Jump to content

Transportation Projects, Roads, Light Rail, etc


mcheiss

Future Proposed Northwest Arkansas Transportation Projects  

103 members have voted

  1. 1. Which Project is the best option for the future of Northwest Arkansas?

    • 10 Stop Light Rail System
      33
    • Western Bypass
      15
    • I-540 Improvements (6 to 8 lanes)
      35
    • Eastern Parkway
      6
    • Regionwide Bus Service
      8
    • Pedestrian Facilities
      1
    • Bicycle Facilities
      4
    • Ride Share Programs
      1


Recommended Posts

Here's a link to the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission's Northwest Arkansas Western Beltway Feasibility Study. The NWARPC has alredy made up their mind that the beltway is a good idea so the study is slanted towards that position but for those opposed this is a chance to show that opposition. I added my coments that the western beltway would be a sprawl inducing disaster that is not needed. It would only enrich a few individuals with property in it's path and harm the established areas that need help. Between improvements to I540 and the eastern corridor plus improved mass transit options the needs of NWA can be met. Wastin money on this study is a mistake - that money could be used to fininsh projects that have already been started

Study link

Edited by zman9810
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Here's a link to the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission's Northwest Arkansas Western Beltway Feasibility Study. The NWARPC has already made up their mind that the beltway is a good idea so the study is slanted towards that position but for those opposed this is a chance to show that opposition. I added my comments that the western beltway would be a sprawl inducing disaster that is not needed. It would only enrich a few individuals with property in it's path and harm the established areas that need help. Between improvements to I540 and the eastern corridor plus improved mass transit options the needs of NWA can be met. Wasting money on this study is a mistake - that money could be used to finish projects that have already been started

Study link

You beat me to it. Yeah I just don't get the big appeal of a western beltway. If you live in the western part of the county I suppose I could see those people perhaps liking the idea. But it just seem to me there's a lot more effective ways to help transportation in the area than this. I also agree with you on improvements to I-540, the eastern corridor and improved public transportation as well. I don't see why you couldn't just take out the median on I-540 and put in an extra lane on both sides. Making it more like an urban interstate. Maybe some would argue well you're only adding one new lane on each side. Then you also have the option of the eastern corridor. Perhaps Bentonville wouldn't like the eastern corridor because it won't have a lot of direct effect on them. But it just seems to make more sense of putting in a road where the population actual is located. Than throwing it way out in the western part of the counties which is only going to inspire more sprawl. Besides I think the eastern side of the metro could really use something anyway. Then there's the plan and simple fact that NWA really needs to work on it's public transportation. Overall the current system looks like something like a group of small cities would have. Not what a metro our actual size should have. I suppose this is where not really having a true 'core' hurts us. A western beltway will do nothing but make public transportation harder to achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While filling out the survey I did have another idea. I can see where a western beltway could be more beneficial to Benton County. It could connect up to the future Bella Vista Bypass and it would be beneficial to Bentonville and XNA. But then use the future Hwy 412 bypass to cross over. Then for the Washington County part implement the eastern corridor idea. I still think the eastern corridor plan for the entire metro is a good idea. But this would incorporate aspects to both. Honestly I can see Benton County being less concerned with sprawl than let's say Fayetteville. The eastern corridor certainly works better with what Fayetteville wants. Although I'm not sure what Rogers would think of that plan. For that matter in some ways I also wonder if Springdale would prefer the western beltway idea because right now it's pushing development west. Especially as the area around Arvest Ballpark fills in. But I-540 and a future Hwy 412 bypass wouldn't be that far away either. The eastern corridor would also give Springdale more to work with in improving the east side. Anyway it's just another option I think to the current western beltway idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are they calling this a beltway? A beltway for this area would start somewhere in Bella Vista, go _southeast_, and link up in Fayetteville. Along with 540 that would constitute a proper ring road/loop/beltway that encircles the bigger cities.

That's similar to what I pointed out when I filled out the survey. I can see why they think a western beltway is a good idea with most of the sprawly growth happening in that direction, but there are a lot of other issues that need focused on first. It took me a while to fill out the survey and I doubt they'll actually read it, but I tried to provide good responses to their questions. I looked through their long term regional highway plan before answering some of them. If all the roads they want built were built, it'd be a nice road loop with the western beltway- but I don't know what the odds of all that happening in the time frames they're talking about are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The western beltway would be so far over towards Siloam Springs that it would do little to improve north/south movement in the built up area of NWA. The idea that there is so much traffic traveling through the area that a very expensive alternative road needs to be built for it doesn't make sense. Most of the traffic on I540 is from NWA or just over the line from Missouri. XNA will be served well enough with the southern access road connecting to the Springdale bypass and I540 and if need be they can build another to I540 from the north.

Not to be a wet blanket on the I49 dream but I seriously doubt that the connection for it from Fort Smith to Dequeen will ever be built. It would be so expensive that it would never find funding. Oklahoma is improving the US 69 highway and if it ever appeared that the I49 project was being seriously considered they would fight it. They would start building bypasses and interchanges on 69 to interstate standards and say it provided the connection that an I49 project would and be much cheaper. With the federal government being strapped for cash I imagine it would agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The western beltway would be so far over towards Siloam Springs that it would do little to improve north/south movement in the built up area of NWA. The idea that there is so much traffic traveling through the area that a very expensive alternative road needs to be built for it doesn't make sense. Most of the traffic on I540 is from NWA or just over the line from Missouri. XNA will be served well enough with the southern access road connecting to the Springdale bypass and I540 and if need be they can build another to I540 from the north.

Not to be a wet blanket on the I49 dream but I seriously doubt that the connection for it from Fort Smith to Dequeen will ever be built. It would be so expensive that it would never find funding. Oklahoma is improving the US 69 highway and if it ever appeared that the I49 project was being seriously considered they would fight it. They would start building bypasses and interchanges on 69 to interstate standards and say it provided the connection that an I49 project would and be much cheaper. With the federal government being strapped for cash I imagine it would agree.

Definitely agree about the route. The real necessity for a bypass that far out is several decades away in all likelihood. The Eastern route seems more justifiable in the foreseeable future, but all of it is still less important than the Bella Vista Bypass and I-540 improvements.

As far as your concerns on US 69, I think that's a possibility, but I don't think 69 is anywhere near the route they want to connect I-49. They'd have to use multiple highways to jog far enough east in the northern and southern parts to make it a viable alternative they might as well build a whole new road. I've driven 69 a lot the last year and it's still not as good a road (overall) as the combined 540-US71 (Missouri side) section, and I have to think with the attention Missouri is giving US 71 from Kansas City all the way down to the border they would fight efforts by Oklahoma to use 69 as the route. Oklahoma has been pouring money into 69 because it was an old road under increased traffic flow due to more traffic down to Dallas and was getting in bad shape (and still is in a lot of places). They'd have to do a lot of bypassing and such to make it viable as an interstate grade road, and I just don't see that happening any faster than the obstacles Arkansas has to overcome. But more seriously, the route is just way off if you want to connect in at Shreveport, which is the whole point of the I-49 corridor project. The section from Fort Smith to Dequeen would be difficult, but not impossible. There are "future I-49" corridor signs around southern Arkansas and the 549 improvements on the south and pursuit of the Bella Vista bypass on the north does show Arkansas is trying to do it. Plus Louisiana is working on 71 in places, etc. They built 540 didn't they? It was a ridiculous seeming project at the time, but it does show it is possible. At any rate, I don't see Oklahoma being able to trump the combined lobbying power of Arkansas, Missouri, and Louisiana when their route is too far west and they can't keep existing freeways in that state in good condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely agree about the route. The real necessity for a bypass that far out is several decades away in all likelihood. The Eastern route seems more justifiable in the foreseeable future, but all of it is still less important than the Bella Vista Bypass and I-540 improvements.

As far as your concerns on US 69, I think that's a possibility, but I don't think 69 is anywhere near the route they want to connect I-49. They'd have to use multiple highways to jog far enough east in the northern and southern parts to make it a viable alternative they might as well build a whole new road. I've driven 69 a lot the last year and it's still not as good a road (overall) as the combined 540-US71 (Missouri side) section, and I have to think with the attention Missouri is giving US 71 from Kansas City all the way down to the border they would fight efforts by Oklahoma to use 69 as the route. Oklahoma has been pouring money into 69 because it was an old road under increased traffic flow due to more traffic down to Dallas and was getting in bad shape (and still is in a lot of places). They'd have to do a lot of bypassing and such to make it viable as an interstate grade road, and I just don't see that happening any faster than the obstacles Arkansas has to overcome. But more seriously, the route is just way off if you want to connect in at Shreveport, which is the whole point of the I-49 corridor project. The section from Fort Smith to Dequeen would be difficult, but not impossible. There are "future I-49" corridor signs around southern Arkansas and the 549 improvements on the south and pursuit of the Bella Vista bypass on the north does show Arkansas is trying to do it. Plus Louisiana is working on 71 in places, etc. They built 540 didn't they? It was a ridiculous seeming project at the time, but it does show it is possible. At any rate, I don't see Oklahoma being able to trump the combined lobbying power of Arkansas, Missouri, and Louisiana when their route is too far west and they can't keep existing freeways in that state in good condition.

Well...I think it is a question of what is the purpose of creating the I49 highway. I get the impression that connecting northern US markets with Mexico is considered more important than improving a path to Louisiana. The 69 highway would be a more direct route leading to Mexico- trucks would simply have to jog over on I44 from 71 in Missouri to reach 69 south. The State of Missouri would probably support that considering the trouble Arkansas has had even funding the Bella Vista bypass. An interstate quality highway leading to Dallas (the 5th largest and fastest growing metro in the country) Texas and Mexico would probably get more support than a path through rural Arkansas and leading to Louisiana. Sad to say, but AR and LA don't seem to generate a lot of concern on the national scene- New Orleans post-Katrina was the exception. The use of the I49 idea is just a way for those supporting the western beltway to try to push it through. I just think the western beltway would be to help the sprawl development of Benton County to the detriment of NWA as a whole.

Edited by zman9810
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Regional Light Rail Transit Study Wins 2010 American Architecture Award

Thought it was worth sharing. Do you think it might help getting it actually built in the next 20 years or so?

There is no doubt that the study was very well presented and deserves this award. That doesn't change the facts that the projections for growth aren't based on what is actually happening in NWA and that the local government development policies in place do not support light rail being constructed.

The projections of population growth were based on what was happening during the boom years when WalMart was expanding locally and their vendors were establishing offices in the area. Tyson Foods had acquired IBP and grew from a $5 billion dollar company into a $25 billion company. JB Hunt was in a major growth phase. Now- WalMart is decentralizing and moving employess out of the area. The vendors have their presence established or choose not to move here. Tyson is not likely to expand much more and the same goes for JB Hunt. There is no identified impetus for major job growth and so no reason to think that past projections for population growth will come true. It isn't because of the short term recession that there won't be a doubling of population (or tripling in the case of Rogers and Springdale- that has based on Hispanic immigration anyway), it because there won't be a massive number of job openings here to attract people.

The convenience and comfort of cars and trucks along with improvements in fuel effciency and the already huge investment in the road network mean that light rail is not likely to be feasible in NWA for many decades, if ever. Local government policies supporting sprawl make the density needed to support light rail even more unlikely.

Good to hear from you Snaple- hope things are well with you.

Edited by zman9810
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regional Light Rail Transit Study Wins 2010 American Architecture Award

Thought it was worth sharing. Do you think it might help getting it actually built in the next 20 years or so?

Well I certainly don't think it hurts. While it can help to a certain degree there are a lot of other roadblocks to get past I think. But as Zman mentioned we'll have to see how population growth goes along with a number of other factors. Still it's great to see the study recognized like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

According to the local newspaper, the Northwest Arkansas Regional Mobility Authority has pared their list of priority projects to four. These are projects that the state highway department has on their list of projects planned but not funded. Because the authority has the potential to help fund the projects, what that they choose as priorities make their decisions important. I've waited to see if the authority website would give more information but it hasn't been updated recently.

The four projects they chose are the widening of I540, the Bella Vista bypass,the Northern Springdale bypass and a computerized sign system. This list excludes projects such as the western bypass and eastern corridor route.

These seem to be good choices that have a chance of being supported by the taxpayers who will foot the bill for them, especially the widening of I540. Seeing that I540 is the principal route connecting the line of cities making up NWA and will be for the forseeable future, taking steps to increase capacity and safety for it should be the top priority. It gives the most bang for the buck at a time when funds for any transportation improvements are going to be hard to come by. The Bella Vista bypass is a needed link to connect I540 with the interstate quality highway Missouri has built to the north. Excluding projects that would only create more transportation problems such as the western bypass is a good choice. Not wasting time and money on projects that will have little affect on the reality of the transportation problems in NWA is also a good choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is more encouraging news about area transportation improvements- it is reported that over the next three years over $400 million is scheduled to spent on area road projects. They are scattered all over the area and include I540 widening in spots along with exit improvements. The addition of safety cables in the median is also planned. Other roads to be improved include 265 in Fayetteville, 264 in Springdale, 102 in Centerton and 62 in Benton County. Springdale is still looking at the I540/Tyson Parkway interchange with a possible start in 2012. Even the Bella Vista bypass will get started although on a very limited basis- a three mile section bypassing Hiwasse is planned to start in 2013 if all goes right. It is always possible that projects can be delayed some but it seems these are on the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The same people who helped bring about all the talk of potential light rail service in the future are back in the news. But this time it's talk of a possible streetcar system for Fayetteville. If this does manage to come about it also will be years down the road, but could happen more quickly than the light rail. Stephen Luoni of the university's Community Design Center has been putting out the idea of a streetcar system along the College Ave corridor. Later in the school year some university students will be going to Portland to study the streetcar system there. In the past I've thrown out the idea of having a streetcar system servicing the university/Dickson/Square area. But I certainly wouldn't object to a streetcar system for College Ave. I don't know how feasible the idea is or if it will ever come about. But I do like the idea and having the city look into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like public transit in general and rail in particular, but I still think it'll be difficult to impossible to get light rail or even a tram system done in FYV or NWA. Look at Portland, if wikipedia is correct they're 3 or 4x denser than us, and a metro of 2.5 million IIRC. Seattle's in the middle of building out their light rail system and it'll cost tens of billions before it's all done. They're a good deal denser than Portland and have even more people to work with...will nwa ever be able to generate the sort of ridership to justify that kind of investment?

If we do do a tram or light rail, I hope it's something really useful and not just a short-length project done for vanity's sake. The MAX system in Portland is great...but for us to get something on that level it'd have to be paid for almost totally by the feds as I don't see that level of tax increase being supported locally. Certainly an interesting and fun thing to think about...perhaps a low-cost, at-grade tram system could work in Fayetteville. The obvious stations would be Dickson, downtown, maybe two or three along the U of A. Maybe jog over to 540 to interface with the bus station. Washington Regional would be another obvious stop. Then on to the mall area maybe.

Is the tax increase proposal for improved bus service still going to be put on the ballot?

Edited by aerotive
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like public transit in general and rail in particular, but I still think it'll be difficult to impossible to get light rail or even a tram system done in FYV or NWA. Look at Portland, if wikipedia is correct they're 3 or 4x denser than us, and a metro of 2.5 million IIRC. Seattle's in the middle of building out their light rail system and it'll cost tens of billions before it's all done. They're a good deal denser than Portland and have even more people to work with...will nwa ever be able to generate the sort of ridership to justify that kind of investment?

If we do do a tram or light rail, I hope it's something really useful and not just a short-length project done for vanity's sake. The MAX system in Portland is great...but for us to get something on that level it'd have to be paid for almost totally by the feds as I don't see that level of tax increase being supported locally. Certainly an interesting and fun thing to think about...perhaps a low-cost, at-grade tram system could work in Fayetteville. The obvious stations would be Dickson, downtown, maybe two or three along the U of A. Maybe jog over to 540 to interface with the bus station. Washington Regional would be another obvious stop. Then on to the mall area maybe.

Is the tax increase proposal for improved bus service still going to be put on the ballot?

I believe one of the things Stephen Luoni mentioned was that some cities started building their systems when they were about the current size of NWA. Of course some of those cities have since grown. I think everyone familiar with the forum here knows I'm pro light rail/streetcar. But I can understand people's hesitation about the whole thing. A streetcar system would be easier and cheaper to put in than a light rail system. While I certainly think it would be a good thing I can't guarantee it would be a big success. I think we all know there's just some people who aren't going to leave their cars behind no matter what. Of all the NWA cities I think Fayetteville is the one most likely to have success with something like this. But as you mentioned most of it would have to be funded at the federal level. Maybe a little state, but it might not ad up to much. But I do think improved bus service is a more immediate need. But I also think a streetcar/light rail system would appeal to more people. I think there are some people who just aren't going to give the bus system a fair chance. Of course it would help if there was better bus service in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other news looks like the Garland widening is going to be a while longer. Things were supposed to have already gotten underway. But with sales tax revenue down the city was basically unable to pay it's share of the project to the AHTD the past September. The city doesn't want to put it off for too long however or it sounds like they could end up losing a couple of million in federal funds. By this September the city should be done with acquiring property and relocating utility lines. But from what I understand the actual construction won't start till late 2012 or maybe even 2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe one of the things Stephen Luoni mentioned was that some cities started building their systems when they were about the current size of NWA. Of course some of those cities have since grown. I think everyone familiar with the forum here knows I'm pro light rail/streetcar. But I can understand people's hesitation about the whole thing. A streetcar system would be easier and cheaper to put in than a light rail system. While I certainly think it would be a good thing I can't guarantee it would be a big success. I think we all know there's just some people who aren't going to leave their cars behind no matter what. Of all the NWA cities I think Fayetteville is the one most likely to have success with something like this. But as you mentioned most of it would have to be funded at the federal level. Maybe a little state, but it might not ad up to much. But I do think improved bus service is a more immediate need. But I also think a streetcar/light rail system would appeal to more people. I think there are some people who just aren't going to give the bus system a fair chance. Of course it would help if there was better bus service in place.

Yea! UP is back online- I was getting worried.

I was surprised by the College Ave streetcar idea- it doesn't seem feasible at all. It couldn't be put in the existing rightaway and the cost and disruption of obtaining more rightaway makes it a non-starter.

A streetcar system connecting the square and Dickson Street by using Spring and Block seems like a much more workable idea. Both of those streets could handle having rails laid in them and the establishment of the ORT link shows that there is a need for a public transit system between the two areas. It would also help erase the Block improvement fiasco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea! UP is back online- I was getting worried.

I was surprised by the College Ave streetcar idea- it doesn't seem feasible at all. It couldn't be put in the existing rightaway and the cost and disruption of obtaining more rightaway makes it a non-starter.

A streetcar system connecting the square and Dickson Street by using Spring and Block seems like a much more workable idea. Both of those streets could handle having rails laid in them and the establishment of the ORT link shows that there is a need for a public transit system between the two areas. It would also help erase the Block improvement fiasco.

Yeah UP has been moving to a different server. It's been up and down at times. Just depends on when you try to get on it seems.

While I prefer the university/downtown streetcar idea over the College Ave one, I don't think it's unfeasible. Overall I think it would run like a bus and I think overall there's enough space to make room for areas for it to pull over at stops. I guess it just depends on where you put all the stops. The cheaper method and good initial move would be to have a better implemented bus service along that area. Overall I think the ideal situation would be to start off with well defined bus service for that area then eventually move up to a streetcar system. The one advantage I see to the streetcar is that I think there's a portion of the population that would consider using a streetcar that just wouldn't try out a bus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah UP has been moving to a different server. It's been up and down at times. Just depends on when you try to get on it seems.

While I prefer the university/downtown streetcar idea over the College Ave one, I don't think it's unfeasible. Overall I think it would run like a bus and I think overall there's enough space to make room for areas for it to pull over at stops. I guess it just depends on where you put all the stops. The cheaper method and good initial move would be to have a better implemented bus service along that area. Overall I think the ideal situation would be to start off with well defined bus service for that area then eventually move up to a streetcar system. The one advantage I see to the streetcar is that I think there's a portion of the population that would consider using a streetcar that just wouldn't try out a bus.

The definitions I have found for streetcar define it as using rails, so we may not be thinking about the same mode of transportation. Laying rails in College Ave. doesn't seem feasible considering the amount and type of traffic that uses it. I do agree that a bus system that makes frequent, regular stops (especially if it has pullouts for them) is the best idea. I think it would be used even more than the present ORT routes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The definitions I have found for streetcar define it as using rails, so we may not be thinking about the same mode of transportation. Laying rails in College Ave. doesn't seem feasible considering the amount and type of traffic that uses it. I do agree that a bus system that makes frequent, regular stops (especially if it has pullouts for them) is the best idea. I think it would be used even more than the present ORT routes.

Well the construction delays of putting rails down would cause some temporary problems. But once they're down it wouldn't cause any problems with vehicles. The only problem that it could cause it with bicycle traffic. Bicycle tires are thin enough to fall in the gap near the rails. But I don't know that there's much bicycle traffic on College Ave. Even then as long as you were switching lanes and such it would seem to me that a bicyclist could simply stay on one side of the tracks. I can't really see a bicyclist changing lanes over there. So really the only problem would be with the initial construction of laying down the rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the construction delays of putting rails down would cause some temporary problems. But once they're down it wouldn't cause any problems with vehicles. The only problem that it could cause it with bicycle traffic. Bicycle tires are thin enough to fall in the gap near the rails. But I don't know that there's much bicycle traffic on College Ave. Even then as long as you were switching lanes and such it would seem to me that a bicyclist could simply stay on one side of the tracks. I can't really see a bicyclist changing lanes over there. So really the only problem would be with the initial construction of laying down the rail.

Well...I have to disagree with the idea that it wouldn't cause problems with vehicles. Say rails are put down in the roadway in the outer southbound lane. A streetcar car system that runs less than the 40 mph speed limit that most vehicles travel at and also makes frequent regular stops is going to impede the traffic in that lane. There would be traffic backed up behind it and many drivers will be trying to pass in the inside lane. The congestion caused at intersections would also make for major problems.

I realize there is a push to develop alternative transit options but they need to take into account the realities of how people actually get around. As motor vehicles become more energy efficient their convenience and comfort will continue to make them the first choice for transportation. Spending money on alternative transit options that hurt the efficency of the road network is counter-productive and will harm the economic health of the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well...I have to disagree with the idea that it wouldn't cause problems with vehicles. Say rails are put down in the roadway in the outer southbound lane. A streetcar car system that runs less than the 40 mph speed limit that most vehicles travel at and also makes frequent regular stops is going to impede the traffic in that lane. There would be traffic backed up behind it and many drivers will be trying to pass in the inside lane. The congestion caused at intersections would also make for major problems.

I realize there is a push to develop alternative transit options but they need to take into account the realities of how people actually get around. As motor vehicles become more energy efficient their convenience and comfort will continue to make them the first choice for transportation. Spending money on alternative transit options that hurt the efficency of the road network is counter-productive and will harm the economic health of the area.

Since this has been getting discussed a bit I've been looking up more info. Right now we're really just looking at any sort of improvement. But a number of cities have contemplated whether to move from a bus oriented system to a streetcar system. Probably the one biggest factor involved is that streetcars bring in more people. Maybe the public's view on buses isn't fair but it's simply that more people find the idea of using a streetcar more appealing than a bus. For initial costs a bus system is cheaper. Bus routes can be easily changed. On streetcars the initial cost is higher but long term costs aren't as bad as buses. Streetcars provide a smoother ride. Buses are going to reflect the quality of the road and you'll feel all those potholes. But streetcars are on steel rails which hold up longer than asphalt. Overall streetcars tend to have a higher people capacity than buses. Buses have a higher top speed but streetcars accelerate much faster than buses. It seems all modern streetcars can handle 40mph since the speed limit on College Ave was mentioned. Buses don't help encourage development where streetcars do. Although on the flip side you can easily reroute a bus service to move to the development.

So overall these were some things pointed out that I saw when other cities have considered switching some of their bus routes over to streetcars. Personally I don't see streetcars having any counter-productivity on the road system or hurting economic growth. I would still prefer a streetcar system over a bus system. But that's me. But considering where our metro is at right now. I certainly wouldn't object to having a better established bus system. That would certainly be a big improvement over what we have now. A bus system just isn't what I see as the top level of public transportation that's possible. But I admit a bus system, with it's lower initial costs, would be easier to get going. I know as it stands right now a lot of people would balk of the idea of spending the amount of money to get streetcar/light rail system going. Overall I think those types of systems that have to have a lot of long term planning done, especially light rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I worked on the square 10 or 12 years ago when the city bought bus type trolleys like the ones up in Eureka. There were two of them that ran from the courthouse down Dickson across West street and back around the square. The longest you ever had to wait on one to come by was 10-15 minutes. They were almost always empty! I wonder what the ridership is on the new weekend shuttle from the square to Dickson Street. I've also noticed this trend for the trolleys in Little Rock. They go round and round and with the exception of a few tourist they're empty. Maybe once the population grows to the point that parking becomes a nightmare or when gas prices go up to $5 or $6 a gallon it will become a more attractive option.

Since this has been getting discussed a bit I've been looking up more info. Right now we're really just looking at any sort of improvement. But a number of cities have contemplated whether to move from a bus oriented system to a streetcar system. Probably the one biggest factor involved is that streetcars bring in more people. Maybe the public's view on buses isn't fair but it's simply that more people find the idea of using a streetcar more appealing than a bus. For initial costs a bus system is cheaper. Bus routes can be easily changed. On streetcars the initial cost is higher but long term costs aren't as bad as buses. Streetcars provide a smoother ride. Buses are going to reflect the quality of the road and you'll feel all those potholes. But streetcars are on steel rails which hold up longer than asphalt. Overall streetcars tend to have a higher people capacity than buses. Buses have a higher top speed but streetcars accelerate much faster than buses. It seems all modern streetcars can handle 40mph since the speed limit on College Ave was mentioned. Buses don't help encourage development where streetcars do. Although on the flip side you can easily reroute a bus service to move to the development.

So overall these were some things pointed out that I saw when other cities have considered switching some of their bus routes over to streetcars. Personally I don't see streetcars having any counter-productivity on the road system or hurting economic growth. I would still prefer a streetcar system over a bus system. But that's me. But considering where our metro is at right now. I certainly wouldn't object to having a better established bus system. That would certainly be a big improvement over what we have now. A bus system just isn't what I see as the top level of public transportation that's possible. But I admit a bus system, with it's lower initial costs, would be easier to get going. I know as it stands right now a lot of people would balk of the idea of spending the amount of money to get streetcar/light rail system going. Overall I think those types of systems that have to have a lot of long term planning done, especially light rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.