Innovative Coordination Tisan Manner Can Make Coordination Efforts Much Easier and Have a More Lasting Effect
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Transportation on the Minneapolis Riverfront
RAPIDS, REINS, RAILS: TRANSPORTATION ON THE MINNEAPOLIS RIVERFRONT Mississippi River near Stone Arch Bridge, July 1, 1925 Minnesota Historical Society Collections Prepared by Prepared for The Saint Anthony Falls Marjorie Pearson, Ph.D. Heritage Board Principal Investigator Minnesota Historical Society Penny A. Petersen 704 South Second Street Researcher Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Hess, Roise and Company 100 North First Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 May 2009 612-338-1987 Table of Contents PROJECT BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 1 RAPID, REINS, RAILS: A SUMMARY OF RIVERFRONT TRANSPORTATION ......................................... 3 THE RAPIDS: WATER TRANSPORTATION BY SAINT ANTHONY FALLS .............................................. 8 THE REINS: ANIMAL-POWERED TRANSPORTATION BY SAINT ANTHONY FALLS ............................ 25 THE RAILS: RAILROADS BY SAINT ANTHONY FALLS ..................................................................... 42 The Early Period of Railroads—1850 to 1880 ......................................................................... 42 The First Railroad: the Saint Paul and Pacific ...................................................................... 44 Minnesota Central, later the Chicago, Milwaukee and Saint Paul Railroad (CM and StP), also called The Milwaukee Road .......................................................................................... 55 Minneapolis and Saint Louis Railway ................................................................................. -
Full Draft Long Range Plan February 2018
CONNECTING YOUR FUTURE Everett Transit DRAFT LONG RANGE PLAN Everett Transit Long Range Plan 1 Connecting Your Future 2 Connecting Your Future Table of CONTENTS i Executive Summary i 1 Why a Long Range Plan? 1 2 Transit Today and in the Future 4 3 Everett Transit’s Role 10 4 Our Plan to Move Forward 13 5 Our Financial Future 16 6 Strategy for Implementation 19 Everett Transit Draft Long Range Plan Everett Transit Long Range Plan 3 Connecting Your Future The Goals of the Plan Everett Transit provides safe, customer-focused, cost-efficient, and effective public transit and transportation management services in support of sustainable growth and a livable community. This Long Range Plan services three main goals: 1 Identify future transit service 2 Determine options for implementation 3 Establish service standards Everett Transit Draft Long Range Plan i Everett Transit Long Range Plan i How the Community Helped Develop a Growth Network Plan Everett Transit went out to the community throughout 2017 to help define the vision for transit in the future and to gather feedback on how service should be provided to support continued growth in the region. Respondents described the role they see for Everett Transit in the region and they highlighted their priorities for transit. What We Heard Provide a locally-focused transit network with high frequency and expanded service hours that connects to key destinations and regional transit services. Everett Transit Growth Network Route Frequency (Peak) !#"5 Marysville 15-20 MInutes 30 Minutes E M r a D ri -
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) Performance Characteristics Stations Mixed Traffic Lanes* Service Characteristics Newest Corridor End‐to‐End Travel Departures Every 'X' Travel Speed (MPH) City Corridor Segment Open length (mi) # Spacing (mi) Miles % Time Minutes BRT Systems Boston Silver Line Washington Street ‐ SL5 2002 2.40 13 0.18 1.03 42.93% 19 7 7.58 Oakland San Pablo Rapid ‐ 72R 2003 14.79 52 0.28 14.79 100.00% 60 12 14.79 Albuquerque The Red Line (766) 2004 11.00 17 0.65 10.32 93.79% 44 18 15.00 Kansas City Main Street ‐ MAX "Orange Line" 2005 8.95 22 0.41 4.29 47.92% 40 10 13.42 Eugene Green Line 2007 3.98 10 0.40 1.59 40.00% 29 10 8.23 New York Bx12 SBS (Fordham Road ‐ Pelham Pkwy) 2008 9.00 18 0.50 5.20 57.73% 52 3 10.38 Cleveland HealthLine 2008 6.80 39 0.17 2.33 34.19% 38 8 10.74 Snohomish County Swift BRT ‐ Blue Line 2009 16.72 31 0.54 6.77 40.52% 43 12 23.33 Eugene Gateway Line 2011 7.76 14 0.55 2.59 33.33% 29 10 16.05 Kansas City Troost Avenue ‐ "Green Line" 2011 12.93 22 0.59 12.93 100.00% 50 10 15.51 New York M34 SBS (34th Street) 2011 2.00 13 0.15 2.00 100.00% 23 9 5.22 Stockton Route #44 ‐ Airport Corridor 2011 5.50 8 0.69 5.50 100.00% 23 20 14.35 Stockton Route #43 ‐ Hammer Corridor 2012 5.30 14 0.38 5.30 100.00% 28 12 11.35 Alexandria ‐ Arlington Metroway 2014 6.80 15 0.45 6.12 89.95% 24 12 17.00 Fort Collins Mason Corridor 2014 4.97 12 0.41 1.99 40.00% 24 10 12.43 San Bernardino sbX ‐ "Green Line" 2014 15.70 16 0.98 9.86 62.79% 56 10 16.82 Minneapolis A Line 2016 9.90 20 0.50 9.90 100.00% 28 10 21.21 Minneapolis Red Line 2013 13.00 5 2.60 2.00 15.38% 55 15 14.18 Chapel Hill N‐S Corridor Proposed 8.20 16 0.51 1.34 16.34% 30 7.5 16.40 LRT Systems St. -
What Is Bus Rapid Transit (Brt)?
Community Transit’s Swift Bus Rapid Transit August 21, 2012 Community Transit Snohomish County is just north of King County. Everett is the largest city within Snohomish County, and is approx 30 miles north of Seattle State Route 99 The SR 99 corridor has the highest density of population and employment in Snohomish County Swift •Swift - all the elements of BRT: •Running Ways •Unique Brand •Vehicles •Fare Collection •Stations •ITS •Service & Operations Plan Swift SR 99 – Everett Station to Aurora Village Transit Center 16.7 miles 5 jurisdictions 28 stations 14 northbound 14 southbound Swift Corridor Infrastructure • Able to leverage existing investments in corridor • 6.7 miles of Business Access Transit (BAT) lanes • 10.5 miles of Transit Signal Priority (TSP) • TSP in City of Everett completed in August 2011 BAT LANES UNIQUE VEHICLES 15 Branded 62 foot articulated, hybrid vehicles Vehicle design contributes to Speed & Reliability On board bike racks for 3 bikes Passive restraint for wheelchairs Swift Station – “a sense of place” The station is located on an 10’x60’ easement - behind the sidewalk. Station elements include weather protection, information kiosk, fare collection, welcome mats, and jurisdictional artwork on the platform. Station Placement Innovative station design Innovative station design Swift Fare Collection Off Board fare collection: 2 Ticket Vending Machines at each station 2 Smart Card readers at each station Customers pay at the station, then board by any door Swift Ambassadors in the corridor randomly check fares SWIFT SERVICE Swift now runs 6 days per week • 5 a.m. until midnight M-F • 6 a.m. until midnight on Saturdays • No Sunday service systemwide 12 minute headways • 5 a.m. -
East-West Corridor High Capacity Transit Plan Rapid Transit Evaluation Results
East-West Corridor High Capacity Transit Plan Rapid Transit Evaluation Results About the Corridor The AECOM consultant team conducted a high-level analysis of commuter rail, light rail transit (LRT), streetcar and bus rapid transit (BRT) to determine the most appropriate mode for the East- West Corridor. Based on the corridor fit, ridership capacity, cost per mile to build/operate and available right-of-way, BRT will move forward for more detailed analysis. This fact sheet provides, in more detail, how BRT and LRT compared and why BRT was determined to be the best fit. BRT with LRT Screening Results Below are the similarities and differences between bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail transit (LRT). Features Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Service Frequency Frequent service during peak hrs. (5–15 min.) Frequent service during peak hrs. (5–15 min.) Typical Corridor Length 5–25 mi. 10–20 mi. Range of Operating Speed 25–55 MPH 30–55 MPH Right-of-Way Dedicated lanes and/or mixed traffic Dedicated lanes with overhead electrical systems Typical Station Spacing ½ and one mile apart One mile apart, outside of downtowns Level boarding at high-quality stations Level boarding at high-quality stations Vehicle Types 40- or 60-ft. buses that have multiple doors 1–3 car trains; low floor vehicles Technology Traffic signal priority Traffic signal priority Real-time passenger info Real-time passenger info Off-board fare payment Off-board fare payment Typical Operating Cost per Hr. $100–$200 $200–$400 Typical Capital Cost per Mi. $2.5 million–$20 million $140 million+ Ridership Capacity by Mode Best Poor Current East-West Corridor Ridership (6.9k–8.7k riders) Modern Streetcar Light Rail Transit (1.5k–6k riders) (20k–90k riders) Bus Rapid Transit (4k–15k riders) Commuter Rail (3k–20k riders) Ridership Mode Capacity by 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 The chart above demonstrates that BRT and commuter rail both have the needed capacity to meet ridership needs. -
Classic Trains Index 2018-2019
INDEX TO VOLUMES 19 and 20 CLASSIC TRAINS Spring 2018 through Winter 2019 (8 issues) 768 pages HOW TO USE THIS INDEX: Feature material has been indexed three or more times—once by the title under which it was published, again under the author’s last name, and finally under one or more of the subject categories or railroads. Photographs standing alone are indexed (usually by railroad), but photographs within a feature article usually are not separately indexed. Brief items are indexed under the appropriate railroad and/or category. Most references to people are indexed under the company with which they are commonly identified; if there is no common identification, they may be indexed under the person’s last name. Items from countries from other than the U.S. and Canada are indexed under the appropriate country name. ABBREVIATIONS: Sp = Spring issue, Su = Summer issue, Fa = Fall issue, Wi = Winter issue All contents of publications indexed © 2018, and 2019 by Kalmbach Media Co., Waukesha, Wis. A Baldwin Locomotive Works: C Steam’s Last Great Year, Fa19 14 Aberdeen & Rockfish: Baltimore & Ohio: Cajon Standoff, Way It Was, Wi19 80 All-Star Works the Minor Leagues, Archive Treasures, Wi19 46 Amtrak’s Early Years, from the Inside, Fa18 36 California Photo Special (Photo Section), Wi18 44 Abilene & Southern: Cinders: A Forgotten Commodity, Su18 86 California State Railroad Museum, Classics Today, Sp19 103 Steam-powered mixed train at Ballinger, Texas (photo), Su18 50 Dixie Goes the Backway, Sp18 54 California Western: ACF: See American Car & Foundry EM-1 class 2-8-8-4 7609 at night (photo), Fa19 1 Baldwin diesels by enginehouse in 1973 (photo), Su18 56 (color) Action at Jackson (Kentucky), Wi18 50 Engine with Everything (EM-1s), Steam’s Last Great Year, California Zephyr: Adrian & Blissfield: Fa19 22 At Oakland Pier, Sp19 20 (photo) Obscure Ohio & Morenci, Su18 60 George Washington: Seeking Streamliners in 1969, Wi19 54 At Omaha, Overnight to Omaha . -
Best Practices for Engaging Anchor Institutions and Neighborhoods
Capitol Region Council of Governments Building Corridors of Opportunity: Best Practices for Engaging Anchor Institutions and Neighborhoods Final Report December 1, 2016 Acknowledgements Building Corridors of Opportunity: Best Practices for Engaging Anchor Institutions and Neighborhoods, Final Report was prepared with financial support from the Hartford Foundation for Public Giving. The report was prepared for the Capitol Region Council of Governments by the consulting firm of HR&A Advisors, Inc. Building Corridors of Opportunity, Final Report 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary.........................................................05 Case Studies....................................................................19 Cleveland Healthline...............................................29 East Liberty Revitalization......................................42 Cortex Innovation Community................................52 Maryland TOD Initiative.........................................63 Urban Essex Coalition for Smart Growth............72 Emerald Express (EmX)...........................................82 Appendix..........................................................................90 Building Corridors of Opportunity, Final Report 3 Executive Summary CTfastrak is a bus rapid transit (BRT) service that began operation in 2015, running from downtown Hartford to downtown New Britain, Connecticut. • With a dedicated right-of-way, frequent service, pre-boarding payment system, and specially designed buses, it is one of the highest-rated systems -
JUNE 1975 TOM PULSIFER Editor OFFICIAL NEWSLETTER of OARP
• THE • A$OCtliON OF A41l..R040 96ENGERS Post Office Box 653 • Xenia, Ohio 45385 issue #6 JUNE 1975 TOM PULSIFER editor OFFICIAL NEWSLETTER OF OARP OHIO SITUATION UPDATE by David s. Marshall Ohio continues to move toward active involvement in OFFICIAL rail passenger service. The legislation initiated mainly by Rep. Art Wilkowski to establish an Ohio rail ANNOUNCEMENT authority outside the Ohio DOT (HB 64) has passed the of the House and moved on to the Senate Transportation Com mittee for review. OARP testified before Wilkowski's MID-SUMMER Committee and before the Senate Committee. At press G ETING time the bill is being reported out of committee and is given a good chance of passing the Senate. of the The other matter, critical to the State involvement, OHIO ASSOCIATION of is the constitutional amendment legislation to allow RAILROAD PASSENGERS Ohio to use state funds in support of rail activities. This bill is House Joint Resolution 47. As firstwrit in CINCINNATI, OHIO ten it failed a House vote due a lack of Republican ••• see the insert backing. This prompted an urgent plea from OARP for at center of issue communications to Republican legislators. A motion to rehear the question passed with bi-partisan support and joint committee activity between the houses has been ironing out wrinkles in the proposal. As we go to press HJR 47 is on the calendar for a House vote and is given excellent chances of making it this time. LATE-BREAKING ITEMI We are told that the constitutional amendment it car The Freedom Train ries is designed to allow Ohio to participate finan schedule in Ohio cially in support of corporations set up by Congress. -
Shopping. Work. School. Errands. Swift Bus Rapid Transit. for the Way
An expanded Swift network in Snohomish County Shopping. Work. School. Errands. Swift Bus Rapid Transit. Snohomish County has a vibrant future, drawing families to move here with a breathtaking setting, specialized services and For the way top-flight employment. For more information on Community Transit’s vision you live. to further increase Swift service, Community Transit is building a world-class visit www.communitytransit.org/Swift transit system to support and connect those growing communities, ensuring quality of life for generations to come. www.communitytransit.org (425) 353-RIDE (7433) 0915/10K Community Transit has changed LOCATION ECONOMIC IMPACT A proposed second line of Swift Bus Rapid Transit is designed to connect the Boeing/ There are currently about 65,000 jobs in the Boeing/Paine Field vicinity. And the way people use public transit Paine Field aerospace manufacturing area in Everett with the Canyon Park technology Snohomish County is the manufacturing center of Washington State. Fast, frequent center in Bothell. The Everett-to-Bothell corridor was chosen because of several factors: new bus service between Canyon Park and Paine Field will provide more incentive Swift instead of driving their cars. This eases in Snohomish County. • Existing lanes on part of the corridor that allow transit access for workers and shoppers to choose congestion and brings economic vitality to the area. • High-density housing and concentrated jobs located nearby • Corridor intersects with the first Swift line at Airport Road For local businesses, the Swift network will provide reliable and frequent options for • New transit facility planned for northern terminal: Seaway Transit Center employees to get to work and will reduce the need for expanded parking facilities. -
Chapt4 Comment Summary.Pdf
City Council Office 435 Ryman Missoula, MT 59802 Phone: 406-529-5580 Fax: 406-327-2137 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.ci.missoula.mt.us/citycouncil/ Chapter 4 – State Rail Plan Comments October 21, 2010 Doug McBroom MDT Multimodal Programs 2701 Prospect Ave. PO Box 201001 Helena, MT 59620-1001 Dear Mr. McBroom, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Chapter 4 (Passenger Rail Service) of the Montana State Rail Plan. I appreciate the Montana Department of Transportation’s (MDT’s) efforts in updating this plan— particularly by continuing to examine alternatives for enhancing passenger rail service in Montana. And while Chapter 4 discusses both the Empire Builder and the possibility of reinstating passenger rail service in southern Montana, my comments focus on the latter, as I take it as a given that the continuation of the Empire Builder will remain a priority for the state. In addition, my comments relative to the restoration of passenger rail service in southern Montana boil down to one main point: the two-tiered Amtrak study requested by MDT is inadequate to address the true feasibility of reinstating passenger rail service through southern Montana due to its limited focus on intrastate service. This appears to be largely a function of the original scope of work assigned to Amtrak by MDT, as described in section I.A of Amtrak’s Feasibility Report on Proposed Amtrak Services in Southern Montana (Amtrak Report). Let me elaborate. The Tier 1 analysis focuses on Billings to Missoula. Given (i) the meager projected ridership along this route, (ii) the capital investment necessary to put this intercity line into service, and (iii) the fact that the state of Montana would be responsible for a significant amount of the initial capital outlay and ongoing operational costs, it is extremely unlikely that this limited route is a feasible undertaking. -
Swift Green Line April 11, 2019 Overview
Swift Green Line April 11, 2019 Overview • Swift BRT Overview • Swift Green Line Project • Snohomish County Partnership • Early Results Swift – Washington’s first BRT ✓ “Overlay BRT” ✓ Stations approx. 3/4-1 mile apart ✓10 minute frequencies – all day Swift Blue Line ➢SR 99 – Everett Station to Aurora Village Transit Center ➢16.7 miles ➢5 jurisdictions ➢29 stations ✓14 northbound ✓15 southbound ✓Stations approx 1 mile apart ➢ Overarching goal – 10 second dwell Swift vehicles: Vehicle design contributes to Speed & Reliability of the Service Station Features • Shelter & wind protection • Seating & Leaning rails • Iconic marker • Off board fare collection: • 2 Ticket Vending machines • 2 ORCA processors • Raised platforms – 10 inch curbs for ease of boarding • Tactile edges • Curb bumpers • Welcome mats with graphics to show where to board • Information kiosk • Lighting – dims at night when service is not operating • Next bus display with audible tone when bus approaches Swift Service Characteristics ◆ Swift runs 7 days per week – 4:20 a.m. – 11:30 p.m. • Every 10 minutes 6 a.m. – 7 p.m. M-F • Every 20 minutes early morning, evenings & weekends ◆ Compulsory stops at all stations ◆ Precision docking with rub rails ◆ Consistently meeting goal of 10 second dwell times System Ridership Swift ridership is more than triple the next closest route • 1 in 6 Community Transit boardings are on Swift December 2018 Swift Green Line – • building the Network Swift Green Line ⚫ Boeing/Paine Field MIC to Canyon Park Park & Ride ⚫ 12.5 miles ⚫ 15 station pairs ⚫ Service every 10 minutes throughout the day SEAWAY TRANSIT CENTER SEAWAY TRANSIT CENTER SEAWAY TRANSIT CENTER SEAWAY TRANSIT CENTER 128th WIDENING @ I-5 Station Construction Swift Coaches Project Cost ◆ Final Project cost estimate is $73,632,000 • Federal Small Starts Grant = $43,190,000 • Federal 5307 Grant funds = $3,360,000 • Regional Mobility Grants = $13,800,000 • Local funding = $13,282,000 (Incl. -
Insiders Report 1/3
N L I N Volume 2 O E Number 1 E D N O I T I Mainline Set Out Track Conveyor Location Flood Loader Alternate Conveyor Location HO Western Coal Flood Loader 933-3089 $39.98 N Scale 933-3247 $36.98 Flood Up To Thirty Cars An Hour Loading Loop To Other Loaders Out in the western coal fields, (Optional) surface mining yields an amazing amount of clean- Here are a few sample place- burning, low-sulfur coal. ments for the flood loader. Under the prairies and up in Make sure to place the the Rockies, the depth of some loader at the center of a sid- coal seams are measured in ing or loop long enough to yards, not feet as in most older handle double the length of eastern mines. your longest train, including Huge shovels and gigantic, locomotives. This way trains 125-ton-plus dump trucks feed can pull completely through conveyors stretching for miles the loader without fouling between mines and the rail- This structure, located in In the U.S. alone, coal is a $21 This way you can add heavy- the mainline. central Colorado, has been head. The tall concrete silos of billion per year industry. With duty mining equipment to converted into a washing western coal flood loaders, so the easy-to-build Western Coal your scene. facility fed by a conveyor named because they literally Flood Loader, you can feed In some locations, the loader directly from the mine. flood 100-ton gondolas and entire unit trains of gondolas is on the site of an older mine Trains are loaded by the hoppers with coal, seem to or hoppers to your modern-era facility or along an existing flood loader.