DOCSLIB.ORG

Great Rail Disasters

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Great Rail Disasters Reason Public Policy Institute Independence Institute 3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd. 14142 Denver West Parkway, Suite 185 Suite 400 Golden, Colorado 80401 Los Angeles, CA 90034 310-391-2245 303-279-6536 www.rppi.org i2i.org/cad.aspx Great Rail Disasters The Impact of Rail Transit on Urban Livability by Randal O’Toole February 2004 Great Rail Disasters: The Impact of Rail Transit on Urban Livability by Randal O’Toole Center for the American Dream Independence Institute 14142 Denver West Parkway, Suite 185 Golden, Colorado 80401 303-279-6536 independenceinstitute.org/cad.aspx February 2004 Abstract This paper grades rail transit in twenty-three urban areas on thirteen different criteria: 1. The change in transit ridership from 1990 to 2000; 2. The change in transit’s share of motorized passenger travel from 1990 to 2000; 3. The change in transit commuting in the 1990s; 4. The change in transit’s share of commuting in the 1990s; 5. The reliability of construction cost forecasts; 6. The reliability of ridership forecasts; 7. Changes in congestion from 1982 to 2001; 8. Changes in per capita driving from 1982 to 2001; 9. The cost effectiveness of rail transit relative to freeways; 10. The cost effectiveness of rail transit relative to buses; 11. The safety of rail relative to autos and buses between 1992 and 2001; 12. The energy efficiency of rail relative to passenger cars in 2002; and 13. The effects of rail transit on land-use regulation and property rights. The results show that rail transit has negative net impacts on every urban area in which it is located. In particu- lar, rail transit offers no guarantee that transit commuting will increase or that transit will increase its share of travel. The twenty-three urban areas with rail transit collectively lost more than 33,000 transit commuters during the 1990s, while the twenty-five largest urban areas without rail transit collectively gained more than 27,000 transit commuters. During the same time period, per capita transit ridership and transit’s share of motorized travel de- clined in about half of the rail regions, while transit’s share of commuters declined in 60 percent of rail regions. Regions that emphasize rail transit typically spend 30 to 80 percent of their transportation capital budgets on transit even though transit carries only 1 to 5 percent of regional travel. As a result, rail transit is strongly associated with increased congestion: Sixteen of the twenty regions with the fastest growing congestion are rail regions. Nor is rail transit environmentally friendly. Sixty percent of rail transit systems consume more energy per passenger mile than private cars and the congestion created by rail transit adds to air pollution. Rail transit, espe- cially light rail and commuter rail, can also be deadly. Commuter-rail lines kill more than twice as many people, per billion passenger miles, as buses or urban interstate freeways, while light rail kills three times as many. This paper also profiles transit in each of the major urban areas that have rail transit. The profiles detail transit trends and compare rail line productivity with the productivity of freeway lanes in the same urban areas. The results show that few rail lines carry as many people as a single freeway lane. Contents Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................................................7 Pork Lovers, Auto Haters, and Nostalgia Buffs ................................................................................................................8 Measuring Disaster ............................................................................................................................................................ 10 Change in Transit Ridership and Transit’s Share of Travel................................................................................... 11 Transit Commuting and Share of Commuting ...................................................................................................... 12 Forecast vs. Actual Costs and Ridership .................................................................................................................. 13 Congestion.................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Cost Effectiveness........................................................................................................................................................ 15 Safety............................................................................................................................................................................. 16 Energy ........................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Land-Use Regulation and Property Rights............................................................................................................. 18 Air Pollution ................................................................................................................................................................ 19 Ranking Disaster Using a Rail Livabiity Index.............................................................................................................. 20 Disaster Profiles .................................................................................................................................................................. 21 Atlanta .......................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Baltimore ...................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Boston ........................................................................................................................................................................... 23 Buffalo ........................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Burlington..................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Chicago ......................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Cleveland ...................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Dallas-Ft. Worth ......................................................................................................................................................... 26 Denver ........................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Los Angeles .................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Miami-Ft. Lauderdale................................................................................................................................................. 27 New Haven .................................................................................................................................................................. 28 New Orleans ................................................................................................................................................................ 28 New York ...................................................................................................................................................................... 29 Philadelphia.................................................................................................................................................................. 30 Pittsburgh ..................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Portland ........................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Sacramento ................................................................................................................................................................... 32 Salt Lake City .............................................................................................................................................................. 33 San Diego ..................................................................................................................................................................... 34 San Francisco Bay Area .............................................................................................................................................. 34 San Jose ......................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Seattle...........................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From the 1832 Horse Pulled Tramway to 21Th Century Light Rail Transit/Light Metro Rail - a Short History of the Evolution in Pictures
    From the 1832 Horse pulled Tramway to 21th Century Light Rail Transit/Light Metro Rail - a short History of the Evolution in Pictures By Dr. F.A. Wingler, September 2019 Animation of Light Rail Transit/ Light Metro Rail INTRODUCTION: Light Rail Transit (LRT) or Light Metro Rail (LMR) Systems operates with Light Rail Vehicles (LRV). Those Light Rail Vehicles run in urban region on Streets on reserved or unreserved rail tracks as City Trams, elevated as Right-of-Way Trams or Underground as Metros, and they can run also suburban and interurban on dedicated or reserved rail tracks or on main railway lines as Commuter Rail. The invest costs for LRT/LMR are less than for Metro Rail, the diversity is higher and the adjustment to local conditions and environment is less complicated. Whereas Metro Rail serves only certain corridors, LRT/LRM can be installed with dense and branched networks to serve wider areas. 1 In India the new buzzword for LRT/LMR is “METROLIGHT” or “METROLITE”. The Indian Central Government proposes to run light urban metro rail ‘Metrolight’ or Metrolite” for smaller towns of various states. These transits will operate in places, where the density of people is not so high and a lower ridership is expected. The Light Rail Vehicles will have three coaches, and the speed will be not much more than 25 kmph. The Metrolight will run along the ground as well as above on elevated structures. Metrolight will also work as a metro feeder system. Its cost is less compared to the metro rail installations.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion on Applicability and Train of Thought of Urban Small
    ORIGINAL ARTICLE Discussion on Applicability and Train of Thought of Urban Small Capacity Rail Transit Development Yuan Wang* Ningbo University of Technology, Ningbo 315211, Zhejiang, China. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: In recent years, small and medium-sized cities have built rail transit to meet the growing travel needs of residents that gain popularity. Among them, small capacity rail transit has been widely used in many cities across the country due to its short construction period, low cost and strong adaptability. This article introduces the classification and characteristics of urban small capacity rail transit. Moreover, it discusses the applicability of small capacity rail transit development based on the current development of urban rail. This article claims that the direction of its development ideas in the future is more strengths, more smart, more standardized and coordination development with multiple types. Keywords: Small and Medium Cities; Small Traffic Capacity; Rail Transit; Applicability 1. Introduction With the development of China's economy and society, urban rail transit construction has become a trend. As the skeleton of urban public transportation, rail transit has the advantages of high arrival rate, high punctuality rate, clean and comfortable riding environment, and therefore driving urban economic development. However, the construction of large-capacity rail transit has high cost and long construction period. In some small and medium-sized cities, due to population aggregation, travel capacity, and economic constraints, the construction of large capacity rail transit has obviously caused the city's economic burden and resource waste. Therefore, for small and medium-sized cities, the proper construction of small capacity rail transit has become a reasonable choice.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Bibliography of Light Rail Transit*
    An Annotated U.S. Department of Transportation Bibliography of September 1981 Light Rail ·Transit z 7164 Prepared for .T8 California L57 Department of Transportation AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT* *Light rail transit is a mode of urban transportation utilizing predominantly reserved but not necessarily grade-separated rights of way. Electrically propelled rail vehicles operate singly or in trains. LRT provides a wide range of passenger capabilities and performance characteristics at moderate costs. (Definition from Light Rail Transit: A State of the Art Review, U.S. Department of Transportation, Spring 1976.) September 1981 State of California Department of Transportation Prepared by Division of Transportation Planning ~.C.R.T.D. llBRARY z 7164 -TB L57 Table of Contents Introduction ............................... ii General References ...................................... 1 Glossaries . 2 Periodicals •• .. 3 Advanced Systems ••••••••••••••• . ... 4 Bibliography and Documentation ••••••••••••••.•••••• 6 Economics ••••••• . .. 7 Electrification ••••.•••. 10 Energy ..................... 11 Environmental Protection ••••••• . ... 12 Government Policy, Planning, and Regulation •••••••• . ... 16 History •••••••••• 18 Hum~n Factors •••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••• 22 Industry Structure and Company Management 23 Passenger Operations •••••••••••••••• Cos ts ••.•••••••••••••••••••. 25 Fares and Revenue Collection 28 Intermodal Integration 36 Land Use and Development ••.•••.••••• 39 Level of Service ••• 42 Marketing .....................
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Rail Service Comfortability in Kuala Lumpur Urban Transit System
    MATEC Web of Conferences 47, 003 11 (2016) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201647003 11 C Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2016 Passenger Rail Service Comfortability in Kuala Lumpur Urban Transit System 1 1,a 2 3 Noor Hafiza Nordin , Mohd Idrus Mohd Masirin , Mohd Imran Ghazali and Muhammad Isom Azis 1Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Tun Hussien Onn Malaysia, 86400 Parit Raja, Johor, Malaysia 2Faculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Universiti Tun Hussien Onn Malaysia, 86400 Parit Raja, Johor, Malaysia 3Prasarana Negara Berhad, 59000 Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Abstract. Rail transit transportation system is among the public transportation network in Kuala Lumpur City. Some important elements in establishing this system are ticket price, operation cost, maintenance implications, service quality and passenger’s comfortability. The level of passenger’s comfortability in the coach is important to be considered by the relevant authorities and system operators in order to provide comfort and safety to passengers. The objective this research is to study some parameters that impact the comfortability of passengers and to obtain feedbacks from passengers for different rail transit system. Site observations were conducted to obtain data such as noise, vibration, speed and coach layouts which will be verified by using the passenger feedback outcomes. The research will be focused in and around the Kuala Lumpur City for the duration of 10 months. Four rail transit systems were being considered, i.e. Train Type A (LRA), Train Type B (LRB), Train Type C (MRL) and Train Type D (CTR). Data parameters obtained from field observations were conducted in the rail coaches during actual operation using apparatus among others the sound level meter (SLM), vibration analyzer (VA) and the global positioning system (GPS).
    [Show full text]
  • Design of Bus Bridging Routes in Response to Disruption of Urban Rail Transit
    sustainability Article Design of Bus Bridging Routes in Response to Disruption of Urban Rail Transit Yajuan Deng 1,*, Xiaolei Ru 2, Ziqi Dou 3 and Guohua Liang 4 1 Department of Traffic Engineering, School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China 2 The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education, Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China; [email protected] 3 Department of Transportation Management Engineering, School of Traffic and Transportation, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China; [email protected] 4 Department of Traffic Engineering, School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 30 September 2018; Accepted: 23 November 2018; Published: 27 November 2018 Abstract: Bus bridging has been widely used to connect stations affected by urban rail transit disruptions. This paper designs bus bridging routes for passengers in case of urban rail transit disruption. The types of urban rail transit disruption between Origin-Destination stations are summarized, and alternative bus bridging routes are listed. First, the feasible route generation method is established. Feasible routes for each pair of the disruption Origin-Destination stations include urban rail transit transfer, direct bus bridging, and indirect bus bridging. Then the feasible route generation model with the station capacity constraint is established. The k-short alternative routes are generated to form the bus bridging routes. Lastly, by considering the bus bridging resource constraints, the final bus bridging routes are obtained by merging and filtering the initial bridging routes. Numerical results of an illustrative network show that the bus bridging routes generated from the proposed model can significantly reduce travel delay of blocked passengers, and it is necessary to maintain the number of passengers in the urban rail transit below the station capacity threshold for ensuring a feasible routing design.
    [Show full text]
  • The Urban Rail Development Handbook
    DEVELOPMENT THE “ The Urban Rail Development Handbook offers both planners and political decision makers a comprehensive view of one of the largest, if not the largest, investment a city can undertake: an urban rail system. The handbook properly recognizes that urban rail is only one part of a hierarchically integrated transport system, and it provides practical guidance on how urban rail projects can be implemented and operated RAIL URBAN THE URBAN RAIL in a multimodal way that maximizes benefits far beyond mobility. The handbook is a must-read for any person involved in the planning and decision making for an urban rail line.” —Arturo Ardila-Gómez, Global Lead, Urban Mobility and Lead Transport Economist, World Bank DEVELOPMENT “ The Urban Rail Development Handbook tackles the social and technical challenges of planning, designing, financing, procuring, constructing, and operating rail projects in urban areas. It is a great complement HANDBOOK to more technical publications on rail technology, infrastructure, and project delivery. This handbook provides practical advice for delivering urban megaprojects, taking account of their social, institutional, and economic context.” —Martha Lawrence, Lead, Railway Community of Practice and Senior Railway Specialist, World Bank HANDBOOK “ Among the many options a city can consider to improve access to opportunities and mobility, urban rail stands out by its potential impact, as well as its high cost. Getting it right is a complex and multifaceted challenge that this handbook addresses beautifully through an in-depth and practical sharing of hard lessons learned in planning, implementing, and operating such urban rail lines, while ensuring their transformational role for urban development.” —Gerald Ollivier, Lead, Transit-Oriented Development Community of Practice, World Bank “ Public transport, as the backbone of mobility in cities, supports more inclusive communities, economic development, higher standards of living and health, and active lifestyles of inhabitants, while improving air quality and liveability.
    [Show full text]
  • Critique of “Great Rail Disaster”
    www.vtpi.org [email protected] 250-508-5150 Rail Transit In America A Comprehensive Evaluation of Benefits 1 September 2021 By Todd Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute Produced with support from the American Public Transportation Association Photo: Darrell Clarke Abstract This study evaluates rail transit benefits based on a comprehensive analysis of transportation system performance in major U.S. cities. It finds that cities with large, well- established rail systems have significantly higher per capita transit ridership, lower average per capita vehicle ownership and annual mileage, less traffic congestion, lower traffic death rates, lower consumer expenditures on transportation, and higher transit service cost recovery than otherwise comparable cities with less or no rail transit service. This indicates that rail transit systems provide economic, social and environmental benefits, and these benefits tend to increase as a system expands and matures. This report discusses best practices for evaluating transit benefits. It examines criticisms of rail transit investments, finding that many are based on inaccurate analysis. A condensed version of this report was published as, "Impacts of Rail Transit on the Performance of a Transportation System," Transportation Research Record 1930, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), 2005, pp. 23-29. Todd Litman 2004-2012 You are welcome and encouraged to copy, distribute, share and excerpt this document and its ideas, provided the author is given attribution. Please send your corrections,
    [Show full text]
  • MODERN TRAMS (LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT) for Cities in India 1 | Melbourne Early Trolley Car in Newton, Massachusetts
    MODERN TRAMS (LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT) For Cities in India Institute of Urban Transport (india) www.iutindia.org September, 2013 Title : Modern Trams (Light Rail Transit)-For Cities in India Year : September 2013 Copyright : No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form by photo, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without the written permission of FICCI and Institute of Urban Transport (India). Disclaimer : "The information contained and the opinions expressed are with best intentions and without any liability" I N D E X S.No. SUBJECT Page No. 1. What is a Tramway (Light rail transit) . 1 2. Historical background . 1 3. Worldwide usage. 3 4. Trams vsLRT . 3 5. Features of LRT . 4 6. Comparison with Metro rail . 4 7. Comparison with Bus. 5 8. Comparison with BRT (Bus-way) . 6 9. Issues in LRT. 8 10. A case for LRT . 8 11. Integrated LRT and bus network . 9 12. Relevance of LRT for India . 10 13. Kolkata tram . 10 14. Growth of Kolkata tram . 11 15. Kolkata tram after 1992. 12 16. Learning from Kolkata tram . 13 17. Present mass rapid transit services in India . 14 18. Need for a medium capacity mass rapid transit mode in India. 15 19. Planning and design of LRT . 16 20. Aesthetics and Technology . 17 21. Capex, Opex and Life cycle cost of alternative modes of MRT . 18 22. Evolution of LRT model abroad . 20 23. LRT model for India . 21 24. Road Junctions & Signalling Arrangements . 22 25. System design . 22 26. Financing . 23 27. Project Development Process . 23 28.
    [Show full text]
  • Rail Transit Capacity
    7UDQVLW&DSDFLW\DQG4XDOLW\RI6HUYLFH0DQXDO PART 3 RAIL TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS 1. RAIL CAPACITY BASICS ..................................................................................... 3-1 Introduction................................................................................................................. 3-1 Grouping ..................................................................................................................... 3-1 The Basics................................................................................................................... 3-2 Design versus Achievable Capacity ............................................................................ 3-3 Service Headway..................................................................................................... 3-4 Line Capacity .......................................................................................................... 3-5 Train Control Throughput....................................................................................... 3-5 Commuter Rail Throughput .................................................................................... 3-6 Station Dwells ......................................................................................................... 3-6 Train/Car Capacity...................................................................................................... 3-7 Introduction............................................................................................................. 3-7 Car Capacity...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Global Overview of the Urban Rail Transit and the Urgency for PPP Standard Development Prof
    Global Overview of the Urban Rail Transit and the Urgency for PPP Standard Development Prof. Li, Kaimeng, Ph.D., Director General of the CIECC Research Centre Dear Colleagues, My name is Li Kaimeng, from the China International Engineering Consulting Corporation (CIECC). It is my great pleasure to be here joining the TOS PPP meeting, and to use this opportunity to discuss together how to develop the best practice PPP model on Urban Rail Transit to support Member States to develop a greener economy. Here I would like to share with you my vision on the global overview of Urban Rail Transit, and the urgency for the PPP standard development in terms of the people-first principle. Compared with traditional public transport systems, urban rail transit is a greener and environmental-friendly transport mode with energy-efficiency, land-conservation, huge traffic capacity, less pollution, convenience, safety and comfort, which is in line with the principles of sustainable development requirements, especially suitable for the public transport needs in large- and medium-size cities. Although urban rail transit has a history of over 150 years, the urban rail transit system has only been built on a large-scale internationally since the 1970s. Until now, over 50 countries have operated subways in more than 150 cities, the gross length of which has exceeded 10,000 kilometres. It includes Metro, Light rail, Monorail, Urban fast track, tram, Maglev Train and APM. Progress of urbanization all over the world, especially in developing countries, leads people to an increasing requirement on ecological and green urban transport. In choosing the mode of urban transportation, people pay more and more attention to land and energy saving, environment quality improvement, and passenger safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Design of Urban Rail Transit Network Constrained by Urban Road Network, Trips and Land-Use Characteristics
    sustainability Article Design of Urban Rail Transit Network Constrained by Urban Road Network, Trips and Land-Use Characteristics Shushan Chai * , Qinghuai Liang and Simin Zhong School of Civil Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China; [email protected] (Q.L.); [email protected] (S.Z.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 1 September 2019; Accepted: 1 November 2019; Published: 3 November 2019 Abstract: In the process of urban rail transit network design, the urban road network, urban trips and land use are the key factors to be considered. At present, the subjective and qualitative methods are usually used in most practices. In this paper, a quantitative model is developed to ensure the matching between the factors and the urban rail transit network. In the model, a basic network, which is used to define the roads that candidate lines will pass through, is firstly constructed based on the locations of large traffic volume and main passenger flow corridors. Two matching indexes are proposed: one indicates the matching degree between the network and the trip demand, which is calculated by the deviation value between two gravity centers of the stations’ importance distribution in network and the traffic zones’ trip intensity; the other one describes the matching degree between the network and the land use, which is calculated by the deviation value between the fractal dimensions of stations’ importance distribution and the traffic zones’ land-use intensity. The model takes the maximum traffic turnover per unit length of network and the minimum average volume of transfer passengers between lines as objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Application and Prospect of Straddle Monorail Transit System in China
    Urban Rail Transit (2015) 1(1):26–34 DOI 10.1007/s40864-015-0006-9 http://www.urt.cn/ ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPERS Application and Prospect of Straddle Monorail Transit System in China Xihe He1 Received: 9 December 2014 / Revised: 14 February 2015 / Accepted: 19 February 2015 / Published online: 21 May 2015 Ó The Author(s) 2015. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Straddle monorail, using rubber wheels and positional relationship between the vehicle and the track precast concrete track beams, is a kind of distinctive urban beam, it can be divided into two types of monorail such as rail transit system, featured with strong climbing capa- straddle monorail and suspend type monorail. bility, small turning radius, less land occupation, low noise, Straddle monorail is a kind of monorail system, in which moderate volume, and low cost. Those unique technical the vehicles use rubber wheels traveling across on the characteristics have played an important role in Chongqing track/beam. Except the walking wheels, there are guiding urban rail transit lines. Chongqing provides a typical wheels and stabilizing wheels on both sides of the bogie, demonstration project, and straddle monorail transit system which clamp on both sides of the track beam, to ensure the will be a favorite urban rail transit system for our other vehicle safely and smoothly running along the track [1]. mountain cities, landscape cities, coastal cities, historical Not only is Straddle monorail very suitable for mountain and cultural cities, etc. And it has laid a good foundation city, coastal city, urban and complex terrain, and road city and favorable conditions for further popularization and but also for the urban areas surrounded by a high con- application of straddle monorail transit system.
    [Show full text]