Personal Rapid Transit in Daventry? - An Update

Daventry Town Council page on the pods:

Following our Annual Town Meeting in April when over 100 residents attended and voiced their opposition to the proposed POD transport system, the Town council resolved to hold a Public Meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to allow members of the public to raise questions and receive information on how Daventry District Council’s proposed PRT plans would benefit the residents of Daventry.

However, following a recent statement by the DDC confirming that proposals for a futuristic Personal Rapid Transport System have been put on hold, the Town Council agreed this negates a need for a public meeting and resolved to defer holding a Public Meeting at this time.

The Town Council have further resolved to work in partnership with the DDC, NCC and WNDC and be actively involved in discussions on future public transport options for Daventry Town.

Further details will be available in the Autumn edition of our newsletter.

Daventry District Council Town Crier, October 2009 (PDF)

People Power Puts Pods on Hold?

Following our Annual Town Meeting in April when over 100 residents turned up to voice their opposition to the proposed pod transport system, it was agreed at full council to hold a Public Meeting to allow members of the public to raise questions and receive information on how the DDC’s proposed PRT plans are likely impact on the Daventry community. It was subsequently decided to broaden the scope of the meeting, allowing both public and council representatives to open up the debate by discussing the future transport needs for Daventry in the wider sense. With DDC refusing to participate, and publicly stating in the press that proposals for PRT are now on hold, this raises the question of the need, or timing of such a meeting, and as organisers we must ask what we expect to achieve by holding such a Public Meeting at this time.

It must be noted that DDC continues to promote PRT on their website; in fact there are no changes in the text or mention of any change in their position – the official line from DDC on their website is: “Plans for a pioneering driverless public vehicle system in the heart of Daventry are being developed.” The DDC have also now disbanded the PRT public advisory panel of which we had two members. The Daventry Town Council feels it would be useful, timely and informative to meet with the DDC and Northamptonshire County Council to discuss all public transport options for Daventry. We will keep you updated on the latest news from these talks whenever we can and we will tell you more in the next issue of The Town Crier.

As is usually the case when the PRT hucksters come to town, the public process is minimal or non-existent:

The town council has decided it will organise its own meeting on the personal rapid transport (PRT) system, also known as the pods, after DDC said it would not hold one in the near future.

DDC instead said it will consult with the public once proposals are sufficiently detailed to give people ‘meaningful information’ including the commercial viability of whatever transport scheme is chosen.

At a meeting on Tuesday last week town councillors unanimously agreed to reject the PRT proposals and pilot scheme saying it is ‘inappropriate for and unacceptable to the people of Daventry’ and to hold their own public meeting where officers and councillors from DDC will be invited to give townspeople the opportunity to ask questions on the PRT proposals.

Lynne Taylor, leader of the town council, said: “A lot of comments we received from the public show they believe they’ve not been informed and they don’t know what a PRT system would mean for the town and they are getting more entrenched in their views.

“The district council said there’s not plans out there yet and that it hasn’t looked into the system it would use.

“Our decision was unanimous because we felt that the public isn’t being listened to.”

More about the Daventry pod fiasco here.

Comments on PRT from the Daventry Town Council website:

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.

Does Senator John Marty Still Support Personal Rapid Transit?

"To the Point!" Apple Pie Alliance, March 20, 2000:

$30 million for Personal Rapid Transit (PRT). This is a very promising, but still untested Minnesota technology that would be much less expensive to build and operate than LRT, while delivering passengers to their destinations faster. $6 million would be used for final engineering studies and development of a prototype of PRT. After completion of the engineering study, the state would be able to invest the remaining $24 million to construct one or more local PRT systems.

Skyloop.org (PDF):

Stongest Supporters in the Minnesota Legislature
Rep. Torrey Westrom
Rep. Ray Vandeveer
Rep. Bruce Anderson
Rep. Peggy Leppik
Sen. John Marty
Sen. Roy Terwilliger

Margaret Anderson Kelliher in Session Weekly. April 23, 2004 (PDF):

I have a great concern about the PRT project - the word "boondoggle comes to mind.

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: