Group pushes Richmond for green-transit projects

Charvey, I have nothing against Seway’s as personal transportation and am glad you’re saving a few bucks on gas and parking. I’ve done the tour on one in DC and it was a fun experience, but not every day.  What I am more than a bit hacked off at is the way we go about a serious program like public transport.  I stand by my claim that this is a lot of smoke and mirrors in order to discourage heavy investment in electric and in particular electric rail vehicles. 

Yesterday I was reading an article in the July issue of Today’s Railways-Europe on Paris’s Phases II of its Transportation Plan.  While Richmond is not the size of Paris it still bears looking at in terms of size, scope and vision.  It calls for an expenditure of just over 35 Billion Euros ( $50.29 billion US), which will add over 114 km of fully automated metro with sustain speeds of 80 km. Light rail lines are to be extended and a regional TGV to be built that will serve the southern portions of the city including the Disney Park at Marm-la-Vallee (Commune du Chessy). There is also a further 21 Billion Euros ($30.3 billion US) pledged to upgrade the existing regional rail network and the older sections of the Metro.  This is what our leadership should be doing and not limiting themselves to an orgy of road building with little “green concepts” thrown in. Yes! I’m cynical.

The Kenosha example was designed to show it can be done on a small scale and a way to spoon feed leadership in to looking at other modes and stop the grand standing with “Gee Whiz” web sites and Mall Cop technology.

The PUMA is described as a self-propelled rickshaw. Somebody is definitely thinking outside the box.  Probably not suitable for Richmond.

What this amounts to in my humble opinion is “gadgets” and ‘hot air.”  Nothing of substance to effectively deal with traffic and transportation problems only toys and talk with corporate grand standing from auto executives mouthing slogans about going “green.”  The new favor de jur!

Charvey is right Richmond was home to the first modern electric streetcar/light rail system a technology whose time has again come and should be the focus of this committee’s work. Frank Sprague’s work in the years 1887-88 saw Richmond City Railways adopt two important innovations that made the system so successful. First the sprung motor capable of withstanding impact and maintaining a constant speed couple with the use of a single trolley and pole to collect electric current.  This couple with Richmond’s hills—some grades nearly 10 percent—gave him an ideal laboratory in which to develop these innovations.  Ironically, despite the success of Sprague’s work-and in true Richmond fashion-he managed to lose his shirt financially.  However, it invites the question does this committee represent anything so bold or innovative?  The answer is a resounding “NO.”  What we get are more diesel buses and Segways. No mention of light rail or the possibility of commuter rail services to other localities. Not even the electric trolley bus gets a node from these ‘visionaries.”  By the way does anyone really think a Segway is a public transit vehicle?

If Richmond is serious about light rail and transportation alternatives it may do well to look at the example of Kenosha Wisconsin, whose trolley system opened in April 2000. 
Kenosha’s Harbor Park Plan, which is served by the streetcar line, comprises over four hundred upscale urban housing units and retail, commercial, restaurant and recreational facilities. The 2.2 mile line connects the Harbor with the MERTA station and has a fleet of five ex-TTC trolleys painted in the colors of major North American streetcar systems including Chicago Surface Lines and Pittsburg Railways The Kenosha system is circular in nature and operates on both a winter and summer schedule with a base fare of 50 cents offering transfers to a number of bus lines.
What is also unique about the system is the method of construction which utilized the contractor—not the city—as the purchasing agent.  Cars, track and electric fittings were purchased by the builder at cost savings far below that of the municipality. This was due to the fact the contractor was not encumbered by rules public agencies must follow in making procurements.  The much larger New Jersey Transit followed a similar strategy in building its North Jersey Light Rail system.
What the Kenosha streetcar circulator project demonstrates is the feasibility of reintroducing zero-emission electric transit into Midwest cities and the application of special short-haul transit applications that can be grown into larger more complex transit operations.  However, our leadership is seemingly content with “toys and talk” and above all smoke and mirrors to maintain the status quo.  Frank Sprague must be turning in his grave.

Hard to imagine anything that innovative happening in Richmond, huh?

Great idea. But who’s on the committee?