68 replies to this topic

[Spartan]

I assume by "Sprinter" service you mean a bus service with signal prioritization and fancy bus shelters?

[southslider]

^True, newer vehicles, plus fewer but nicer stops.  Yet that's not all.  Also with this grant, I've heard CATS plans to connect Westside and Eastside services as one route (another feature similar to streetcar).  So no more transferring at the CTC to go from one popular bus corridor to another.

[Urbanity]

Playing Devil's advocate here, but will the Sprinter as a precursor of streetcar also ironically hurt the streetcar's chances of being completed?

My rationale for asking is that there is such a vocal group that opposes the streetcar and often makes statements along the lines that a streetcar is nothing more than an expensive bus on rails.  If the Sprinter happens will that then add weight to those questioning why we need to build a streetcar?

[southslider]

^True, what mobility benefits streetcar provide over current bus will basically be achieved by Sprinter-like service.  These benefits include vehicle capacity, interlined/crosstown service, and quality stops.  But what remains is the development benefits and a bias for rails over tires.  The former can still build a policy argument for streetcar, when also financed by development, but the latter is just frankly elitist.

Riders will already be served by frequent, quality-bus service along the streetcar corridor.  Extensions beyond the CTC-Presby starter line should thus depend on development return.  And given the receipts and politics of the half-cent sales tax, I wouldn't be surprised if such development is asked to help finance incremental extensions.

[dubone]

I'm pretty sure the cat is out of the bag on the idea of new streetcars needing to compete against a current bus route. (The pun wasn't noticed until after I finished the sentence ).  CATS has pretty much abandoned the streetcar routes for this decade, pretty much pushing them to the never-gonna-happen end of their long range plan.  Honestly, trying to build a brand for an overlay bus route that has a higher quality of stops and higher quality of bus that can happen quickly (within a year) is exactly what they should be doing.  Frankly, the ridership of the current corridor is what helps to support justification for the streetcar, whose only real improvement over bus routes is capacity and unchangeability.  So if ridership on the corridor can be developed in the interim, then it helps to justify the higher capacity line.

[southslider]

At the streetcar workshop last night, I heard a CATS planner say that the Sprinter service would have 20-minute frequency, as well as 9-Central. Guess I'll have to catch my bus at a shared stop.

[Spartan]

dubone, on 18 February 2010 - 11:06 PM, said:

Frankly, the ridership of the current corridor is what helps to support justification for the streetcar, whose only real improvement over bus routes is capacity and unchangeability.  So if ridership on the corridor can be developed in the interim, then it helps to justify the higher capacity line.

That's true, but we can't discount latent demand and also future demand with redevelopment. The Lynx was constructed under those auspices, so we can't discount that altogether.... of course that still doesn't change the gloomy funding scenario for the streetcar.

[tozmervo]

I may need corrected on this, but I think the expanded Sprinter service grant was coming from the same pool of money that the Streetcar just won - specifically, the bus half of the Urban Circulator/Bus and Bus Facilities Livability grants. It would appear that CATS did not win their Sprinter portion.

[tozmervo]

After it's first year of operation, the Sprinter's ridership is up 21% over the old Route 5.

http://www.bizjourna...13/daily12.html