While the Long Island Lighthouse project, a plan to revitalize Nassau Coliseum and its surrounding area with a new arena, walkable downtown, office space and residential units, has recently gained momentum for Islanders owner and Long Island Lighthouse Development Group principal, Charles Wang, the project may have also served as a catalyst for the long delayed Nassau Hub transit study.
Last month, Nassau County released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Alternatives Analysis and Environmental Impact Statement (AA/EIS) for the transit component of the Nassau Hub, the centerpiece of County Executive Thomas Suozzi’s ‘New Suburbia’ vision. This vision would densify and expand transportation options in certain Nassau County locations to promote transit oriented development, curb suburban sprawl, retain Nassau County’s young people and generate new tax revenues.
The RFP deadline is August 13.
Located in the center of Nassau County, the Hub would, according to the Nassau County Planning Commission, include an area that encompasses the Nassau Community College, Hofstra University, EAB Plaza, Nassau Coliseum and Eisenhower Park. The rough northern boundary is Roosevelt Field and Source Malls; the southern border is Nassau County Government offices in Mineola.
The RFP builds upon the Nassau Hub Major Investment Study (MIS), commissioned in 2003 and completed in 2006, which identified numerous challenges facing the study area including high levels of roadway congestion, missing or disconnected linkages between transit stations and important cultural, education and entertainment activity centers, disjointed, auto-centric land use patterns and a dearth of north-south transit connectivity. The MIS also proposed new transportation options and smart growth land use strategies for central Nassau County, as possible remedies to these challenges. Transportation options included Light Rail Transit, Bus Rapid Transit and an Automated Guideway Transit system.
The firm selected to undertake this next step will select the best alternative for the area; then it continue with a full Environmental Impact Study. The process is expected to begin by the end of 2009.
This progress is a welcome development for a project that has been proposed for over a decade. Tri-State has been calling for a transit component for the Nassau Hub for almost as long. However, any of the outlined transit components to be studied are still years away from completion and implementation.
In the short term, Nassau County and the MTA should work together to fully fund the neglected Long Island Bus system that already operates within the Hub footprint and move rapidly towards creating a regional bus system, a system that will help rationalize LI Bus’ funding stream and allow for much needed expansion, and one that was identified in the recently released draft of the MTA’s 2010-2014 Capital Program.
Don’t settle for Bus Rapid Transit! Light rail is far superior to BRT for several reasons:
1. Light rail vehicles are less expensive in the long run, with useful lives of 40 to 60 years. Reconditioned LRVs from the 1950s are still running in San Francisco and Philadelphia. Where do you see a 40 year old bus in regular service?
2. Light rail vehicles have better acceleration than buses do, and can run a route much faster than buses. This means that you need fewer LRVs and fewer drivers to cover the same route.
3. Light rail vehicles can run in much narrower lanes than buses can, so they take up less space. This is especially important in crowded urban areas.
4. Light rail vehicles only use energy when they are accelerating. When they decelerate, the momentum is turned back into electric energy. When they’re at rest, their motors use no energy at all. Most buses use energy continually, whether they are accelerating, decelerating, or standing still.
5. Light rail vehicles give a smoother, bump-free ride far superior to the bouncing around bus passengers are subject to.
6. Operating expenses for light rail vehicles are significantly less than for buses, according to the Federal Transit Administration’s 2001 National Transit Database. Boston’s light rail line had costs of $1.25 per trip vs. $2.04 for buses. If you want the figures expressed as costs per passenger mile, Boston spent $0.51 for LRVs and $0.71 for buses.
7. In city after city (St. Louis, Denver, Phoenix, Boston, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas ……) people prefer light rail to buses. Ridership on the entire transit system increases when even a single light rail line is opened.
8. Light rail stations often spur development around them that doesn’t happen around bus rapid transit stations.
For extensive information about the benefits of light rail, go to http://www.lightrailnow.com.
[…] [blog.tstc.org] Share This Article: […]
I hope the study looks at trying to convince the Long Island Rail Road to operate all day regular interval service (at least half-hourly and preferably every 15 minutes until at least 10 PM) on all of its electrified lines including contra-flow service in peak periods. This may mean that the third track to Hicksville should be 4 tracks although good scheduling probably would make 3 viable. It might also mean grade crossing elimination on the Hicksville line should have higher priority. If there is a policy of frequent all day service then speeding up the trains could reduce the number of sets needed to run the service.
With more frequent service, it really becomes worthwhile to treat the Long Island like a European S-Bahn where it is just a big fast bus with its own lanes. This means a common fare and zone structure. You don’t even need SMART cards. Many European countries have been doing it with paper and laminated passes for years using proof of payment (if you don’t like European proof of payment check San Diego or Florida Tri-rail versions). Light rail operating on the surface can give good cross-island travel on heavy routes with less disruption to traffic than buses will. Buses can feed the higher speed nodes where appropriate. By making better use of the higher speed, higher capacity modes the buses will be strengthened where they make the best sense. By having buses with timed connections with rail at given nodes, you also have buses that connect with each other. Run a good quality transit and the fares can be higher meaning the general taxpayer has to pay a smaller portion.
PRT is far superior to BRT and LRT. The 1970s demo in Morgantown WV is being modernized and expanded. San Jose is studying seriously with Silicon Valley investors smelling green profit.
Don’t let inertia consultants and federal policies short-change you.
we need this on long island big time
nassau is a disgrace it is 2011 and we pay the highest taxes yet they cant build an arena and hub area yet a dumpy city like cleveland or some other city can. then these losers who complain about high taxes dont want development to help lower taxes.they want to live in caveman time and stay stuck. all the young should leave and let this county sink