coddle those that protest any expense whatsoever even if it increases our quality of life and elevates our stature among other large cities. In other words, damn the torpedoes and give us some progress here. We have not seen any substantive change to this city in far too long.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:34 am
I’m also critical of the streetcar, or even light rail. Bus Rapid Transit, such as the Las Vegas example, can be far better value for money than a rail track-based option. With BRT, we could also get to a much more extensive network a lot faster.
However, BRT means a lot more than just nicer buses. It’s also exclusive right-of-ways, timed or controlled lights, better stations (that resemble light rail stations) and other features that provide advantages over a typical bus system or route. And this requires investment in infrastructure, though nowhere near as expensive as streetcar or rail.
In this regard, the article’s first two criticisms of the streetcar idea (”taking up critical lanes of traffic” and “cutting down on the very limited parking”) would also apply to BRT. I think this is fine, because driving and parking have to be more painful in order for people to consider using transit. If you only have flashy looking buses without the BRT infrastructure, then it’d be a bigger waste of money than the streetcar.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
With both Battelle and The Ohio State University located here, why are they not working together (or even separately) to devise the next generation bus that can get us where we’re going at a lot less than $100,000,000+? Ohio State has a group (on Kinnear Road) devoted to transportation research and I imagine Battelle has a similar department…and they are minutes away from each other. This could be the most environmentally friendly project that would benefit not only Columbus but the entire nation. Come on you guys, what are you waiting for?
January 12th, 2010 at 10:36 pm
I think a very important fact that is forgotten is that our urban neighborhoods were in fact built around the streetcar, so of course they would work. However, I don’t think the stretch of N High that was planned is the best first route, but not for reasons mentioned here. Parking would overall not have to be sacrificed since most of N High is two-lanes. As long as the streetcar utilizes the left hand lane and rubber infills that remain flat except for the weight of streetcar wheels to avoid bike tires, shoes, dogs, etc getting stuck, you get to have a streetcar and maintain parking. Of course, you could have the streetcar occupy most of the right lanes, but conflicts would arise where the streetcar would need to get over in the left lane to pass the parking lane.
The main reason for why I don’t think N High needs a streetcar is because it’s already up, not up-and-coming, meaning that the impact would not be as noticeable as say a W. Broad streetcar that goes through Franklinton and Highland West, whose stretch of W Broad is the 2nd most intact urban street in the city: it’s just way below its potential. Also, there is no stretch where you have only one lane for traffic in either direction. Here there is always a left-hand lane, so the streetcar could easily just use the right-hand one. Not only that, but there are active efforts in both neighborhoods to improve residential streets. A charette has been designed for a more pedestrian-friendly W Broad in Highland West and the Home Again program has added new homes and renovated others in Franklinton, while there’s even an arts space up for grabs on Broad near Josie’s Pizza that they’re trying to get occupied. Let’s put the streetcar where it can make a real positive difference so that this city of 750,000 has more than one major street to offer residents and visitors.
Unfortunately, developers for whatever reason are less likely to build along bus lines. We know that COTA in its current and past forms hasn’t exactly spurred development along Cleveland Ave, Livingston Ave, Parsons, W. Broad, etc, and isn’t considered a factor for new development on N High. Buying new buses for COTA and not addressing important problems (too many stops too close to each other, too much focus on providing regular service to sprawling burbs several miles from the core where no one uses a bus, lack of shelters and maps and timetables, etc) isn’t going to do what the streetcar could by providing transportation and anchoring a butt-load of development.
What needs to be done regardless of rail is an overhaul of our major streets to make them more pedestrian-friendly and cyclist-friendly. Since we’re not offering residents or visitors streetcars, light-rail, BRT, or a schwebebahn ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuppertal_Schwebebahn )
how about making our streets better for pedestrians, cyclists, & scooterists? Pedestrians should not have to walk a quarter mile or more before reaching a traffic light to cross the street like they do today on Parsons, E Livingston, E Main, Sullivant, W 5th Ave, etc. On those same streets signage should be up like it is for N High, along with the soon-to-come sharrows. More scooter-only parking needs to be added in Downtown, Short North, German Village, and OSU neighborhoods. I can’t help but think that the price of all of the above combined would pale in comparison to Cleveland’s $197 million 4 mile BRT line and could be almost instantly implemented, if the city government wanted that.
http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2009/11/rtas_euclid_avenue_healthline.html
I just find talk about rail options in this city to be fruitless. We’re not going to have a line up in running in 2012 or 2014 and once we decide we want it it’ll be yet another couple years before we can even use it. Let’s focus on improving what we’ve got (our streets) for personal mobility choices other than the automobile. And is it too much to ask for COTA to get its act together?