DOCSLIB.ORG

SEATTLE STREETCAR Operations Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Seattle Department of Transportation SEATTLE STREETCAR Operations Report July 2019 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................4 1.1. South Lake Union Streetcar.....................................................................4 1.2. First Hill Streetcar ...................................................................................6 1.3. Center City Connector .............................................................................6 2. OPERATIONS HIGHLIGHTS ..................................................................................7 2.1. Governance Structure and Budget Overview ..........................................7 2.2. Status of Negotiations on New Streetcar ILA..........................................8 2.3. Safety & Security Update .........................................................................9 3. FINANCIAL METRICS .........................................................................................10 3.1. South Lake Union Streetcar...................................................................10 3.2. First Hill Streetcar .................................................................................13 3.3. Investment in Streetcar Operations ......................................................15 4. PERFORMANCE METRICS ..................................................................................17 4.1. Ridership ................................................................................................17 4.2. South Lake Union Streetcar...................................................................17 4.3. First Hill Streetcar Performance Metrics .............................................19 4.4. Reliability ...............................................................................................19 4.5. Farebox Recovery ...................................................................................20 5. PROPOSED OPERATIONS IMPROVEMENTS ......................................................21 5.1. South Lake Union Streetcar – Proposed Operations Improvements ....21 5.2. First Hill Streetcar – Proposed Broadway BAT Lane ............................21 5.3. Streetcar-Bike Safety SLI 65-1-A1: .......................................................22 Figures Figure 1 - Seattle Streetcar System Map .................................................................5 Figure 2 - On-Time Performance 2008-2018 .........................................................19 Tables Table 1 - South Lake Union Streetcar Financials - 2014-2018 ..............................11 Table 2 - South Lake Union Streetcar Financials - 2019-2024 ..............................12 Table 3 - First Hill Streetcar Financials - 2016-2024 .............................................14 Table 4 - Projected Streetcar Balances and Investment Per Rider .......................15 Table 5 - South Lake Union Streetcar Performance - 2014-2018 ..........................18 Table 6 - South Lake Union Streetcar Projected Performance - 2019-2024 .........18 Table 7 - First Hill Streetcar Performance - 2016-2024 ........................................19 Table 8 - SLU Proposed Operations Improvements ...............................................21 1. INTRODUCTION Ordinance 124946 requires the Seattle The Seattle Streetcar system consists of two Department of Transportation (SDOT) to submit a separate, modern streetcar lines: the South Lake report to the Chair of City Council’s Sustainability Union Streetcar (SLU) and the First Hill Streetcar and Transportation Committee at least bi- (FHS). A project to expand and unify the system annually on the operations of all operating by connecting these two separate lines along streetcar lines. This requirement has been in First Avenue and Stewart Street, the Center City place since December 2015. Connector, is on pause per mayoral direction in March 2018. Initial assessments revealed Ordinance 124946 states: that the capital costs had risen, and further evaluation was required. In addition, media “The report shall include both performance metrics reports disclosed differences in SDOT and Metro’s and financial metrics; and will include data for projected operating costs. The project underwent the past 5 years, estimates for the current year, an independent review under the direction of the and projections for the next 5 years. Performance City Budget Office. In January 2019, the Mayor metrics shall include ridership, farebox recovery expressed her intent to work with City Council to ratio, productivity (riders per revenue hour), fare move the project forward. evasion, and reliability. Financial metrics shall include costs, including operating payments to King Figure 1 shows the South Lake Union and First County, SDOT direct costs and contingency, and major Hill Streetcar segment alignments along with the maintenance expenditures; revenues, including Center City Connector. farebox recovery, sponsorships and donations, grants and intergovernmental revenues; and actual 1.1. SOUTH LAKE UNION STREETCAR use of funds from the Consolidated (Residual) Cash The South Lake Union Streetcar was approved by Pool*1 for interim financing. Financial reporting shall the City Council in 2005 in response to efforts to identify variances from financial projections included develop the South Lake Union neighborhood into in the Adopted Budget. The report shall include a a biotechnology and biomedical research hub. narrative to describe any significant or operational The $56.4 million line was funded nearly 50% policy changes and explain any significant variation by property owners along the alignment and the from budgeted projections SDOT may adjust the remainder by federal, state, and local funds. performance and financial metrics with the written concurrence of the Chair of the Transportation The SLU line is 1.3 miles long and operates Committee, to reflect changes to reporting methods through mixed traffic. The line is served by a fleet from King County or other sources of data. The report of four Inekon vehicles operating in mixed right shall be submitted in writing to the Chair of the of way and powered exclusively by an overhead Transportation Committee.” contact system (OCS). SLU operates an average 10- to 15-minute service frequency most hours of the day it operates, seven days a week. 1An interfund loan for streetcar operations is currently supported by the City’s Transportation Fund. Legislation for the 2019-2020 Proposed Budget states that the loan is supported by the Move Seattle Levy Fund. 4 | SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIGURE 1 - SEATTLE STREETCAR SYSTEM MAP E GALER ST E HIGHLAND ST Volunteer Park Lake Union SEATTLE ASIAN ART MUSEUM E PROSPECT ST FAIRVIEW AVE N MUSEUM OF FAIRVIEW & E AVE 10TH HISTORY AND CAMPUS DRIVE INDUSTRY Lake Union BELMONT AVE E Lake Union ALOHA ST Park CENTER Park FOR WOODEN E ALOHA ST BOATS VALLEY ST VALLEY ST E ROY ST ROY ST LAKE UNION PARK TERRY & MERCER MERCER ST E MERCER ST WESTLAKE & MERCER BROAD ST SOUTH LAKE UNION REPUBLICAN ST E REPUBLICAN ST 8TH AVE N AVE 8TH 9TH AVE N AVE 9TH DEXTER AVE N AVE DEXTER AURORA AVE N AVE AURORA WESTLAKE AVE N AVE WESTLAKE STREETCAR HARRISON ST E HARRISON ST STREETCAR E AVE BELLEVUE MAINTENANCE WESTLAKE & THOMAS TERRY & FACILITY E THOMAS ST THOMAS SOUTH THOMAS ST LAKE UNION CAPITOL HILL E JOHN ST PONTIUS AVE N AVE PONTIUS 5 Denny Park TERRY AVE N AVE TERRY YALE AVE N AVE YALE BOREN AVE N AVE BOREN MINOR AVE N AVE MINOR FAIRVIEW AVE N AVE FAIRVIEW E DENNY WAY DENNY WAY E OLIVE WAY WESTLAKE & YALE AVE BROADWAY & DENNY 9TH DENNY E HOWELL ST CAPITOL HILL 8TH AVE Cal DENNY SEATTLE Anderson CENTRAL Park 13TH AVE E AVE 13TH 19TH AVE E AVE 19TH 20TH AVE E AVE 20TH 11TH AVE E AVE 11TH 12TH AVE E AVE 12TH 14TH AVE E AVE 14TH 16TH AVE E AVE 16TH 17TH AVE E AVE 17TH 15TH AVE E AVE 15TH 7TH AVE TRIANGLE COLLEGE E AVE 18TH E OLIVE ST BATTERY ST 9TH AVE 6TH AVE NAGLE PL NAGLE HOWELL ST SUMMITAVE E SUMMITAVE HARVARD AVE E AVE HARVARD BELMONT AVE E AVE BELMONT BELL ST E AVE BOYLSTON WESTLAKE & 7TH E PINE ST MELROSE AVE E MELROSE AVE BELLTOWN E BELLEVUE AVE BROADWAY & PIKE PINE BLANCHARD ST STEWART ST E PIKE ST E MADISON ST LENORA ST OLIVE WAY WESTLAKE HUB VIRGINIA ST MCGRAW SQUARE E UNION ST BROADWAY E BROADWAY MOORE WESTLAKE PINE ST THEATER CENTER E SPRING ST 2ND & STEWART Westlake PIKE ST Park VIRGINIA Freeway E MARION ST MASON Park MEDICAL UNION ST CENTER COMMERCIAL BROADWAY & MARION PIKE PLACE SEATTLE MINOR AVE MARKET UNIVERSITY E COLUMBIA ST ALASKAN WAY CORE SWEDISH BOREN AVE 1ST & PIKE UNIVERSITY ST MEDICAL CENTER TERRY AVE BENAROYA 5TH AVE SENECA ST E CHERRY ST HALL 6TH AVE 9TH AVE PIER 59: 4TH AVE SEATTLE SEATTLE ART AQUARIUM 8TH AVE E JAMES WAY MUSEUM 3RD AVE CENTRAL 2ND AVE SEATTLE DISTRICT Waterfront PUBLIC Park WESTERN AVE 1ST AVE LIBRARY FIRST E JEFFERSON ST ELLIOTT AVE SPRING ST HILL BROADWAY & TERRACE MADISON ST E TERRACE ST 1ST & MADISON MARION ST SEATTLE E ALDER ST MUNICIPAL HARBORVIEW FIRST HILL COURT CENTER CITY COLUMBIA ST SEATTLE MEDICAL E AVE 14TH CITY HALL CENTER E SPRUCE ST ALDER ST STREETCAR CONNECTOR CHERRY ST KING COUNTY COURTHOUSE E FIR ST PIER 52 JAMES ST PIONEER SQUARE COLMAN DOCK: SMITH WASHINGTON STATE City Hall TERRACE ST YESLER & BROADWAY TOWER JEFFERSON ST FERRIES Park E YESLER WAY PIER 50: PIONEER BOREN AVE S WATER TAXIS Kobe SQUARE 2ND AVE EXTENSION S Terrace YESLER S WASHINGTON ST Park Elliott Bay Occidental 14TH & WASHINGTON 4TH AVE S AVE 4TH 5TH AVE S AVE 5TH 6TH AVE S AVE 6TH Park S AVE 3RD TERRACE
Recommended publications
  • Dover Nj to Penn Station Train Schedule

    Dover Nj to Penn Station Train Schedule

    Dover Nj To Penn Station Train Schedule Courtney tickles goofily as diminuendo Farley snatch her Elohim sparkles irreparably. Spousal Odell thigging scantly, he Americanizing his pinhole very unashamedly. Sometimes bothered Ignazio depersonalized her saplessness testily, but earthier Worth rebraced sparely or amplifies troublesomely. Ledger, find Bergen County real estate listings and senior about local pond on NJ. Only new users can earn points through a referral. Good reason why share write a roundtrip train companies sell or penn station? Buses are choreographed to penn station is designed to do? CEO of Wanderu, as notice as later office instigator of celebratory vodka shots. Customers are strongly encouraged to sign up know My Transit alerts and activate push notifications on the mobile app to rumor the latest status of value system, NJ Transit said allow a release. Traveling by nj transit schedule except with fantastic fly ticket. This improve my hire time using Wanderu, pleasantly surprised! New jersey motorcycle helmet law enforcement of nj transit numbers used to dover can go around your trips. Five NJ TRANSIT rail lines serve Penn Station New York. In image to judge you with key best quality of ticket system map online, we will provided detailed Maps by Community in addition consider the splash System Map. Restaurants in an essential role in essex and this station to dover nj penn station due to get access is no parking at no. The NJ Transit will take occasion to Manhattan to Penn Station. Get schedules schedule information is dover, check travel by following one scheduled train tour of penn station in completing your commute or www.
  • 2017 Certification Review Report

    2017 Certification Review Report

    Transportation Management Area Planning Certification Review Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration St. Louis Transportation Management Area April 14, 2017 Summary Report Table of Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Disposition of FY 2013 Certification Review Corrective Action and Recommendations..5 1.2 Summary of FY 2017 Findings .......................................................................................... 5 2.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 10 2.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Purpose and Objective ................................................................................................... 11 3.0 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 12 3.1 Review Process ............................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Documents Reviewed ..................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Input from the Public, Officials, and Member Agencies Staffs ......................................... 13 4.0 PROGRAM REVIEW ...........................................................................................................
  • Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study

    Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study

    Portland Union Station Multimodal Conceptual Engineering Study Submitted to Portland Bureau of Transportation by IBI Group with LTK Engineering June 2009 This study is partially funded by the US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. IBI GROUP PORtlAND UNION STATION MultIMODAL CONceptuAL ENGINeeRING StuDY IBI Group is a multi-disciplinary consulting organization offering services in four areas of practice: Urban Land, Facilities, Transportation and Systems. We provide services from offices located strategically across the United States, Canada, Europe, the Middle East and Asia. JUNE 2009 www.ibigroup.com ii Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................... ES-1 Chapter 1: Introduction .....................................................................................1 Introduction 1 Study Purpose 2 Previous Planning Efforts 2 Study Participants 2 Study Methodology 4 Chapter 2: Existing Conditions .........................................................................6 History and Character 6 Uses and Layout 7 Physical Conditions 9 Neighborhood 10 Transportation Conditions 14 Street Classification 24 Chapter 3: Future Transportation Conditions .................................................25 Introduction 25 Intercity Rail Requirements 26 Freight Railroad Requirements 28 Future Track Utilization at Portland Union Station 29 Terminal Capacity Requirements 31 Penetration of Local Transit into Union Station 37 Transit on Union Station Tracks
  • Rulebook for Link Light Rail

    Rulebook for Link Light Rail

    RULEBOOK FOR LINK LIGHT RAIL EFFECTIVE MARCH 31 2018 RULEBOOK FOR LINK LIGHT RAIL Link Light Rail Rulebook Effective March 31, 2018 CONTENTS SAFETY ................................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 2 ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................................. 3 DEFINITIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 1 ............................................................................................................................20 OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT GENERAL RULES ...............................................................20 1.1 APPLICABILITY OF RULEBOOK ............................................................................20 1.2 POSSESSION OF OPERATING RULEBOOK .........................................................20 1.3 RUN CARDS ...........................................................................................................20 1.4 REQUIRED ITEMS ..................................................................................................20 1.5 KNOWLEDGE OF RULES, PROCEDURES, TRAIN ORDERS, SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS, DIRECTIVES, AND NOTICES .....................................................20
  • Motion No. M2020-69 Funding Agreement for Capped Contribution for Rapidride C Line Improvements

    Motion No. M2020-69 Funding Agreement for Capped Contribution for Rapidride C Line Improvements

    Motion No. M2020-69 Funding Agreement for Capped Contribution for RapidRide C Line Improvements Meeting: Date: Type of action: Staff contact: System Expansion Committee 11/12/2020 Recommend to Board Don Billen, Executive Director, Board 11/19/2020 Final action PEPD Cathal Ridge, Executive Corridor Director- Central Corridor Chris Rule, HCT Project Manager – Central Corridor Proposed action Authorizes the chief executive officer to execute an agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to reimburse the City of Seattle for $1,730,000 and King County Metro for $2,800,000 to provide a total funding contribution of $4,530,000 for bus speed and reliability improvements to the RapidRide C Line serving West Seattle to South Lake Union. Key features summary • This action authorizes Sound Transit to enter into an inter-local agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to reimburse the City and County for costs of up to $4.53 million for speed and reliability improvements to the RapidRide C Line. • The Sound Transit 3 (ST3) System Plan includes a capped capital contribution of $65 million for bus capital enhancements to design and construct transit priority improvements that improve speed and reliability for the Madison BRT project and the RapidRide C and D Lines. • In 2018 the Sound Transit Board established the RapidRide C and D Improvements project and approved an initial study of potential improvements performed by the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions project team. • In September the Board of Directors moved that staff bring forward an agreement for a limited near- term authorization for RapidRide C Line improvements pending a more comprehensive program realignment.
  • Caltrain Fare Study Draft Research and Peer Comparison Report

    Caltrain Fare Study Draft Research and Peer Comparison Report

    Caltrain Fare Study Draft Research and Peer Comparison Report Public Review Draft October 2017 Caltrain Fare Study Draft Research and Peer Comparison October 2017 Research and Peer Review Research and Peer Review .................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 2 A Note on TCRP Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Elasticity of Demand for Commuter Rail ............................................................................... 3 Definition ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Commuter Rail Elasticity ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Comparison with Peer Systems ............................................................................................ 4 Fares ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Employer Programs ..................................................................................................................................................
  • Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents

    Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents

    DOWNTOWN ACCESS STRATEGY PHASE 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 II. Review of Existing Plans, Projects, and Programs ......................................... 2 III. Potential Construction Concerns and Opportunities .................................. 3 A. Existing Construction Planning Tools 3 B. SDOT’s Construction Hub Coordination Program 4 C. Construction Mitigation Strategies Used by Other Cities 7 D. Potential Construction Conflicts and Opportunities 10 IV. Future Transportation Network Opportunities ......................................... 12 A. North Downtown 12 B. Denny Triangle / Westlake Hub 14 C. Pioneer Square / Chinatown-ID 15 D. Downtown Core and Waterfront 16 V. Future Phases of Downtown Access Strategy ............................................. 18 A. Framework for Phase 2 (2014 through 2016) 18 B. Framework for Phase 3 (Beyond 2016) 19 - i - September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years I. INTRODUCTION Many important and long planned transportation and development projects are scheduled for con- struction in Downtown Seattle in the coming years. While these investments are essential to support economic development and job growth and to enhance Downtown’s stature as the region’s premier location to live, work, shop and play, in the short-term they present complicated challenges for con- venient and reliable access to and through Downtown. The Downtown Seattle Association (DSA) and its partners, Historic South Downtown (HSD) and the Seat- tle Department of Transportation (SDOT), seek to ensure that Downtown Seattle survives and prospers during the extraordinarily high level of construction activity that will occur in the coming years.
  • Seattle Center City Connector Transit Study LPA Report

    Seattle Center City Connector Transit Study LPA Report

    The Seattle Department of Transportation Seattle Center City Connector Transit Study Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) R e port Executive Summary August 2014 in association with: URS Shiels Obletz Johnsen CH2MHill Natalie Quick Consulting John Parker Consulting BERK Consulting VIA Architecture Alta Planning + Design DKS Associates I | LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE REPORT ― EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LTK Cover image from SDOT Seattle Center City Connector Transit Study Executive Summary Volume I: LPA Report 1. Project Overview 2. Purpose and Need 3. Evaluation Framework 4. Evaluation of Alternatives 5. Summary of Tier 1 Screening and Tier 2 Evaluation Results and Public Input 6. Recommended Locally Preferred Alternative 7. Next Steps Volume I Appendix A: Project Purpose and Need Volume II: Detailed Evaluation Report 1. Project Overview 2. Evaluation Framework and Public Outreach 3. Initial Screening of Alternatives (Purpose and Need) 4. Summary of Tier 1 Alternatives and Evaluation Results 5. East-West Connection Assessment 6. Description of Tier 2 Alternatives 7. Tier 2 Evaluation Results 8. Tier 2 Public Outreach Summary 9. Tier 2 Recommendation Volume II Technical Appendices (Methodology and Detailed Results) Appendix A: Ridership Projections Appendix B: Additional Ridership Markets: Visitors and Special Events Appendix C: Operating and Maintenance Cost Methodology and Estimates Appendix D: Loading Analysis Appendix E: Capital Cost Methodology and Estimates Appendix F: Utility Impacts Assessment Appendix G: Traffic Analysis Appendix H Evaluation
  • ST Express 590 (Tacoma – Seattle) And

    ST Express 590 (Tacoma – Seattle) And

    Eastlake Ave E ST Express Eastlake Ave E StewartStewart StSt Yale Ave N Yale Yale Ave N Yale 6th Ave 6th Ave 9th Ave 9th Ave HowellHowell StSt 7th Ave 590 TacomaDOWNTOWNDOWNTOWN – Seattle 7th Ave Adult fares $3.25 4th Ave SEATTLESEATTLE 4th Ave 594 Lakewood – Seattle Olive Way 2nd Ave Olive Way 2nd Ave Effective September 19, 2021 – March 19, 2022 PikePike StSt SenecaSeneca StSt ConnectingConnecting routesroutes 2nd2nd AveAve ExtExt CherryCherry StSt LakewoodLakewood StationStation Eastlake Ave E SS WashingtonWashington StSt ITIT Stewart St Yale Ave N Yale 612612 620620 SS JacksonJackson StSt 6th Ave STST 9th Ave Howell St 580580 592592 7th Ave Lumen Field Lumen Field SS RoyalRoyal BroughamBrougham WyWy SS LineLine DOWNTOWN T-MobileT-Mobile ParkPark 4th Ave SR 512 Park & Ride SEATTLE SS HolgateHolgate StSt SR 512 Park & Ride IT Olive Way IT 2nd Ave 612612 620620 PugetPuget SS LanderLander StSt PT SoundSoundPike St PT SS SpokaneSpokane StSt 33 44 Seneca St STST STST STST Connecting routes 574574 580580 592592 2nd Ave Ext Cherry St 590590 Lakewood Station594 Downtown Tacoma/ S Washington St IT 594 Downtown Tacoma/ SODO Busway SODO Busway 612 620 CommerceCommerce StSt Commerce St S Jackson St Commerce St Downtown Tacoma/ ST PTPT Downtown Tacoma/ 580 592 CommerceCommerce StSt SS 10th10th StSt 11 1313 4545 400400 Lumen Field S Royal Brougham Wy S Line 22 1616 4848 500500 T-Mobile Park DOWNTOWNDOWNTOWN 33 4141 5757 501501 1111 4242 6363 S Holgate St TACOMATACOMA SR 512 Park & Ride 594594IT STST Pacific Ave Pacific Pacific Ave Pacific 612 620
  • UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction File Structure

    UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction File Structure

    UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction This file gives detailed country notes on the UNECE tram and metro statistics dataset. These metadata describe how countries have compiled tram and metro statistics, what the data cover, and where possible how passenger numbers and passenger-km have been determined. Whether data are based on ticket sales, on-board sensors or another method may well affect the comparability of passenger numbers across systems and countries, hence it being documented here. Most of the data are at the system level, allowing comparisons across cities and systems. However, not every country could provide this, sometimes due to confidentiality reasons. In these cases, sometimes either a regional figure (e.g. the Provinces of Canada, which mix tram and metro figures with bus and ferry numbers) or a national figure (e.g. Czechia trams, which excludes the Prague tram system) have been given to maximise the utility of the dataset. File Structure The disseminated file is structured into seven different columns, as follows: Countrycode: These are United Nations standard country codes for statistical use, based on M49. The codes together with the country names, region and other information are given here https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/overview/ (and can be downloaded as a CSV directly here https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/overview/#). City: This column gives the name of the city or region where the metro or tram system operates. In many cases, this is sufficient to identify the system. In some cases, non-roman character names have been converted to roman characters for convenience.
  • Streetcar Plan Posters

    Streetcar Plan Posters

    WELCOME Welcome! The purpose of this open house is to present draft recommendations from the Bicycle Master Plan and the Streetcar System Plan to the public. City sta! and citizen volunteers are here to present the material and to answer questions. The room is divided into three sections: one for the Bicycle Master Plan, one for the Streetcar System Plan, and one called “Integration Station,” where we tie the two concepts together. Refreshments and child care services are also available. The bicycle and streetcar networks will play a key role in Portland’s future. Together, they will reduce reliance on the automobile for daily tasks, they will reinforce urban land use patterns, and they will help the City achieve its goals to combat climate change. This is the beginning of a transportation transformation. WHY PLAN? PORTLAND HAS A HISTORY OF SUCCESSFUL LONG-RANGE PLANNING In 1904, landscape architect John C. Olmsted produced a report for the City Among the parks that resulted from the Olmsted Plan are Holladay Park, Irving Parks Board. The plan served as a blueprint for development of the highly Park, Mt. Tabor (shown above), Overlook Park, Rocky Butte, Sellwood Park, valued park system we enjoy today. Washington Park, and several others. Interstate MAX Opened 2004 Airport MAX Hillsboro MAX Opened 2001 Opened 1998 Portland Streetcar Opened 2001 MAX to Gresham Opened 1986 Clackamas MAX Opens fall 2009 Westside Express Service Opened Feb. 2009 In 1989, three years after the "rst MAX line opened from downtown to Gresham, 20 years later the regional rail system is well on its way to being constructed as planners laid out a vision for a regional rail system.
  • Public Meeting Presentation 130826.Pptx

    Public Meeting Presentation 130826.Pptx

    Proposed Long-Term Streetcar Network Study Overview/Purpose § Examine the feasibility of streetcar service in Saint Paul § Determine where it would work best § Determine where to start 2 What is Streetcar Service? Consists of many elements: Vehicles Stops Right-of-Way Short Stop Spacing Fare Payment New Development Streetcar Vehicles • Modern, vintage, or replica of vintage streetcar • Usually single vehicle Modern Streetcar, Toronto Modern Streetcar, Portland Modern Streetcar, Seattle Modern Streetcar, Tacoma Vintage Streetcar, Memphis Historic Replica Streetcar, New Orleans Streetcars in the Street • Usually operate in mixed-traffic • But can also operate in exclusive rights-of-way Portland Streetcar Seattle Streetcar Tucson Streetcar (Planned) San Francisco F-Line Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Route Length & Stop Spacing • Short lengths; focus on shorter more local trips • Frequent stops; approximately every two blocks 2.8 miles 2.1miles Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Stops Smaller scale/less elaborate than LRT stations Portland Streetcar Stop Seattle Streetcar Stop Toronto Streetcar Stop Future Westgate Light Rail Station, St. Paul Economic Development Patterns Streetcar Light Rail • Linear economic development • Nodal economic development South Lake Union Streetcar, Seattle The Lyric near the future Raymond Ave Station, St. Paul Construction Impacts Streetcar Light Rail • Lower impact • Greater impact • Faster construction • Longer construction First Hill Streetcar construction,