PRT SYSTEM

Branson weighs new mass transit option

Didi Tang
News-Leader

Branson -- After hearing proposals for a monorail in 2001 and a light-
rail system in 2006, Branson officials heard a new idea for mass
transit Monday.

This time, it was the Personal Rapid Transit -- a system that has
individual, automated cars moving along elevated tracks.

The idea is so new Branson officials, though intrigued, were far from
committing.

"Practicality is yet to be determined," said Assistant City
Administrator Frank Schoneboom. "Conceptually, it is a neat idea."

J. Edward Anderson, who holds a Ph.D. in aeronautics and astronautics
from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, made the presentation.
He worked on developing PRT systems for 25 years at the University of
Minnesota and Boston University.

He is now the managing director in his new firm, PRT International
LLC, which has yet to build a PRT system.

Anderson told Branson officials that all the technologies needed for
his system, including hardware and software, have been developed and
his company is seeking money to build a test system.

Other companies and universities around the world also are developing
similar systems, Anderson said.

But Branson officials have some reservations.

"I need more concrete proof," Schoneboom said. "Not just sentences and
documents."

Although Anderson's PRT system could be significantly less expensive
than a light-rail system, it could still cost tens, if not hundreds,
of millions of dollars with no assurance of recouping the capital
spending, Schoneboom said.

Anderson said it costs about $4 million to $4.5 million per mile for
the track, but the cost could be significantly lower if the work is
outsourced to countries like China.

Schoneboom, however, noted costs of equipment and stations can raise
the final price.

High price tags are to blame for Branson's hesitancy to make any
significant move into public transit in the last few years.

Anderson apparently understands his challenge.

"Because it's new," he said. "People hate to do something new. That's
a major problem."

Anderson said he heard about Branson's interest in public transit
through Greg Young of Bolivar, a citizen watchdog of public spending.

Young said he heard Anderson making presentations at conferences and
was impressed.

"The system meets our needs for mass transportation," Young said.
"It's smaller, inexpensive and more similar to automobile travel."

When Young read about Branson's interest in public transit as well as
its concerns about the funding of a $500 million light-rail system,
Young said he thought of Anderson.

"I knew from Dr. Anderson that something might be available soon,"
Young said.

Several calls later, Young said he got Anderson connected with
Branson's city engineers, and a trip for Anderson from Minneapolis
came together.

Anderson, who travels with his wife and a PRT International official,
said he is paying for the trip.

He is scheduled to meet with Springfield officials Wednesday to talk
about the possibilities of providing public transit from Springfield
to Branson and St. Louis, Young said.

"Springfield might be too sprawled out for (PRT inside the city),"
Young said.

But Branson is a perfect candidate with 8 million tourists a year
roaming within a "very small" area, Young said.

"Branson has the congestion problem they are trying to solve," he
said.

To solve that problem, Anderson's model has point-to-point
transportation on elevated tracks with off-line stations, so the cars
won't clog up the main tracks but maintain relatively high speeds.

It is economical to build individual cars, which allow the transit
system to simulate automobile travel and attract ridership. Yet, the
system can take far less land than roads, and the individual cars are
computer-controlled to reduce accidents, he said.

The system also can use sustainable energy, operate around the clock
and offer competitive fares because of its lower costs compared with
conventional mass transit methods, Anderson said.

He also told city officials that the system would be reliable and
safe.

Branson officials told Anderson his idea was interesting, but the
Monday meeting ended without any clear indication whether Branson
would pursue the proposal.

Several senior citizens attending the meeting, however, were much more
eager.

"It's really nice. They should get it started as soon as possible,"
said Johnny Creed, a resident at Branson Manor.

Billy Pipkin, a fellow resident, said he would be pleased with any
public transit.

"City bus, just a couple of them, will be nice," he said.

http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071120/NEWS01...

Dennis

Check out the letter/memo from Ed Anderson to the City of Branson.
  http://www.news-leader.com/assets/pdf/DO920851120.PDF

PRT SYSTEM

Branson weighs new mass transit option

Didi Tang
News-Leader

Branson -- After hearing proposals for a monorail in 2001 and a light-
rail system in 2006, Branson officials heard a new idea for mass
transit Monday.

This time, it was the Personal Rapid Transit -- a system that has
individual, automated cars moving along elevated tracks.

The idea is so new Branson officials, though intrigued, were far from
committing.

"Practicality is yet to be determined," said Assistant City
Administrator Frank Schoneboom. "Conceptually, it is a neat idea."

J. Edward Anderson, who holds a Ph.D. in aeronautics and astronautics
from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, made the presentation.
He worked on developing PRT systems for 25 years at the University of
Minnesota and Boston University.

He is now the managing director in his new firm, PRT International
LLC, which has yet to build a PRT system.

Anderson told Branson officials that all the technologies needed for
his system, including hardware and software, have been developed and
his company is seeking money to build a test system.

Other companies and universities around the world also are developing
similar systems, Anderson said.

But Branson officials have some reservations.

"I need more concrete proof," Schoneboom said. "Not just sentences and
documents."

Although Anderson's PRT system could be significantly less expensive
than a light-rail system, it could still cost tens, if not hundreds,
of millions of dollars with no assurance of recouping the capital
spending, Schoneboom said.

Anderson said it costs about $4 million to $4.5 million per mile for
the track, but the cost could be significantly lower if the work is
outsourced to countries like China.

Schoneboom, however, noted costs of equipment and stations can raise
the final price.

High price tags are to blame for Branson's hesitancy to make any
significant move into public transit in the last few years.

Anderson apparently understands his challenge.

"Because it's new," he said. "People hate to do something new. That's
a major problem."

Anderson said he heard about Branson's interest in public transit
through Greg Young of Bolivar, a citizen watchdog of public spending.

Young said he heard Anderson making presentations at conferences and
was impressed.

"The system meets our needs for mass transportation," Young said.
"It's smaller, inexpensive and more similar to automobile travel."

When Young read about Branson's interest in public transit as well as
its concerns about the funding of a $500 million light-rail system,
Young said he thought of Anderson.

"I knew from Dr. Anderson that something might be available soon,"
Young said.

Several calls later, Young said he got Anderson connected with
Branson's city engineers, and a trip for Anderson from Minneapolis
came together.

Anderson, who travels with his wife and a PRT International official,
said he is paying for the trip.

He is scheduled to meet with Springfield officials Wednesday to talk
about the possibilities of providing public transit from Springfield
to Branson and St. Louis, Young said.

"Springfield might be too sprawled out for (PRT inside the city),"
Young said.

But Branson is a perfect candidate with 8 million tourists a year
roaming within a "very small" area, Young said.

"Branson has the congestion problem they are trying to solve," he
said.

To solve that problem, Anderson's model has point-to-point
transportation on elevated tracks with off-line stations, so the cars
won't clog up the main tracks but maintain relatively high speeds.

It is economical to build individual cars, which allow the transit
system to simulate automobile travel and attract ridership. Yet, the
system can take far less land than roads, and the individual cars are
computer-controlled to reduce accidents, he said.

The system also can use sustainable energy, operate around the clock
and offer competitive fares because of its lower costs compared with
conventional mass transit methods, Anderson said.

He also told city officials that the system would be reliable and
safe.

Branson officials told Anderson his idea was interesting, but the
Monday meeting ended without any clear indication whether Branson
would pursue the proposal.

Several senior citizens attending the meeting, however, were much more
eager.

"It's really nice. They should get it started as soon as possible,"
said Johnny Creed, a resident at Branson Manor.

Billy Pipkin, a fellow resident, said he would be pleased with any
public transit.

"City bus, just a couple of them, will be nice," he said.

http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071120/NEWS01...

Grant,

I extracted some sentences from the article you posted, because these (and not only these) are exactly the critics we received from CH2M Hill who went through our project and examined it in detail on request of the client. They are favourable to PRT but want to make sure that the risk implied is acceptable.
cheers, Luca

        > The idea is so new Branson officials, though intrigued, were far from
        committing.

        > "Practicality is yet to be determined," said Assistant City
        Administrator Frank Schoneboom. "Conceptually, it is a neat idea."

        > Branson officials have some reservations.

        > "I need more concrete proof," Schoneboom said. "Not just sentences and
        documents."

        > Although Anderson's PRT system could be significantly less expensive
        than a light-rail system, it could still cost tens, if not hundreds,
        of millions of dollars with no assurance of recouping the capital
        spending, Schoneboom said.

        > Schoneboom, noted costs of equipment and stations can raise
        the final price.

        > "Because it's new," he said. "People hate to do something new. That's
        a major problem."

winmail.dat 6K Download