The MT Position

 Posted by Brendan B. Read

On Thursday Jan.21, two Bombardier Flexity Outlook streetcars, borrowed from STIB, the Brussels transit agency, started rolling on the Olympic Line, a demonstrator addition to Vancouver, B.C., Canada’s transit system built for the 2010 Winter Olympics that begins Feb.12. The two ‘trams’ will operate free of charge until March 21 from the Olympic Village Canada Line rapid transit station 1.1 miles to the popular (and traffic-congested) shopping and entertainment hub of Granville Island, on the south shore of False Creek near the city’s downtown.

Bombardier’s participation in the project has already been paying off. Company officials report that Seattle streetcar representatives have already visited the line. The city of Seattle with Sound Transit, is building a $132 million streetcar route from the International District to First Hill and Capitol Hill in conjunction with the Link light rail extension to the University of Washington. The key selling point is the Flexity’s 100 percent low-floor layout, unlike the partial low-floor Skoda/Inekon streetcars in service on the city’s South Lake Union line.

Whether the Olympic Line continues service after March 21 and is extended beyond its present endpoints — the city of Vancouver is envisioning a network linking the downtown core, Stanley Park and the north shore of False Creek — depends on funding. With federal and provincial government representatives politely smiling on the same stand, Mayor Gregor Robertson made the pitch for money at the event. In the audience was former TransLink CEO Tom Prendergast who had flown in for the opening.

Vancouver’s transit has been facing the milder but still impacting version of an Olympic-sized funding crisis that has gripped transit agencies continent-wide. Prendergast left TransLink amidst financing disputes between local governments and the province that put the long-promised Evergreen Line SkyTrain extension to the northeast plus new bus routes to the growing but atrociously underserved areas in the southeast on hold, with fare hikes on the way. He became president of MTA New York City Transit just as the agency is planning service cuts as well as eliminating fare discounts and slicing administration costs to close a $383 million budget gap.

New York City is in the same rattling subway car as Chicago, Cleveland, San Diego and Salt Lake City to list just a few names on the growing list of transit agencies facing making cuts and as a last alternative raising fares — even as many of them receive ARRA money to buy equipment, renovate stations and maintenance facilities, and build new lines.

If it sounds strange that service is being chopped and fares are being hiked while new buses and railcars are being bought and bus and rail rapid transit projects are being constructed it is. And that’s precisely what’s wrong with American transit financing. There is no linkage between capital (federal) and operating (state/local) cost coverage.

Where the rubber literally meets the road is maintenance, which has been a local responsibility. Yet the billions in federal money invested on infrastructure and equipment risks going to waste if there is no money allocated to keep the assets in a state of good repair. The ARRA has some money for it but nowhere is it enough to meet transit agency needs.

The federal government has to step up to the plate here because the states and cities have boxed themselves in by relying on downturn-vulnerable sales taxes; it is next to impossible at this point for them to shift to more stable property taxes, which Canadian systems rely on, and which have dampened though not eliminated cuts and hikes there.

Washington should start financing transit system maintenance costs. In turn it should require applicant agencies and states to develop more stable operating support financing plans, including real estate transfer taxes where new transit services have boosted property values, plus have proven land-use policies that limit transit-killing and environment-damaging sprawl.

This last measure is being advocated in Canada in efforts to get transit-dedicated revenue from the federal gas tax. While the Canadian government streams money from it to local governments they have the discretion to spend the cash as they wish, which means in smaller communities, transit, outweighed by the road interests, gets little if anything and sometimes nothing.

Resolving today’s transit financing crisis will take an effort akin to competing in the Olympics. Yet the needs and the outcomes: increased greener, energy-secure mobility, healthier cities and towns, and a stronger economy, merits the toil and the dollars.

Brendan Read is a freelance journalist living in Vancouver.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit editor

It’s a landmark week for public transportation. The federal government has put its money where its mouth is to the tune of $8 billion for high-speed rail in the United States. Now the hype begins. Transit directors need to be wary, though, as that groundswell of support for rail could quickly turn against you — even if you deliver just what you promised. Just ask Steve Jobs.

You could argue that there hasn’t been a product in recent history that has been so supremely overhyped as the Apple “iPad.” If wishes were horses this thing could replace every electronic device in your home and tuck you in bed at night. Of course, this wasn’t going to be the case. Apple never promised us such a device. Heck, Apple never promised us anything about the device — which is typical for them.

And President Obama and his administration are in the same boat when it comes to high-speed rail. Have they promised us flying trains and near-instantaneous transportation? No. The administration never promised us that.

But we need to be careful now that the funds have been given not to build up high-speed rail into “High-Speed Rail” ala the famous monorail bit from the Simpsons. I had a long discussion about the benefits of the nascent Madison-Milwaukee extension to Amtrak’s Hiawatha line with members of my family. Their general viewpoint was, “What’s the point?” This became especially evident when they learned the train probably wouldn’t be traveling upwards of 200 miles per hour or reduce the time of a trip from Madison to Milwaukee to less than 30 minutes. Simply put, their expectations were a lot higher than reality — which was the case when the iPad was unveiled by Steve Jobs yesterday.

The Internet today is filled to the brim with stories and (lots of) comments about how the iPad is just a bigger iPhone and doesn’t do anything fundamentally different. It really has no place when it doesn’t do what a netbook can do and is already handled by an iPhone. Oh and it doesn’t have a camera or a phone.

Sound familiar?

The high-speed trains really have no place when they don’t do anything an airplane can do and is already handled by a car. Oh and it doesn’t have Wi-Fi or a stop at the end of my block.

A good friend of mine and a devout railfan said to me this morning that he would believe the Madison-Milwaukee Hiawatha Line when, “he saw the tracks.” I just hope that like the iPad, when he does see the tracks the hype surrounding the project doesn’t kill all the excitement of having it for him.

Be sure to check back on Tuesday when we unveil our latest creation, On the Line, a new regular blog by Mark Foss, a 20+-year transit veteran who can weigh-in on issues from the trenches so to speak.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn page!

Posted by Mark Foss

This year King County Metro plans to begin its new RapidRide service.  RapidRide is bus rapid transit (BRT) service intended to increase service frequency, speed and reliability along several dedicated surface street corridors.  The first of five planned RapidRide lines will begin service in 2010, the rest are to commence operation between 2011 and 2013.

I’m a fan of the BRT concept.  I like the idea of dedicated roadways, control of non-transit traffic and signal priority.  I like very much the idea of automated payment systems that speed up boarding.  A transit operator should have as little to do with fare collection as possible.   I like the idea of AVL (GPS) systems that work well.  But I also liked BRT’s predecessor — limited stop express service — which costs less.  Does BRT deliver better service for the investment?  I think it can.  But there are operational hurdles to meet.  Here are a few of my concerns:

RapidRide’s Line A will use a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane that isn’t completely separated from other traffic.  Traffic enforcement will be necessary to keep cheaters from clogging the bus lanes.  If the HOV lane isn’t kept moving, BRT won’t deliver on its promise.  King County’s RapidRide Line A will pass through more than one jurisdiction — each with its own traffic enforcement priorities.  Enforcement must be one of those priorities.

Relying on sophisticated technology to keep the busses moving on time could also be problematic.  For example, resolving Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) problems — either during initial implementation or on-going operations — could cause service to slow down.   Some BRT projects have had problems implementing TSP systems, in part due to the number of parties involved (BRT Institute’s evaluation of MBTA).   Multiple entities involved in resolving TSP problems won’t work very well.  RapidRide’s Control Center Communications Coordinator needs one number to call to resolve signal malfunctions quickly.

I like the look of some of the BRT busses in service.  However, busses that are purchased to look different from the rest of the fleet have a drawback.  The need for “branding” limits breadth of equipment use.  For example, it may be harder to swap out a bus that is broken down in a timely manner.  Non-BRT busses that are on the way back to the garage at the end of scheduled service can be diverted to replace busses that are broken down.  Perhaps the assumption is that BRT service frequency will limit the impact of this kind of event.  Experience suggests, however, that this can backfire — e.g. two busses that break down in succession causing overloads.  My experience also suggests that routes pulling out in the morning could experience problems, if a shortage of spare BRT busses occurs, since substitution is not an option.

The BRT concept promises to deliver benefits associated with rail.  I’ve used rail (light and/or heavy) in Washington D.C., Portland Oregon, Seattle Washington, Germany and Russia.  I don’t think rail is a good comparison.  However, my concern is less what BRT is compared with than whether it achieves its goal — increased service frequency, speed and reliability along a dedicated corridor.  If BRT in King County is to reap those benefits, it will stand or fall on whether the bus lane offers quick unobstructed passage; and whether problems can be worked out quickly.  Let the games begin!

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC).

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit editor

In many ways the public transportation industry leads the way (or breaks new ground) when it comes to technology. From hybrid vehicles and alternative fuels to vehicle location systems and everything in-between transit is leading the charge to make use of technological advances. Of course, sometimes even transit can get passed.

I’m a self-professed gadget junky (I’ve professed it here before). So I am waiting with bated breath with seemingly the rest of the gadget community for next week’s Apple event where it is purported that the company will unveil its new tablet version of the iTouch/iPhone. While this may seem to only have minor repercussions in the transit industry, its length may be much farther reaching.

On the surface the relationship between transit and technology is usually viewed from a what is new for the system perspective, not taking that step back and seeing what is new for riders and how it affects the system perspective. A perfect example of this is Wi-Fi. Amtrak just announced it was implementing free Wi-Fi on some of its routes last week. That is great for its riders, but it may be too little, too late.

I know of two bus systems that had installed free Wi-Fi on some routes and pulled it not because of the costs (well in part because of the costs), but mainly because people weren’t using it. Sure, it can be argued that local service doesn’t allow people to be on buses long enough to boot up their computer and hook into the Wi-Fi, and this might be the reason Wi-Fi will work for Amtrak — longer travel times. But I think the real reason people weren’t using Wi-Fi on these routes isn’t that they didn’t want it — it’s that they didn’t need it.

 What were people on the bus or train using Wi-Fi for? Likely checking their email and Web surfing. No my cell phone does that, and it’s not a so-called “smart phone” like the iPhone or one of the variety of Blackberries. Before transit could even take advantage of the portability of computers via wireless Internet the technology has passed it by.

Now what affect will the iTablet/iPad/iSlate have on transit? Reportedly Apple is targeting to do with print media with the new tablet what it did to music with the iPod. If it is even close to that level of success that means a paradigm shift in how people view the world. Transit needs to be aware of these technology shifts among its customers so it can take best advantage of them.

There are currently more than a dozen applications (apps) for the iTouch and iPhone related to public transportation. Of course, when you compare that to the more than 100,000 apps in iTunes it becomes an infinitesimal amount. Technology shifts are happening. Except now they are happening to the public at large and not just at transit agencies.

Public transportation needs to not focus on what it’s doing so much that it lets the world pass it on by. Then those old mantras about transit being slow an inefficient will unfortunately prove they are true.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn page!

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

What’s a railroad got to do to get a little respect these days? It seems like every time I see an Amtrak story it’s followed by (or includes) a snarky comment about on-time performance. The problem is that most of these comments tend to be uninformed and based on mystique rather than facts.

This week I read this story about Amtrak adding wireless Internet service to some of its routes. Great, right? Not so much. The piece continues to skewer Amtrak for its “frequent delays” and “more delays.” This seems to be the public sentiment these days — Amtrak = delays.

Of course, that’s not always the case. Ask the folks traveling from Kansas City to St. Louis. Not only is the Missouri River Runner service getting higher ridership due to its increased on-time performance, it’s 90 percent on-time performance in the last 12 months is pretty impressive. Of course, the route is only 283 miles long.

Here’s the secret that those making the snarky comments about Amtrak miss out on. Amtrak on-time performance doesn’t suck when you’re looking at routes less than 400 miles long. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) the on-time performance for airlines between 2003 and 2007 is 77 percent for Amtrak during the same period it’s 70 percent, but if you only consider routes 400 miles long or less that increases to 74 percent.

And while airline delays are a constant complaint by travelers, it hasn’t seeped into the fabric of air travel as it seemingly has with rail travel. Of course, the delays are one thing. The causes of those delays are another.

Take a look at those charts one more time. Of the delays the airlines themselves were responsible for 54 percent. For Amtrak, the host railroads were responsible for 68 percent of the delays. Amtrak itself was responsible for 26 percent of delays — less than half what the airlines were directly responsible for.

Now digging into these numbers isn’t something the average person is going to take the time to do. And really, most of your rail opponents won’t do it either. It’s much easier to say Amtrak is slow than to qualify it as Amtrak is slow over its long-distance routes. Interestingly enough, if you pull out your handy high-speed rail map you’ll see that these routes fall into that less than 400 miles sweet spot.

I wonder why that is?

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn page!

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

I like the four seasons as much as the next guy, but come on, enough with the snow already. It all started innocently enough — we were supposed to get our second big snow storm of the season — but then it went wrong from there.

Ever had one of those days? Where it seems like everything just won’t go right? That’s my day as I write this. First I have to fight with the snowblower to get it started and clear out the driveway, only to have to do it again once the plow goes by.

Then my DSL goes out. So I head to the local public Wi-Fi location (McDonalds) and get a little work done. Finishing that up, I was able to get my service provider to visit and check on why I had no Fi. It seems somebody put the wrong part in the neighborhood routing station (or something).

Anyway, my Wi-Fi is back up. Just in time for me to catch a quick bite to eat. Unfortunately the snow hasn’t stopped and now I can’t get back into my driveway. So back to the snowblower. Except I’m out of gas. Shovel it is.

An hour later and a bucket of salt lighter I can get back into my driveway.

So I can finally sit down to write my blog. And after all that, I sit here and marvel at everyone in transit who does this every day with not one, but a thousand vehicles.

To fight to get your fleet started, your yards plowed, routes run (while dodging plows) and doing it all on time in just about any type of weather is an impressive feat. I don’t think most riders realize just what goes on behind the curtain so to speak. They just expect the bus to be at their spot when it’s supposed to be.

Getting those buses and trains to run on time is a monumental task in itself, but to do it in inclement weather is an even greater achievement. I’ve ridden buses at agencies in subzero temperatures, temperatures in excess of 100 degrees F, snow, rain, wind and even the dead of night.

The one common factor? A driver who didn’t complain about his lot in life. A driver who knew the importance of being at their stops on time.

As we head into 2010, I just wanted to start off the year with a hearty pat on the back and good luck as we look forward to another record-breaking year in transit.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn page!