Comments on: Cincinnati Approves Funding for Streetcar, Increasing Likelihood of Federal Commitment http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:43:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: BruceMcF http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-45128 BruceMcF Sat, 22 May 2010 02:46:57 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-45128 "It’s the way that computerized transport modelling works. The inputs dictate the outputs and most models contain steep penalties for walking distance, so if you have a potentially large trip generator, the number of trips actually generated in the model will vary widely if you move the route away by a few blocks." Quite. The thing about the penalties for walking distance is that they do not seem to be calibrated against the existing average walk. That is, you have a massive trip generator, and sometimes people will be willing to park a ways away ... and yet a stop that some of them would be walking past is considered "to far to go". They seem to be calibrated against some kind of "average" condition rather than the actual amount of active transport that the actual users of a streetcar would be used to. And after looking at it, I gotta agree that instead of that complex overlapping section between Gateway Quarter and Findlay market, the northern leg should go straight up Vine. The shorter travel time and elimination of crossovers would make up for the short side of a block walk either to or from Findlay Market. “It’s the way that computerized transport modelling works. The inputs dictate the outputs and most models contain steep penalties for walking distance, so if you have a potentially large trip generator, the number of trips actually generated in the model will vary widely if you move the route away by a few blocks.”

Quite. The thing about the penalties for walking distance is that they do not seem to be calibrated against the existing average walk. That is, you have a massive trip generator, and sometimes people will be willing to park a ways away … and yet a stop that some of them would be walking past is considered “to far to go”. They seem to be calibrated against some kind of “average” condition rather than the actual amount of active transport that the actual users of a streetcar would be used to.

And after looking at it, I gotta agree that instead of that complex overlapping section between Gateway Quarter and Findlay market, the northern leg should go straight up Vine. The shorter travel time and elimination of crossovers would make up for the short side of a block walk either to or from Findlay Market.

]]> By: Nathanael http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44453 Nathanael Tue, 18 May 2010 22:36:25 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44453 Oy. That's a horrible story. Hey, did you propose "expanding" the Brouward Transit Center by building a covered walkway along the intervening block? :-) Then, presto, the streetcar stops in front of the Transit Center, and their model will say it's lovely ;-) Oy. That’s a horrible story. Hey, did you propose “expanding” the Brouward Transit Center by building a covered walkway along the intervening block? :-) Then, presto, the streetcar stops in front of the Transit Center, and their model will say it’s lovely ;-)

]]> By: Nathanael http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44452 Nathanael Tue, 18 May 2010 22:32:48 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44452 To be blunt, if an Express HSR 3C route were constructed, I don't see any good location for a Cincy terminal. They'd probably have to build something brand new. To be blunt, if an Express HSR 3C route were constructed, I don’t see any good location for a Cincy terminal. They’d probably have to build something brand new.

]]> By: Ocean Railroader http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44347 Ocean Railroader Tue, 18 May 2010 03:25:48 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44347 I do noice some of these strange planning models do put some of the streetcars in some very strange places. Maybe they should try to offer open polls among the public to see what they would think would be the best streetcar line? I do noice some of these strange planning models do put some of the streetcars in some very strange places. Maybe they should try to offer open polls among the public to see what they would think would be the best streetcar line?

]]> By: Eric G. http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44328 Eric G. Mon, 17 May 2010 22:37:52 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44328 It's the way that computerized transport modelling works. The inputs dictate the outputs and most models contain steep penalties for walking distance, so if you have a potentially large trip generator, the number of trips actually generated in the model will vary widely if you move the route away by a few blocks. Now that cost-effectiveness has lost some power over federal allocations I would expect to see a bit less of that, but ridership estimates will still be very important and unfortunately engineers often have a hard time accepting common sense over what the computer says. I was evaluating the Ft. Lauderdale streetcar project in a previous job and the PB consultants kept saying that the route had to veer one block over to directly serve the Broward Transit Center. This added a couple turns in the track with associated cost, noise issues and delay, screwed up the auto, paratransit and shuttle drop off area, caused additional delay on a major arterial and it got people only 400 feet closer to thier bus connections. The model said that it would increase streetcar ridership by thousands of trips. I challenged that because the distance people have to walk when connecting buses from one end of the Terminal to the other can be up to 800 feet. Alas, to deaf ears. The models currently being used tell us a lot of stupid things, and people really need to be checking those outputs against common sense and forcing engineers to correct thier input assumptions to match reality. It’s the way that computerized transport modelling works. The inputs dictate the outputs and most models contain steep penalties for walking distance, so if you have a potentially large trip generator, the number of trips actually generated in the model will vary widely if you move the route away by a few blocks. Now that cost-effectiveness has lost some power over federal allocations I would expect to see a bit less of that, but ridership estimates will still be very important and unfortunately engineers often have a hard time accepting common sense over what the computer says.
I was evaluating the Ft. Lauderdale streetcar project in a previous job and the PB consultants kept saying that the route had to veer one block over to directly serve the Broward Transit Center. This added a couple turns in the track with associated cost, noise issues and delay, screwed up the auto, paratransit and shuttle drop off area, caused additional delay on a major arterial and it got people only 400 feet closer to thier bus connections. The model said that it would increase streetcar ridership by thousands of trips. I challenged that because the distance people have to walk when connecting buses from one end of the Terminal to the other can be up to 800 feet. Alas, to deaf ears. The models currently being used tell us a lot of stupid things, and people really need to be checking those outputs against common sense and forcing engineers to correct thier input assumptions to match reality.

]]> By: BruceMcF http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44305 BruceMcF Mon, 17 May 2010 16:04:32 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44305 Its actually not "every" point, its Findlay Market. Going near but not directly past Findlay Market and the complex wrap-around would go away. Whether a streetcar goes up and down one street or up one street and down the next street to the west is six of one, half a dozen of the other ... people get used to it very quickly. After all, destinations are not in the middle of streets, they are in the middle of blocks. Its actually not “every” point, its Findlay Market. Going near but not directly past Findlay Market and the complex wrap-around would go away.

Whether a streetcar goes up and down one street or up one street and down the next street to the west is six of one, half a dozen of the other … people get used to it very quickly. After all, destinations are not in the middle of streets, they are in the middle of blocks.

]]> By: BruceMcF http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44304 BruceMcF Mon, 17 May 2010 15:51:12 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44304 Except this is a model that is used with substantial real world success in Germany. Urban circulator and mass transit are categories we impose on transport, but where a large number of "mass transit" commuters will be using a "circulator" to complete their commute, then in terms of transport task they are both serving the same transport task. Where the Rapid Streetcar (or "tram-train") can really excel is in attracting off-peak patronage, since its a single seat ride from the suburban station through the heart of downtown. Except this is a model that is used with substantial real world success in Germany.

Urban circulator and mass transit are categories we impose on transport, but where a large number of “mass transit” commuters will be using a “circulator” to complete their commute, then in terms of transport task they are both serving the same transport task.

Where the Rapid Streetcar (or “tram-train”) can really excel is in attracting off-peak patronage, since its a single seat ride from the suburban station through the heart of downtown.

]]> By: Randy A. Simes http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44286 Randy A. Simes Mon, 17 May 2010 13:59:22 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44286 Urban circulators function differently from rapid transit. The two are both valuable for their own purposes, but they do have separate functions. The purpose you're suggesting would be better suited for light rail and commuting needs, while the proposed Cincinnati Streetcar seems better suited for circulating people about in the urban core. Urban circulators function differently from rapid transit. The two are both valuable for their own purposes, but they do have separate functions. The purpose you’re suggesting would be better suited for light rail and commuting needs, while the proposed Cincinnati Streetcar seems better suited for circulating people about in the urban core.

]]> By: poncho http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44249 poncho Mon, 17 May 2010 07:25:39 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44249 whats with that complicated route? why cant we build streetcars today with a simple route on one street for both directions? whats with routing a streetcar to hit the front door of every point of interest in a neighborhood, zigzagging over to this, then zigzagging back to that, etc. theyve managed to make the streetcar line have as complex a route as your typical bus line, hardly the user friendly system that the streetcar is supposed to be. why not make it easy to remember and have it run almost entirely on vine street from end to end, both directions? whats with that complicated route? why cant we build streetcars today with a simple route on one street for both directions? whats with routing a streetcar to hit the front door of every point of interest in a neighborhood, zigzagging over to this, then zigzagging back to that, etc. theyve managed to make the streetcar line have as complex a route as your typical bus line, hardly the user friendly system that the streetcar is supposed to be. why not make it easy to remember and have it run almost entirely on vine street from end to end, both directions?

]]> By: BruceMcF http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/05/14/cincinnati-approves-funding-for-streetcar-increasing-likelihood-of-federal-commitment/#comment-44211 BruceMcF Sun, 16 May 2010 16:19:48 +0000 http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=7038#comment-44211 Then why not use them for Rapid Streetcars ... run from the streetcar system onto the dedicated system through the tunnels. If the low height of the Rapid Streetcar platforms was a concern, they could install those automatic sliding "window doors" like at the Atlanta airport train. Further north, it could switch between dedicated track in space in existing corridors ... and streetcar sections to local inner suburban centers. And some of the overheads of the kind of single-line light rail system would be lower if it was an extension of a system that is already in place. Then why not use them for Rapid Streetcars … run from the streetcar system onto the dedicated system through the tunnels. If the low height of the Rapid Streetcar platforms was a concern, they could install those automatic sliding “window doors” like at the Atlanta airport train.

Further north, it could switch between dedicated track in space in existing corridors … and streetcar sections to local inner suburban centers.

And some of the overheads of the kind of single-line light rail system would be lower if it was an extension of a system that is already in place.

]]>