Seattle Transportation Examiner.com Reporter Not Reporting His Opposition to Recent Seattle Personal Rapid Transit Proposal

Not reporting on it, but quietly whispering his opposition on his personal blog.

David Gow, the Seattle transportation reporter at Examiner.com has not reported on the recent proposal by the Century Transportation Authority for an PRT Project for Seattle (reported HERE, HERE and HERE). David Gow wrote a 6-part "primer" on podcars (PRT) for Examiner.com including this article about PRT in Seattle.

David Gow has several websites promoting Personal Rapid Transit. The Seattle "Get There Fast" PRT website - gettherefast.org seems to be slow in reporting on the new proposal for PRT in David Gow's backyard. The news page at Gow's "kinetic" PRT website is also silent about the CTA PRT Seattle project.

The moribund Seattle PRT forum is also silent on the new development.

However, David Gow is quietly attacking the Seattle CTA PRT proposal on one of his many blogs called "This Week in Precipitation" in a March 24, 2012 post titled "Not another agency":

I have been aware for a few months that this organization -- 'CenTran' -- has been in the works. However I had been under the impression what it's about is Son Of Green Line.

Instead, it looks like they're intending a 16-mile monorail+PRT (pod transit) system in the West Seattle to Ballard corridors.

Gow goes on to address the pod aspect of the plan:

However, there are a number of practical issues here. By the time we are ready to do a technology screening (let alone select a design for installation), will these vendors be ready to deliver and operate what could be the largest pod system to date? Will their systems be sufficiently proven in regular operation?

Most of all, I personally object to this local effort being mounted by a small group, out of the public eye, creating yet another transit bureaucracy.

If PRT is going to be done here, it needs to be part of the existing decisionmaking structure. It needs to be done by Seattle or King County, or even Sound Transit. The latter had planned to do a PRT project as part of the Link program ( http://bit.ly/GN66Yg ), but the expected Raytheon PRT program was cancelled.

Raytheon? Gow is citing ancient history - from the last century. Sound Transit has no current plans for PRT.

Gow then wades into the recent pod people controversy about which imaginary pod concepts should be promoted by ATRA and even how PRT is defined.

I have misgivings that High Capacity corridor service might be too much too soon for a flavor of PRT (HCPRT) that hasn't yet been implemented, anywhere.

Apparently, Gow doesn't have any faith in J. Edward Anderson's PRT International, the would-be PRT vendor mentioned in the CTA proposal (CTA board member Jake Solomon is Manager of Marketing and Business Development at PRT International) . It seems that ATRA doesn't have any faith in PRT International's ability to deliver the goods either, leaving PRT International off its preferred member/vendor page and relegating J.E. Anderson's Fridley company to a lower tier "conceptual" category.

Gow concludes that the problem with the CTA pod/monorail plan is really institutional:

It's OK to hypothesize something that ambitious. But set up a whole new bureaucracy? Really?

Furthermore, local planning for circulation PRT and collector-distributor PRT have been done in SeaTac and Issaquah. We should look first at those service niches.

Will David Gow report his opposition to the Seattle monorail/PRT project at Examiner.com or his PRT promoting websites?

Developing...

UPDATE: David Gow has finally acknowledged the existence of the PRT proposal for his city on his Get There Fast website's news page, with this comment:

Get There Fast takes no position on this proposal.

Also read: Pod People & Monorail Fans Join Forces in Seattle.

Will MnDOT Commissioner Sorel Continue Promoting Personal Rapid Transit?

Steve Berg at MinnPost:

Minnpost: What's your reaction to Gov.-elect Dayton reappointing Tom Sorel as transportation commissioner?

Frank Hornstein: He's a breath of fresh air at MnDOT and a good advocate for a multimodal approach to transportation. The only complaint I have is that he has embraced PRT (personal rapid transit) in a way that's not helpful. It's something suitable for an amusement park and a distraction from the bigger challenges we face.

With Republicans in control of the MN legislature, there has never been a better opportunity for the PRT hucksters to get a PRT bill passed.

MnDOT wasted a considerable of $$$ on PRT 2009-2010. MnDOT sponsored a ridiculous MnDOT "workshop". The usual crackpots, hucksters and backyard inventors showed up... even convicted felon Dean Zimmermann showed up at the workshop. Here's a bunch of pics from the MnDOT PRT Workshop. A while back, MnDOT announced plans for a "PRT Alliance":



MnDOT has not responded to my emails asking whether the department will continue promoting PRT.

Here are more recent examples PRT fiascos:

Masdar and Heathrow PRT Still Not Happening.

The Pawlenty administration wasted at least $150,000 on personal rapid transit .

PRT Conference Newsletter & Website Features PRT Plan by Convicted Felon.

PRT is so not happening at Heathrow.

Daventry says "Pods Off!".

Video: Bill James Pitches Jpods Resolution to Hennepin County.

Federal Funding Nixed for Winona Personal Rapid Transit Project

Taxi 2000 lobbyist and Bachmann pal Ed Cain also lobbied for the phony U.S. Navy Veterans Association charity.

ULTra PRT Heathrow Debut Postponed a Fourth Time.

No $25 million earmark for PRT pork project in Winona, Minnesota.

The Swedish/Korean PRT prototype malfunctioned recently in front of the media.

Japan Attempt to Build Personal Rapid Transit?

Eight years ago, Michael D. Setty and Leroy W. Demery, Jr. posted an article titled "Conventional Rail vs. 'Gadgetbahnen'" at Planetizen. The essential point:

In our view, it is a big waste of time advocating such "gee-whiz" options, given the severe limits of monorails and similar technologies such as PRT, when U.S. transportation problems are almost always sociopolitical and economic–not technical–in nature.

Demery returns to the subject in "Where's the Gadgetbahn?" at publictransit.us

The introduction:

If there is a country where Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) "should" work and "should" already have been built, then it's Japan.

Having traveled extensively throughout that country over the past three decades, I shall take this a step farther: if there is a place in Japan where PRT "should" work - and "should" already been built - then it's _____.

One could fill in the "blank" above with a number of locations, based on empirical observation of the built environment. During the past five years, maps and aerial photo images became available online and quality has been improved steadily. It is now possible to study the urban geography of Japan, "armchair" style, whether or not one has any knowledge of Japanese. This series shall present several examples of locations in Japan where the built environment appears conducive to PRT development. It shall also consider results obtained by other transport modes, e.g. automated guideway transport (AGT), in specific locations.

Excellent article - read the whole thing.

Where is the Grassroots Support for Personal Rapid Transit (PRT)?

PRT promoters will tell you there is grassroots support for PRT. Whatever public support PRT had in the past, it has all but vanished. Internet PRT forums are quiet - the last post on the Minnesota PRT forum is June, 2010 and the last post on the Seattle PRT forum is February, 2010. A handful of PRT promoters and would-be inventors opine on the Transport Innovators Google forum, but few of the participants fit the definition of grassroots.

Looking around the internet, there's the moribund Sky Loop Committee in Covington, Kentucky. The Skyloop website used to have a news page which apparently has been removed. An archived Skyloop web page has this news item about what happened to PRT in Cincinnati:

September 25, 2001 The Central Area Loop Study Committee (CALSC) of OKI voted to not recommend Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) for adoption as the transit technology for linking the downtowns of Cincinnati, Covington and Newport. For more on the outcome of the Central Area Loop Study (CALS) go to Central Area Loop Study Ending, including the paper "Why the Central Area Loop Study Committee Failed to Adopt PRT" and the CALS Draft Final Report (DFR) Rebuttal Documents..

That's right, PRT was rejected ten years ago:

The "Loop Study", which began early in 2001, studied monorail, personal rapid transit, light rail, streetcars and buses. The Central Area Loop Study, as it was known, concluded in October 2001 that any further study of monorail and PRT in the urban cores of Cincinnati, Covington and Newport should be eliminated. Any additional study of surface alternatives should be conducted and incorporated as an integral part of the proposed Regional Rail Plan. This left the use of light rail, streetcars and buses as alternative systems.

The decade-old Skyloop PRT fiasco in Cincinnati only serves as a a topic for derision.

There's an Austin Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit that judging by the dated content on that site seems as moribund a grassroots movement as Skyloop - whatever happened to astronaut Richard Garriott's PRT plans for Austin?

PRT websites litter the internet. Years ago, there was something called Saint Paul Personal Rapid Transit with the unfortunate acronym SPPRT. There is another website for a SPURTS.org. There's a website for PRT promoters in Santa Cruz... there's likely more if you bother to look.

The only "grassroots" PRT website that shows any signs of life is the Minnesota-based Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit (CPRT) which is planning to go to the MnDOT PRT workshop tomorrow.

The CPRT likely violated their non-profit status by electioneering for former Mpls Councilman Dean Zimmermann and other PRT-promoting candidates in the 2005 election. I can't find the CPRT on the Secretary of State's website and there is no mention of the CPRT's current non-profit status or even contact information. The CPRT used to meet at Dean Zimmermann's home, but now meet in restaurants.

The CPRT's website makes this bogus claim about conventional transit:

Less than 5% of Americans use public transportation. It’s just too slow, complicated and inconvenient.

Videos of the CPRT in action at the Living Green Expo in 2008:





Once again, here's a list of recent pod flops and fiascos:

Taxi 2000 lobbyist and Bachmann pal Ed Cain also lobbied for the phony U.S. Navy Veterans Association charity.

ULTra PRT Heathrow Debut Postponed a Fourth Time.

No $25 million earmark for PRT pork project in Winona, Minnesota.

The Swedish/Korean PRT prototype malfunctioned recently in front of the media.

The Masdar PRT (actually computer-guided golf carts that follow magnets imbedded in the roadway) has been scaled way back, This setback got a mention in the NY Times and confirmed in this Bloomberg article.

The so-called Morgantown PRT (it's a mundane people-mover) was the subject of a student newspaper editorial after a malfunction created a "fireball" and filled a vehicle with smoke. The cost of fixing the Morgantown boondoggle is $93 million.

Personal Rapid Transit at the Mall of America by the Fourth of July?

It doesn't look too good for that Winona PRT earmark. A gloomy gadgetbahner makes this doleful prediction at the Transport Innovator's forum:

Actually the news just got worse. Just announced today...barely three weeks after they buried the body of Democratic Congressman John Murhtha, the king of earmarks, the House Democratic Party has all of a sudden declared that earmarks are no more. If the Winona project was dependent on earmarks, I think that the Winona PRT project is dead...at least until after the fall elections. Maybe San Jose also????

All is not gloom and doom for PRT in Minnesota... The inventor of JPOD's, Bill James is going to have a PRT up and running at the MoA in a mere three months!

The Hull Sun:

VanHamm said JPods has plans to build a 12-mile system with four tracks at the LuoSiwan International Trade Center in China, as well as a smaller system at the Mall of America.

Yup, that's right.... and Bill James says he can have his Jpods up and running by July 4th:

He [James] told the board that officers in his company are funding both the China and Mall of America projects, and they expect to have the Mall of America project up and running by the 4th of July.

Confirmation of the JPOD/Megamall project in The Daily News Tribune:

In recent years James has approached officials in San Jose and Minneapolis with the podcar plan but hasn’t received commitments. He said the company will build a podcar line from the Mall of America to a nearby Ikea store.

... well sort of:

Erica Dao, a spokeswoman for the Mall of America, said no agreements are in place.

“We’re hopeful we can work something out with them,” she said of JPods.

And I'm sure they will... only three months until you can "pimp your own pod" at the MoA!

PRT & Stadiums - Boondoggle Buddies

UPDATE: Major league sports and pods cross paths yet again when CPRT board member Dick Gronning claims Vikings Football Hall of Famer Carl Eller said he was hoping to build a pod project in South Minneapolis.

This is a proposal for a combined PRT/Stadium boondoggle on the Minnesota Legislature website (PDF).

Minnesota has several choices regarding stadiums. We can do nothing. We can be among the last to build the “latest” generation of stadiums or we can be first to build the next generation of stadiums. We believe Minnesota should lead.

The technology that enables this leadership is Personal Rapid Transit. This technology is the lowest cost alternative of all potential transit solutions. It is flexible, fast, and rider-friendly. It can make a significant contribution to the economic success of stadia to which it is integrated. Placed in the right location, the inclusion of this technology is very low risk. For stadium economics, it can only help and can’t hurt.

Here's another proposal for a combined PRT & stadium boondoggle on the legislature's website(PDF):

Transit is critical to sports due the nature of large crowds coming and going simultaneously and in large groups. Transportation will depend on the integration of several modes. A true inter-modal transit system, to include automobile, conventional transit, PRT, and perhaps LRT, will be required. The Center for Transportation Studies at the University would lead and coordinate the efforts of the Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Council to develop a transit model for this project.

City Pages Blotter Post About the Pods

Hart Van Denburg has a post about the pods on the City Pages Blotter.

Peter "PRT Guru" Muller showed up in the comments to say the Morgantown PRT is wonderful.

That's not the opinion of WVU students who made not one, but TWO You Tube Hitler-parodies of the WVU PRT.

Here's one titled "Hitler mad at WVU's PRT":



A sample of the comments on the video:

GuitarRocker12

I love this video. I totally forgot about this until my professor talked about it a few weeks ago. It's hilarious and accurate. It sucks waiting on the PRT in freezing weather freshman year when you have no other transportation. Thank God I have my car up here now.

AngiDsigns

ROFLMAO....exactly why 7 of my 8 semesters I avoided the PRT like the plague. My dad rode it when it was new and back then they referred to it as the Perfectly Rancid Transit system.

RAbbi74

Very well done! Piece of junk just stranded me in Evansdale yesterday (right, immediately after the piece-of-junk bus left), and was down for a couple HOURS on gameday a week and a half ago, must to the dismay of all those alumni and fans.

Should honestly scrap the damned thing and admit failure...

Pod people admit failure? Never!!!

Revealed - ULTra PRT's Dorky Golf Cart Wheels

The 30+ year story of PRT is a lot like the plot of the Mel Brooks movie "The Producers". In order for PRT do its job as a stalking horse for bashing rail transit, it cannot ever be built. The moment PRT attempts to leave the shiny, futuristic computer animations and attempts to become a real, live transportation system, its flaws become obvious... and with its little wheels that look like they came off of a golf cart, PRT looks downright dorky.



The dorky wheels that must be never be revealed:

We were just outside Boston, Massachusetts at the Raytheon world headquarters. Raytheon, a big producer of hi tech military weapons and air traffic control systems, was working on the PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) project. Several energetic images were needed to promote the new system worldwide, with instructions that we were not to reveal the rubber tires under the vehicle in any of the final photos.

In a recent BBC puff-piece about ULTra, we get a glimpse of the undercarriage of the glorified golf cart... and its dorky wheels:

Uppsala Green Party Backing Away From the Spårbilslobbyn (PRT Lobby)?

MP Maria Gardfjell (Google Translation):

There are many interesting opportunities with driverless rail cars. But when there are no practical tests in an urban environment, it is actually not possible in current situation to support a major expansion of the PRT in Uppsala. Therefore, the Green Party has taken the position that there are trams that must be the main effort in Uppsala.

ULTra PRT Heathrow Debut Delayed a Third Time?

UPDATE: ULTra PRT Heathrow Debut Postponed a Fourth Time.

U of M CTS Report:

Steve Raney, a principal with ATS ULTra, gave an overview of current PRT technology and discussed ULTra’s recently completed PRT project for London’s Heathrow airport.

The ULTra circulator runs on an elevated guideway to connect Heathrow’s new Terminal 5 to a remote parking lot. Its on-demand nature was particularly useful for this destination. “PRT was the only practical solution for (the British Airport Authority),” Raney said. “It had a 60 percent travel time savings and 40 percent operating costs savings” over other modes. Construction on the project is currently complete, with revenue service scheduled to begin this spring.

According to a presentation by Martin Lowson (available at the ATRA website) the new launch window is in "Mid 2010":



That would make it three times the debut of the glorified golf carts have been postponed. How many chances do these PRT guys get?

Public Transit had this comment after the second postponement:

It seems that the opening of the Ultra PRT system constructed at Heathrow Airport outside London, England, has been delayed again, by issues that remain unidentified.

During some intense debate earlier this year involving this website and the engineering team behind the Ultra PRT at Heathrow, it was stated that the system would open for revenue service in the "4th quarter" of 2009, e.g., sometime between October 1, 2009 and December 31, 2009.

In recent British press reports (for example, http://www.ultraprt.com/cms/index.php?page=the-london-science-museum-aug-09 ), the system now reportedly will open "sometime next year." To wit:

The bubble-shaped, driverless cars with black, bug-eyed windows are his solution to the problems of urban travel. He began working on the system in 1995 and NEXT YEAR [2010] they are due to start operating at Heathrow, carrying passengers from car parks to Terminal 5 [emphasis added].

So what gives? Did the concerns raised here a few months ago sink in, and perhaps produce more "due diligence." Of course, I'm not going to hold my breath for any explanation from Mr. Lowenson et al regarding up to another year of delay.

Also, displaying the Ultra PRT vehicles alongside Stephenson's Rocket is highly presumptuous until PRT is actually proven for several years in revenue service, which it still has to show.

Steve Raney had this to say after the first postponement,

"I've certainly been in situations where the people I'm communicating with really hate PRT."

Listen:

Uppsala Green Party and the Spårbilslobbyn (PRT Lobby)

Comment on article - "Decision on spårbilar (PRT) postponed" (Google translation):

Risk Project

Agree with previous writers in the trams and trolley buses are a better system of Uppsala. It needed an upgrade of the public transport system!

Unfortunately, this systematic delays of the PRT lobby with Niclas Malmberg at the forefront. Malmberg has damaged both the Green Party and Uppsala with his passion for an untested system that is now at risk of cold Swedish state of 700 million.

Friend of order to question whether it is right that the state pays a private company's development costs.

By: Eric Thärnström,

A blog post at YIMBY by Eric Thärnström (also Google translation):

The Green Party's Niclas Malmberg has long pursued the PRT in Uppsala. We have a test track from Vectus, we have received several suggestions on PRT in the media, and trace the taxi has now picked up in Floorplan 2010th Malmberg has also pushed for a full-scale test facility in Boländerna. But now, suddenly changing the MP side.

MP, in its opinion to the Master plan in 2010 chose to say no to the PRT, and we can thank the new President Mary Gardfjell for. The opposition makes common cause, and believe that PRT should certainly be tested but that there should be Uppsala's future public transport. Thus says the opposition Christian Democrats, together with definite no to the PRT, and definitely yes to the trams. Hopefully, it will accelerate efforts to upgrade the city's public transport when the choice of system is already clear.

In retrospect, one wonders what would have happened if the tram instead received the same attention as the taxi track. Trams are relatively uncontroversial and in discussions about how it would affect the urban environment is a lot to get in Uppsala's history. It is clear that we did not have a "decisions concerning the selection of systems" as late as the 2015th Now, instead of up to officials if we get an upgrade of public transport or not. It would not hurt if they were equally clear that the opposition is now.

By upgrading to the trams, we can hope for a denser urban construction in our existing neighborhoods so that we can improve services, access to quality green space and conditions for new and interesting meetings.

The post links to this video.

What's with the Greens and the Spårbilslobbyn?

New Route for the Winona Personal Rapid Transit

A few comments on today's Winona Daily News article:

While it's not clear how this PRT/RTP scheme would answer many questions about how such a system would function in a densely populated urban environment, it does demonstrate how one person's wasteful pork spending can be another's wise use of economic stimulus funds.

---

This is a ridiculous waste of taxpayers' money, especially when it fails like others before this one. We need our roads fixed so we can use own personal transport vehicles to get where ever we want to go in safety and comfort. Hwy 61 crumbles while we use tax money for this!

---

All the pork should be cut. Start with this as Troller said. Take care of the infrastructure we have (roads, rail, river) first. $25M may not be much to a progressive, but it's a heck of a lot to little ole me. Just think 'only 27.7M per mile,WOW.

By the way, we already have PERSONAL transport, I drive to work in/on it every day. Guess what, I can drive wherever I want and even go further than .9 miles too!

The article also has new (late January 2010) plans. There is nothing on the plans to indicate who prepared the plans.

Click on the images to make them bigger.

Uppsala - "Decision on track cars (spårbilar) postponed"

Upsala Nya Tidning: Beslut om spårbilar sköts upp

Google Translation:

The decision on Uppsala's PRT effort was postponed by the Municipal Bureau on Monday.

The politicians wanted a clearer statement to the effect that the state should pay 100 percent of the investment cost. The letter of intent which the government requires the municipality to participate in a project could, in certain respects be interpreted as that the municipality would account for part of the financing, all parties agree, however, that the City of Uppsala to say yes to the PRT project. A decision is expected later this week.

From the Eskilstuna Courier (Google translation):

Eskilstuna is re-opening race for track cars (spårbilar)

Eskilstuna - If the government wants us to do a pilot municipality so they may well do so. But we have no own resources to stop in, "says Jimmy Jansson (S).

Eskilstuna Municipality would again take up the fight on a pioneering path to track cars. But the alliance, in addition to the Center Party, rejects the whole idea of rail cars in Eskilstuna.

Some time ago four municipalities singled out as potential candidates to become pioneers of the effort the PRT tracks.

Comments:

No, but stop now! Again comes the nonsense PRT debate up again as it has done occasionally in the last 10-15 years. Why have track cars at all? Requires an infrastructure that ugly urban environment, and it can not be trace on every street in town? No, instead favoring electric cars are starting to come now. Add money on parking spaces with charging socket for them instead!

---

Pure idiocy! Stop burning tax money on a bunch of shit that do not provide society anything.

---

But that's typical activists governing this municipality, ideas miles distant from reality and exorbitant fees for everything that may have the least connection to the environment. Is simply to take money into cover behind environmental issues, not to promote it.

---

On the municipal website, I found some time ago a paper with a proposal for spårbilsnät in Eskilstuna. There was a ring around the city center as well as a detour from the ring to Fristad Square. Can anyone imagine Fristad Square cluttered with bärpelare and bärbalkar both lengthwise and crosswise and one or more hanging platforms with associated lifts and other things. One or more technologies happy at the municipality can actually there. How divorced from reality may be responsible in the municipality.

Here is a visual from the proposal:

Keep it Klassy, PRT Guys

Ian Bicking:

PRT has succeeded in attracting a small number of trolls, Ken Avidor (the first poster here) foremost among them.

Small number? Yeah, right.



"I've certainly been in situations where the people I'm communicating with really hate PRT." - Steve Raney:



UPDATE: Ian Bicking tweets:



A chip off the old block:

Winona Daily News LTE - "PRT is a Farce"

Winona Daily News:

Larry Ellis Reed: PRT is a farce

Winona is a test bed for what may quickly become a "white elephant" of a transportation concept: Personal Rapid Transit will be nothing more than a farce. Winona is too working-class a community to afford the luxury even if tax dollars - our tax dollars - are being used on this noble experiment.

It is also little more than a sick joke at Gov. Tim Pawlenty's expense, what with his desire to make our beloved Minnesota all the more a technology leader with low tax rates for political reasons.

As a friend of mine put it, we already have pod-based transit - it's called buses.

So why waste money on a concept that may work well in a theme park while so many are all the more unable to find work yet are being asked to keep trying, only to meet repeated rejection?

Taxi 2000 Pledges Millions for Winona Pod "Test Lab"

Winona Post:

Firm pledges millions to Winona pod car test lab (01/24/2010)

By Sarah Elmquist

A private company that has developed a futuristic pod car transit system has pledged millions to Winona’s bid for a test lab to be the first to prove such a transportation system works.

Taxi 2000, based in Fridley, Minn., has offered to cover the required 20 percent match to a $24.9 million federal grant Winona will apply for. City leaders are backing the proposal, which would bring Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) to be studied in Winona, aiming to bring jobs and business to the first success of a transit vision first dreamed of in the 1950s.

Taxi 2000 has millions of $$$ to give away?

City Manager Eric Sorensen said that the possible grant money would cover the construction of the tracks, cars and study lab at SE Tech, as well as the maintenance for four years. He said that after that point, a possible nonprofit could be formed to take ownership of the infrastructure.

Supporters of the proposal, which include all City Council members except Deb Salyards, say that the test lab would generate jobs and business in Winona. Sorensen said that he envisions Winona producing much of the necessary components, from the cars themselves to the electronic boards that help run the system, and that there is a major potential for collaboration with the city’s three higher education institutions: Saint Mary’s University’s geospatial services department could take the lead on mapping assessments and graphic depictions of the operations. Winona State University, along with its composite engineering programs unique to the nation, could help develop and study the system and infrastructure, and SE Tech could assist in research and development of electronic systems, network administration, mechanical drafting and maintenance.

While the majority of the council seemed excited about the possibility, Salyards seemed skeptical, and voted against applying for the federal grant. She asked why, if this was such great technology, has the private sector not invested in a functioning system?

Mike Lester of Taxi 2000 said that every municipality around the world he’d talked to about PRT had been interested in being the second to employ it, but didn’t want to be the first. Cities around the world, he said, are waiting for the technology to be proven, a feat that could happen right here in Winona.

“We’ve got municipalities all around the world saying, ‘Show me,’” he said.

Council member Gerry Krage asked whether the city would be on the hook for maintenance costs after the grant expires, and who would pay to tear down the system if it fails in the future. Sorensen told the council that he envisioned a 501(c)3 being formed to take ownership of the system, and the cost of any potential decommissioning would be worked into the grant or taken care of by a future nonprofit.

Salyards was not convinced. “If this is the wave of the future, private investors should be paying,” she said, adding that spending taxpayer money frivolously is a problem that doesn’t seem to be going away, with no one willing to pull in the reins. “[Taxpayer grant money] is all like free money from heaven,” she said.

City leaders also viewed a map showing a potential “long-term” plan to add 11 more miles of track to the system, running tracks down Sarnia Street and Highway 61, down Huff Street and down Highway 14 to Saint Mary’s University.

Council member Deb Salyards is asking the right questions.

ULTra PRT's Headway Hokum

The ULtra website makes this claim:

"ULTra has a passenger-carrying capacity as great as LRT at 4800 seats per hour one-way at a 3 second headway.”

From a presentation at a January 12, 2008 ATRA conference:

Note: Slide #10 of the presentation mentions a shuttle application with a "5 second minimum headway". This only refers to the headway along the guideway. The small end-of-line stations shown in the shuttle graphic on slide #11 could not operate with headways below about 15 seconds. This is because all vehicles have to reverse direction at a single point within the station, and furthermore the limited number of berths would not give time to deboard and board passengers A larger station with more berths and multiple turn-around locations would be needed to process a vehicle every five seconds.

Who are the "Possible Private Donors" for the Winona PRT Project?

The Winona Post has an article on the pods of Winona:

Supporters for a futuristic transportation test system for Winona have thrown their cards on the table, with the city poised to apply for $25 million in federal funds for a first phase test lab.
Preliminary work on the possible project shows that Southeast Technical College could connect with the hospital and East End retailers through a series of pod-like cars which ride along elevated tracks.

Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) is a transportation system developed in the 1950s, and has had its share of failures and criticism for a system which carries three to five passengers to destination stations along the elevated tracks. But supporters of the technology say it’s green, convenient, affordable and the wave of the future, with some studies suggesting such transit will become a $44 billion industry by 2020.

$44 billion? in ten years?

If PRT does explode as the new transportation system of the future, Winona city leaders would like a cut of the job creation that would flower alongside its development. They’ve come up with a plan, one that could result in a $175 million to $200 million system connecting locations in Winona, while fueling composite industry jobs and higher education collaboration.

That's $200 million of taxpayers dollars, folks.

Within a document prepared by the city to promote Winona as the site for a PRT test site, support was pegged from all three higher education institutions, and Winona-based RTP Company and related composite industries in Winona were named as private businesses which could help develop the actual pod cars and related infrastructure. That, city leaders say, could help create jobs that would continue to grow as PRT takes off elsewhere.

The City Council will learn more about the proposal on Tuesday, when it will vote on whether to pursue the $25 million in federal funding for the first phase project. That money would come with an 80/20 split, and would require matching dollars. City leaders have suggested that there’s plenty of interest from possible private donors for the project, and they likely won’t seek state bonding money for the potential PRT test bed.

"Possible private donors"..... where have I heard that before....

I wrote about a similar pitch for a PRT resolution back in December 23, 2005:

How the Personal Rapid Transit Scam Works

The PRT scam artists tried to sneak a resolution onto the Saint Paul City Councilmeeting agenda Wednesday.

Pioneer Press 12/20/05:

"St. Paul City Council: Regular meeting, 3:30 p.m. Wednesday, 15 W. Kellogg Blvd. The council will discuss the city's Emergency Operations Plan and a potential feasibility study on a personal rapid transit system...."
What happened?

I heard the councilman yanked the PRT resolution. I've also heard from a reliable source that the PRTers claimed they had an "angel" willing to invest in a PRT "demonstration project" in Falcon Heights... a monorail between the Midway stadium and the State Fair.

Apparently, the angel didn't exist (maybe the angel was raptured).

The PRTers have pulled variations of this scam in Duluth, Minneapolis, and Rochester. They convince some well-meaning councilmembers to vote for a resolution saying they are "considering" or "studying" a PRT project for their city.

The anti-LRT/anti-Northstar bunch (Bachmann and Mark Olson are prominent Northstar haters and PRT boosters) in the legislature use the resolutions to convince DFLers to vote for their anti-transit PRT bills because a PRT project in their district smells like pork. That's the Democratic Party for you, the Dems will eagerly hang themselves if the rope is made of pork. Last session the PRT demonstration project was supposed to be in Duluth and they got Senator Prettner Solon to co-author a PRT bill.

Some suckers have actually bought stock based on these bogus resolutions and bogus bills.

Which City Council in Minnesota will be the next target of the PRT scam artists?

It only took 4 years. Now Winona is poised to be the next victim of the PRT con artists.

The question now is will the City Council of Winona perform due diligence and ask who the "possible private donors" are before they sign on to this current iteration of Ye Olde Pod Scam.

Who Will Clean and Maintain the Winona PRT?

Another good comment from yesterday's Winona Daily News article:

easy said on: January 16, 2010, 3:58 am

What's the Point and RiverView think it should connect the bars and campuses and the jail -- it would also need a stop at the drive-thru at Hardees!

The question is who would be responsible for maintaining the pods, taking out the litter, cleaning up the graffiti and the vomit -- and you know everyone will want to have sex in the things.

If the pod's a rockin, don't....oh well.

Exactly.

PRT Guys Want an Earmark for Winona Pods

Winona Daily News:

The proposed route for Personal Rapid Transit in Winona would include stops at Minnesota State College-Southeast Technical and Winona Health, according to the latest city proposal.

City leaders say the 1.3-mile route would serve as a showcase for PRT, a controversial transit system that uses small, pod-like vehicles on guideways to shuttle passengers to their destinations. The elevated guideway would loop through the East End near Hwy. 61, with planned stops at Southeast Tech and Winona Health and near Target and Fleet Farm.

... stop right there. Why would anyone take a pod that doesn't even have a trunk to Target and Fleet farm?

The city won't put local tax dollars toward the center and is unlikely to seek state funding, city officials said, meaning the project hinges on federal funding.

... the PRT guys can't face hearings at the legislature, so they are going for an earmark.

Winona City Council members will hear a presentation Tuesday on PRT before considering a resolution supporting a grant application seeking nearly $25 million for the project.

... another PRT dog and pony show like the one they show in city after city to ask for taxpayers' money for a project the PRT guys claim won't cost the taxpayers any money. For a preview, watch the PRT presentation in Alameda in 2008.

"The intent is for this to be a major project," said City Manager Eric Sorensen, citing the potential economic benefits of the proposal. "This would be a huge thing for us. It's a moneymaker."

City leaders envision Winona's businesses manufacturing components for the system and guideway. If the set-up serves as a prototype for PRT elsewhere, local universities and industries could be in the driver's seat to develop an emerging technology, Sorensen said.

So, it's not a transportation project, it's an economic development project (read; pork). How did PRT work out as economic development for Daventry? Not so good.

The technology will come before the Council for the first time Tuesday, with a presentation from Mike Lester of Taxi 2000, a Fridley, Minn., firm the city has been working with on the proposal.

"There's a lot of interest in this ... but everybody says, ‘We don't want to be the first one,'" he said, referring to other municipalities in the U.S. and abroad. "By being the first, it could equal a lot of jobs in Winona, a lot of jobs in Minnesota."

I hope someone makes a video of Mike Lester's presentation.

The proposal is already garnering support from the private sector. Winona's application will be accompanied by letters of support from Southeast Tech, Winona Health and Rivers Hotel Group, Sorensen said.

If submitted, Winona will learn if its funding application is approved this summer, Sorensen said. Under the terms of the grant, construction would have to begin within 18 months.

... stop right there... BIG QUESTION - How can construction "begin within 18 months" without ANY input from the citizens of Winona? Let's have a look at the law: The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA):

Public involvement and a systematic interdisciplinary approach are essential parts of the development process for proposed actions.

23CFR § 771.105(c)

FHWA's Public Involvement Requirements

Each State must have procedures approved by the FHWA to carry out a public involvement/public hearing program pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 128 and 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508.

State public involvement/public hearing procedures must provide for:

Coordination of public involvement activities and public hearings with the entire NEPA process.

Early and continuing opportunities during project development for the public to be involved in the identification of social, economic, and environmental impacts, as well as impacts associated with relocation of individuals, groups, or institutions.
One or more public hearings or the opportunity for hearing(s) to be held by the State highway agency at a convenient time and place for any Federal-aid project which requires significant amounts of right-of-way, substantially changes the layout or functions of connecting roadways or of the facility being improved, has a substantial adverse impact on abutting property, otherwise has a significant social, economic, environmental or other effect, or for which the FHWA determines that a public hearing is in the public interest.

Reasonable notice to the public of either a public hearing or the opportunity for a public hearing. Such notice will indicate the availability of explanatory information. The notice shall also provide information required to comply with public involvement requirements of other laws, Executive Orders, and regulations.

Let's take a look at the comments to the article to get an idea what the citizens of Winona think of the pod project:

1.

easy said on: January 15, 2010, 10:04 am
I agree with those who think it is a wasteful use of funds. And with the grant being 80/20, it looks like 'private sources' will have to come up with around six million. Who exactly will be contributing?

But if we just have to, must, spend the money, why that poor route? We want Winona to be a tourist destination, revitalize the downtown, and better utilize the riverfront....this WOULD bring people into town.

2.

What's the Point? said on: January 15, 2010, 10:00 am
I think this thing should go from each of the campuses to all of the bars in town and have a last stop at the jail!
Report Abuse Admin

3.

xfs said on: January 15, 2010, 9:24 am
We will compete with Disney World's monorail! Wow! I can't wait to drive my car, find a parking space, walk to a pod, and go someplace that I don't need to go. What is wrong with buses and cars and taxis? And is fed money still not coming right out of my pocket? This brilliant city council needs to come back to earth and just fix the roads we already have.

4.

ssugarplum said on: January 15, 2010, 9:14 am
So do I have this right? If I've driven to the clinic and want to take a trip to the school for... (????), I can whiz on over in the pod? Then I whiz back? Or I'm a student and like soo many I must go to the clinic during the day I again whiz on over? Is it just me or is this picture not making sense!

5.

Troller said on: January 15, 2010, 8:27 am
It's not local money, it's federal money???? It'll create jobs until after construction is complete, then it's paid for by ???? So to ride to the clinic I can find parking at WSU or SETC, or do I park at the clinic and ride to WSU or SETC. A train from nowhere to nowhere. Perhaps this is just one more political misdirection project. Use the money to fix the current transportation system, not build another one to be ignored.

6.

CaptnTony said on: January 15, 2010, 8:17 am
We ALREADY HAVE *personal* rapid transit! Spend the money fixing/expanding the roadways! Just another stupid reason to spend my money.

giverson said on: January 15, 2010, 7:53 am
What a waste of Chinese money! I have a better idea, how about using busses? Taxpayers: don't let these criminals get away with this. Save your grandchildren.

8.

Captain Norb said on: January 15, 2010, 4:25 am
Not saying this is or isn't a good use of federal stimulus money. But note that the private sector businessman pitching this is the guy that's been running those full page, star spangled ads about how the country is bankrupt and headed to hell in a handbasket.

What a fiasco!