COTA willing to run streetcars, sees benefits
The Dispatch wrote
COTA willing to run streetcars, sees benefits
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
BY TIM DOULIN
COTA is willing to operate and maintain the streetcar system if it is built, said William Lhota, COTA’s president and chief executive. COTA has talked with the city, he said. “I think it is a positive because it further ensures it will be seamlessly integrated into the COTA system,” Lhota said.
COTA is a “strong possibility” to operate the streetcar system, “but we haven’t made a decision yet,” said Antone White, a spokesman for Mayor Michael B. Coleman. For one thing, the City Council must decide whether to give the go-ahead for the streetcar line. That decision is expected this year.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, April 1st, 2008 at 12:14 pm and is filed under Transit.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Related Tags: bill lhota • COTA • streetcar
April 1st, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Um, yeah, that’s ok….
April 1st, 2008 at 12:57 pm
It’s been hinted at for a long time and I think it makes the most sense to have them manage the operations of it.
April 1st, 2008 at 6:32 pm
April Fools!
April 1st, 2008 at 7:15 pm
i think you’re right walker. that way at some date FAR in the future, when there are several street car lines and one popular light rail line, cota would already be well positioned to integrate logistics of both systems.
April 1st, 2008 at 7:50 pm
See my post in the other streetcar thread about potential incarnations of the streetcar being worse than the status quo …
COTA wants its grubbies in the nice, lush, hot streetcar pie. Streetcars will come in spite of COTA and COTA should not be rewarded for decades of malfeasance.
A.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:31 pm
COTA has experience (good and bad) with running a transit system.
Setting up a new operations entity to run the Streetcar doesn’t guarantee that they will perform better than COTA, and would probably be more costly.
My knowledge is fairly limited on the topic but it seems like the current administration at COTA has been doing fairly well at making some small improvements in the past two years (and more in the pipeline) and getting the whole thing turned around.
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:00 am
See my post in the other streetcar thread about potential incarnations of the streetcar being worse than the status quo …
COTA wants its grubbies in the nice, lush, hot streetcar pie. Streetcars will come in spite of COTA and COTA should not be rewarded for decades of malfeasance.
Agree, I would like to hear what are the alternatives to COTA
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:46 am
I also agree that it makes the most sense for COTA to run any future transit projects in columbus, and specifically, the new streetcar line.
Think of the logistics of two groups running transit. if you needed to ride a bus and a streetcar to get to your destination, you’d have to pay two fares rather than just getting a transfer from the driver. Having two sets of schedule and route information at each stop (if they would use the same stops) instead of just having one comprehensive list.
I’ve been using COTA since I sold my car in 2003, and I have to agree that its gotten much better in the past two years, and it stands to get only better with the tax increase that was approved last year.
Also, I don’t think Bill Lhota would have been sitting on the panel for the financing plan presentation if they didn’t intend for COTA to have some interaction with the project.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:19 am
I don’t see why two different transit operators couldn’t integrate fares, schedules, and timetables on the street. If desired, COTA could do all the scheduling, but let someone else do the driving. Would someone else dirving be a benefit? I don’t know, but I think I like the idea of competitive bidding for the streetcar operations. I would support the same for bus operations, but I believe it is prohibited by union contract.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:34 am
With competitive bidding, wouldn’t you run the risk of pi$$ing off COTA if they don’t win? Maybe that’s not a bad thing, but having two transit agencies fighting each other probably wouldn’t serve the public interest.
I’m usually a fan of competition, but transit agencies are a different animal. You don’t want COTA trying to put the streetcar agency out of business.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:40 am
And there could be a significant cost savings in combined personnel and administration.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:48 am
Sounds like the maintenance man in my condo. He does a crap job, but we pay him his bonus ever year anyway because we’re afraid that we’ll piss him off and he’ll do a worse job.
I can see the benefits to integration of the two services. It might even give COTA a competitive advantage in the bidding process. But I don’t see why it would be in COTA’s best interest to have the streetcar go out of business. Increasing the number of people using transit city-wide is in everyone’s best interest. What’s good for the streetcar is also good for COTA.
I found this APTA report from 1997. It seems that Scandinavian countries have experienced lower unit operating costs, improved quality of the bus fleet, and improved customer satisfaction following competitive bidding. They make a mention that US cities have experienced cost savings, but less consistent quality improvements. I’d like to do more research on the US experience. I’m sure there’s plenty of evidence saying competitive bidding is a disaster too.
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:54 am
I’m still too angry at COTA to digest this - Listening to Bill Lhota introduce himself at the streetcar meeting last week and talk about the high price of gas that he noticed as he was driving into work from Licking County really got my goat, what irony! Anyone else think a stipulation of running COTA should be that you have to live on a line or try taking one of the few park & ride routes into the office?
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:10 am
Sort of like the head of Amtrak flying to Washington for an emergency meeting on the fate of Amtrak? :lol:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:17 am
So the first paragraph of this article is no longer accurate?
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:28 am
Does anyone know what other cities that run multiple transit system concurrently are doing in this regard?
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Most cities have no problems coordinating schedules, and to a lesser extent fares, between multiple agencies.
San Francisco is in the process of implementing the Translink Card, that will be good everywhere.
NYC has the MetroCard, that seems to be good on the MTA buses and subways, but not on the commuter rails or New Jersey Transit.
That’s pretty much the same as the situation in Chicago and DC. Chicago has a Chicago Card good on CTA and PACE, but not on Metra unless you purchase a Metra LinkUp or PlusBus sticker. DC has a SmarTrip card that is good on buses, but not commuter rail and is the only way to pay to park and ride at Metrorail stations.
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
The thing is with those cities, the differing transit agencies are running dis-similar systems, i.e. bus/subway and commuter rail. The systems serve somewhat different purposes.
In Columbus’s case we’re talking about potentially having two separate agencies run two systems run essentially the same sort slow speed surface route. I think it would make the most sense to have COTA run the Streetcar, as it is mostly a fixed bus route.
If this were instead a commuter system I would say another transit agency might be in order.
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Honestly, I’d be in favor of having one-stop shopping for everything up until you’re at the OhioHub level (which necessarily means coordinating with polities outside central Ohio). However, until you get outside the general area roughly corresponding to MORPC’s jurisdiction, I don’t see why completely separate agencies would be necessary. Possibly not even separate branches within one agency.
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:14 pm
One agency might make the most sense. I looked through some streetcar/trolley websites and found that all are either operated by the local transit authority or by a non-profit city-owned development corp.
Streetcars operated by transit agencies
Charlotte
Kenosha
Little Rock
Memphis
Seattle
Tampa
Toronto
Streetcars operated by non-profit corporations
Dallas
Portland
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Does this mean that streetcars are never allowed to run past 6:30 p.m.?
Will they be allowed to arrive at stops at times posted on a schedule?
Will they be able to run more frequently than every 45 mintes?
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:27 pm
THANK YOU!
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:48 pm
So, to summarize:
The biggest argument in favor of COTA is efficiency.
The biggest argument against COTA is COTA.
:(
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:50 pm
When streetcars used to run the streets of Columbus, there were multiple private companies operating lines in Downtown and elsewhere.
The lines that went out to the suburbs were developed/operated by developers trying to get residents to move to a certain area. The seling point was that someone could live outside the city and get Downtown right quick.
These lines also synched up with national heavy-rail systems that were popular when that form of travel was super common.
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
I don’t know if that’s irony — but it’s totally shitty. I don’t trust that guy. It’s like the old rule that you should never visit a doctor with dying window plants.