Nicollet-Central Streetcar

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2753
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby mulad » February 6th, 2013, 3:05 pm

You're not wrong, of course, but if you're living in an area as dense as where you live, you shouldn't be buying tickets at $2.25 a go anyway - a metropass is $60 a month and at that point it's a fixed cost that allows you to ride as much as you want.
I wonder if there would be a simple way to reduce the cost, though. My wife and I are in a similar boat, although in a much less dense neighborhood than 18th/Nicollet. But we're still near two bus lines that go downtown and crosstown at least every half hour. A metropass does not work since we either work from home or have to drive to other meetings a few days a week, not to mention that we're both provided with "free" parking (I realize that's a whole different issue). But what about running errands, going to dinner, etc? There are a lot of trips where we could take the 46 or 14 but the reality is that we drive because $1.75x2x2, $7, is more expensive than our marginal cost to drive somewhere together and park on a street for free.
Of course, if you had taken the bus home from work, a transfer might still be valid to go out and do something later. A lot can be done in that 2.5-hour transfer window if destinations are close and you time things right (or have high-frequency service). Doesn't help Metro Transit's bottom line, but whatever. But even though $1.75 or $2.25 isn't very much, people do see that as a significant amount compared to "free" cars. I still think it might not be a bad idea for Metro Transit to set their fare at $1 and just get rid of transfers, simply because of consumer psychology, but it would require people to hunt for change in their pockets more often.

Anyway, the most direct way to get people to change their behaviors regarding taking the bus vs. driving would be to implement paid parking. Then the bus fare seems cheaper (and easier if you have something in the Go-To card family).

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby MNdible » February 6th, 2013, 3:40 pm

From an incentives point of view, it might make sense to look towards a fairly fine-toothed zone pricing. I know there are real problems with the execution of that, but there's no reason that a 6 block ride should cost the same as a 60 block ride.

helsinki
Landmark Center
Posts: 289
Joined: October 9th, 2012, 2:01 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby helsinki » February 7th, 2013, 1:13 am

I think streetcars would measure favorably in this comparison. Especially in the long term, because they have lower maintenance costs, lower fuel costs, and higher capacity than buses.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but can anybody point to some real numbers regarding these claims?

I am dubious of the capacity question -- I don't see any reason why a streetcar would have higher capacity than an articulated bus.
The issue was investigated in Portland: http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statem ... ity-rider/

The loud anti-streetcar ("I'm not anti-streetcar, just against emotional transit mode decision-making based on transitory cultural norms" ie "Streetcars are a bad idea") Jarrett Walker even admits the capacity point:

"The best reason to convert a bus to a tram, or to build trams instead of a bus line, is because you need a higher capacity -- in riders / driver -- than you can handle on buses." See http://www.humantransit.org/munich/

Transport for London says maximum bus capacity is 6,000 "pphpd" (people per hour per direction) whereas a tram maxium capacity is 12,000 pphpd. See http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena/course/ ... _m1679.pdf

Also, let's not forget the comfort quotient. I love riding the bus (convenience, cost, people watching, etc). I can't with a straight face claim that it's a smooth ride. It can get pretty bumpy. Trams offer a smooth ride, which is good for all those standing passengers - greatly increasing capacity over articulated busses, I think.

And for any German speakers, here is a good article explaining the success of new tram systems in France and their superiority over existing bus lines: http://www.ringstrassenbahn.at/uploads/ ... system.pdf

TWA
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 132
Joined: December 27th, 2012, 11:49 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby TWA » February 7th, 2013, 8:39 am

I know we technically should not build public transport for "infrequent" or "visitors" because you cannot accurately rely on those fares, but clearly a streetcar would increase ridership with those groups. Does it matter? Maybe not. But making your city more enticing to use public transport to visitors surely is a benefit. And many people for whatever reason have an aversion to using buses. I have an aunt in Apple Valley that would never ever use the bus system. She would however take the LRT and would also take streetcars. Sure, some people like her are such infrequent users that it doesn't matter, but for every person like that, there is another who would become more comfortable with public transport from a trolley/streetcar and then would start using all types of public transport.

I just think making the public transport system more user-friendly or less intimidating to all types of people would help ridership across the board and should not be ignored. IMO, you can't strictly look at cost/benefit analysis and ridership.

On another completely random tangent, Portland has free ridership within the downtown area called "free rail zone" i believe it is free lrt and streetcar within a certain area. Maybe an "after 8 pm" or "free weekends" would boost ridership and curb drinking and driving?

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby MNdible » February 7th, 2013, 8:58 am

I haven't had time to read through everything you posted yet, but I was struck by the tram image posted in the Munich link above. Obviously, yes, you can theoretically make a tram infinitely long, and thereby increase its ridership to infinity.

I have a hard time believing that whatever we're running on Nicollet is going to be any longer than a typical articulated bus, and therefore, I have a hard time believing that its capacity will be any higher. The platforms required for much longer vehicles are going to freak people out. Anyway, at the frequencies that I'd like to see this service running (5-7 minutes at peak), I'd expect that an articulated bus should be able to provide capacity well in excess of current demand.

Anecdotally (based on what I've seen and not real research), the only route that couldn't really accommodate demand with articulated buses was the 16/50.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1533
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby talindsay » February 7th, 2013, 9:19 am

I'm not going to bother to look up the actual numbers right now, though if anybody doubts their veracity I can do so later. The thing is, a standard streetcar vehicle is ~65' long, compared to 60' for the articulated bus. BUT, the streetcar is wider, taller, and more square, and hence makes better use of its space. A 65' streetcar can hold a surprisingly larger number of people than a 60' bus - I want to say it's 30% more, though I'm spitballing on that. Another thing to keep in mind: while technically a 60' transit bus *can* carry standees, the truth is that once buses are going more than about 5 mph, it's pretty rough to be a standee - and they provide very little space for it anyway. Streetcars can carry more standees than sitting passengers, and many passengers actually *choose* to stand - even when seats are available - which also raises the capacity. Wider vehicles means wider aisles, and that in combination with a very smooth ride means the seating capacity is a much smaller portion of overall capacity on streetcars than on buses.

The thing is, 60' articulated buses are awful. I don't know anybody who *likes* sitting in the back portion of an articulated bus. They are a necessity for high-capacity bus lines, but they're an inherently compromising solution. The standard 40' transit buses provide a significantly better ride quality; assuming ride quality is a priority at all, I would argue you have to compare streetcars to standard 40' buses, and of course a streetcar carries more than double the passengers of a standard 40' transit bus while maintaining a better ride quality.

mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2753
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby mulad » February 7th, 2013, 9:53 am

What he said. Plus, many rail vehicles remove a lot of the seats to make more room for standees. The Portland streetcars have very few seats, but then again their routes have been fairly short (though they're getting longer).

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby mattaudio » February 7th, 2013, 10:00 am

Also, recently I've been trying to place a value on some of the necessities of rail that are just niceties with bus lines. Jarrett Walker has talked about this, how things like offboard fare payment, station amenities, and segments of dedicated ROW are mode agnostic and therefore not inherent to rail. While that's true, I think it's also true that there are certain certainties/risks associated with bus vs rail. Rail requires more attention to detail for station placement, a sense of permanency at stations rather than a small sign and a bench, etc. Of course these could all happen with buses, but often they get cut due to budget constraints. Dedicated lanes are always under threat to become regular lanes, whereas dedicated rails through a square or some other non-street area are not under that thread without reconstruction. Etc. I think it's fair to discuss the political realities of transit development, why Portland streetcars are nice and why Red Line BRT will suck.

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1767
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby Tcmetro » February 7th, 2013, 10:33 am

No dedicated lanes are being proposed for Nicollet-Central. Why would we throw money at something that will be just as slow as a bus?

The bus improvements aren't really too expensive. Building bus bulbs every few blocks would be quite cheap. A nice bus shelter probably costs around $5-10K, printing better maps and information requires an addition to the printing contract, 40 foot buses could be replaced with articulated buses. Improving the bus service would probably cost something like $10-20 million and travel times and capacity would be the similar to the $160 million streetcar.

I would be more likely to favor the streetcar if parking was to be eliminated and dedicated lanes were proposed, but that looks to be quite unrealistic at this point.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby mattaudio » February 7th, 2013, 10:49 am

That's why we should be starting with Hennepin-University instead of Nicollet Central :) We'd preserve Nicollet for a future cut-cover north-south spine, could put aBRT on Nicollet/Central for now, and have a streetcar starter that connects Uptown, Loring Park, Downtown, Near Northeast, and the U. And we could use David Levinson's idea, removing thru access on Hennepin in order to create more dedicated ROW for streetcar. http://goo.gl/maps/a0y7a

UptownSport
Target Field
Posts: 577
Joined: July 23rd, 2012, 12:07 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby UptownSport » February 7th, 2013, 12:22 pm

Lots of quality research
Thanks for the great contribution!


A streetcar is required in Munich: You'll spill your beer on a bus.
Image
the streetcar is wider, taller, and more square, and hence makes better use of its space.
Huge wheelwells for 11R22.5's steer and jounce clearance, and duals intrude into bus passenger space

UptownSport
Target Field
Posts: 577
Joined: July 23rd, 2012, 12:07 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby UptownSport » February 7th, 2013, 12:44 pm

"streetcars carry more people than buses … you attract more riders who don't ride transit now, and actually the operating costs are not any greater than the bus."
There's more favorable measurements than even this, a train can push mass amounts of snow, and isn't affected by ice, + no flats!
It's quiet, being electric-
Operating costs subset: I understand Minneapolis PCC are still in service somewhere, 1982 buses?
I don't know how to say it exactly, but there's something that'd make it a good match for eat street business over bus.

Is capacity even relevant on 18?

Several of us were refused on a 6 due to being full.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby MNdible » February 7th, 2013, 1:03 pm

Honest question -- Why would (how could) a streetcar be wider than a bus?

Again, do people think that this additional capacity is actually needed when the streetcar is running at very high frequencies?

User avatar
Andrew_F
Rice Park
Posts: 409
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 10:15 pm
Location: Stevens Square

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby Andrew_F » February 7th, 2013, 2:54 pm

Not that this is 100% relevant, but since we're talking about standing comfort and bus/streetcar capacity, I thought I would mention that CTA has some buses now that have aisle-facing seating for the entire low-floor section. It's interesting, but they have to have plastic dividers throughout, presumably as a safety measure to prevent 60 people from all flying across the bus at once.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby twincitizen » February 8th, 2013, 12:51 pm

Regarding MNdible's comment about frequency vs capacity, that is one of my biggest worries with streetcar in this corridor. Currently the Route 18 runs every 7-8 minutes most of the day. I'm worried that streetcars are so expensive, the frequency might be 10 or *gasp* 15 minutes! At those frequencies (assuming no buses filling gaps) you probably will need a streetcar, if not an LRV.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1533
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby talindsay » February 8th, 2013, 7:01 pm

Honest question -- Why would (how could) a streetcar be wider than a bus?
When buses pass each other going opposite directions, they first separate themselves to the outside of the lane. There's a reason for that - rubber-tired vehicles can be pushed around their lane by the buffetting of two vehicles passing close together. You need lots of operational room for error so that you don't lose control of the vehicle. That's why highway lanes are 13 feet wide even though cars are only 6 feet wide - and the biggest trucks are nowhere near 13 feet. The extra space allows maneuvering space. This is all obvious and elementary.

Rail vehicles don't need any maneuvering room - just enough to prevent the most extreme wind vortexes. This is why light rail vehicles can run in a narrower corridor than buses even though they're wider. Similarly, a streetcar can be wider because its movements can be known with precision - if it overhangs the tracks by three feet on each side, it will always take up exactly three feet to either side of the track, regardless of anything the operator does and regardless of any conditions short of a derailment. Whereas all rubber-tired vehicles have a massive need for "squish space" on either side a rail vehicle needs zero. So this space can be taken up with more vehicle.

It's probably self-evident why they're taller, and also why they're boxier. All this results in quite a bit more space for the same length.

UptownSport
Target Field
Posts: 577
Joined: July 23rd, 2012, 12:07 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby UptownSport » February 8th, 2013, 10:06 pm

I heard bus lines have MUCH higher capacity than rail, you can run a bus in two-second intervals, trains you can't

mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2753
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby mulad » February 8th, 2013, 10:43 pm

Well maybe, kinda sorta. Of course, in Curitiba, Brazil, they claim to have a capacity of 36,000 people per hour -- I can't say whether they ever actually get that high or can sustain that level for anything more than the peak of the rush hours. Streetfilms had some videos about Curitiba a while back, and here's one of them

http://vimeo.com/12499536

(Hmm, we seem to have lost the magic video embed option in the new theme, or at least the post composer doesn't have a button for it.)

They talk about a double-articulated bus every 30 seconds. Buses can run more frequently if they aren't stopping, of course, but you do run into problems at super-frequent levels where people just can't board and alight fast enough (I think they have passing zones in station areas, though).

But anyway, a train (particularly subway/LRT) can definitely be thought of as a bunch of buses strung together. Streetcars are typically much more bus-like, though there are some places where multiple streetcars get linked together into trains, making vehicles with more capacity than even double-articulated buses (and, as has been mentioned, probably with better ride quality).

I also suspect that rails simply hold up better to heavily-loaded public transportation -- roadway designers have to deal with the 4th-power rule, where a vehicle that weighs twice as much actually does 16x as much damage to a road surface. Buses get very heavy and can really demolish roads. LRVs are overly heavy too, but at least we know exactly what's causing the damage and don't have to worry about all of the other vehicles (except at grade crossings, I suppose).

UptownSport
Target Field
Posts: 577
Joined: July 23rd, 2012, 12:07 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby UptownSport » February 9th, 2013, 10:01 am

(Standard) Rail has immense ground support, a GoodYear; a tiny area

In any case, didn't mean to get thread into meaningless facts on irrelevant subjects! :D

And, I didn't realize 18 was high frequency, and was thinking more of the lazy traffic pace on lower eat street, so thought a trolley would be 'cute'.
Soooo suburbanite, I know :oops:

helsinki
Landmark Center
Posts: 289
Joined: October 9th, 2012, 2:01 am

Re: Nicollet-Central Corridor

Postby helsinki » February 11th, 2013, 8:00 am

The platforms required for much longer vehicles are going to freak people out.
I wonder if there is a misperception with streetcar skepticism that huge LRT style stations are required. I assume that on Nicollet / Central we would see stations like on Washington DC's H Street:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/beyonddc/5889458507/

Essentially, these stations are just raised bulb-outs with a nice unobtrusive sheltered area and some landscaping. Nothing freaky.

Downtown, Nicollet Mall could imitate Aleksanterinkatu in Helsinki:

http://static.toinenlinja.fi/web/02/021 ... inkatu.jpg

(note the low-floor entry - presumably we would have the same thing here in Minneapolis given our ADA compliance craziness. This makes the stops themselves especially innocuous.)


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests