Streetcar Revival is Wavering in Some Cities - NY Times

[GPCharles]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/bu...=top-news&_r=0

[Bham1982]

Streetcars are the latest "urban revitalization" fad. Previously it was sports arenas, prior to that convention centers, before that festival marketplaces, and way back slum clearance/urban renewal type projects. We Americans love to jump on the latest revitalization magic bullet.

If you want real transit, build modern, functional transit. Toonerville Trolleys are for tourists and barhoppers. Works for NOLA and other places where actual mobility for residents is completely besides the point. No one is building streetcar lines in Asia or Europe.

[ghettopalmetto]

Streetcars are the latest "urban revitalization" fad. Previously it was sports arenas, prior to that convention centers, before that festival marketplaces, and way back slum clearance/urban renewal type projects. We Americans love to jump on the latest revitalization magic bullet.

If you want real transit, build modern, functional transit. Toonerville Trolleys are for tourists and barhoppers. Works for NOLA and other places where actual mobility for residents is completely besides the point. No one is building streetcar lines in Asia or Europe.

That's because European cities didn't *demolish* their streetcar lines after World War II--they *rebuilt* them! Ergo, they don't have to build what they already have! You know what virtually no country outside of South America or the United States is building? The crappy "modern functional transit" bus routes that cheapskates and highway departments are forcing on us.

Asia is a bit of a different animal. In a lot of Asian cities, there is heavy reliance on motorbikes, which don't take up nearly the space [[and parking) that automobiles do. The larger cities on that continent [[which, frankly, dwarf most American and European cities) either have built, or are building metro systems.

[Patrick]

That's because European cities didn't *demolish* their streetcar lines after World War II--they *rebuilt* them! Ergo, they don't have to build what they already have! You know what virtually no country outside of South America or the United States is building? The crappy "modern functional transit" bus routes that cheapskates and highway departments are forcing on us.

Asia is a bit of a different animal. In a lot of Asian cities, there is heavy reliance on motorbikes, which don't take up nearly the space [[and parking) that automobiles do. The larger cities on that continent [[which, frankly, dwarf most American and European cities) either have built, or are building metro systems.

After living in Frankfurt, I can attest the effectivess of trams in modern-day society. I was a typical American skeptic prior to living there...guess it takes actually using public transportation to appreciate it. Just beware of the Fahrkartenkontrolleur [[ticket police). They'll embarrass and humiliate you if they catch you without a ticket...and then send your happy ass home with a hefty fine.

[Gpwrangler]

Asia is a bit of a different animal. In a lot of Asian cities, there is heavy reliance on motorbikes, which don't take up nearly the space [[and parking) that automobiles do. The larger cities on that continent [[which, frankly, dwarf most American and European cities) either have built, or are building metro systems.

That is quickly changing. More cars will be sold in China than in the US this year.

[ghettopalmetto]

That is quickly changing. More cars will be sold in China than in the US this year.

You could also say that there are more automobiles in New York City than in Detroit. What's your point?

[Gpwrangler]

You could also say that there are more automobiles in New York City than in Detroit. What's your point?

That transportation is always evolving, for better or worse.

[wilderness]

Guess they'll begin digging up the many paved-over [[buried) tracks in the Big-D

[Wesley Mouch]

Failures tell me that this is no longer a fad.

[A2Mike]

Why ever did Detroit sell the streetcars and pull up the tracks in 1956? The city was at the zenith of its postwar prosperity, downtown entertainment and retailing were thriving, office and hotel occupancy were healthy and the city center was the focus of life generally in SE Michigan. Everything that people say they want today was already on place. The streetcars [[they should have been subways but that's another story) facilitated the movement of large numbers of people without the vexing problems of traffic and parking, and people too young or too old to drive were able to fully partake of downtown's unique attractions. Were the city's decision makers ignorant of the notion that "if it's not broken don't fix it"? Was there no opposition? Who stood to profit from ruining something that was working just fine? And did no else recognize what was going on? I can't think of another city in this country which exhibited such numbing shortsightedness.

[Bham1982]

I can't think of another city in this country which exhibited such numbing shortsightedness.

Basically every city in the U.S. did the exact same thing. Every major avenue in cities like NYC and LA had streetcars.

Here's a map of streetcar lines in Brooklyn.

http://www.brooklynstreetcar.org/the-streetcar/

[mwilbert]

Why ever did Detroit sell the streetcars and pull up the tracks in 1956? The city was at the zenith of its postwar prosperity, downtown entertainment and retailing were thriving, office and hotel occupancy were healthy and the city center was the focus of life generally in SE Michigan. Everything that people say they want today was already on place. The streetcars [[they should have been subways but that's another story) facilitated the movement of large numbers of people without the vexing problems of traffic and parking, and people too young or too old to drive were able to fully partake of downtown's unique attractions. Were the city's decision makers ignorant of the notion that "if it's not broken don't fix it"? Was there no opposition? Who stood to profit from ruining something that was working just fine? And did no else recognize what was going on? I can't think of another city in this country which exhibited such numbing shortsightedness.

The future looked a lot different in 1956. And the streetcar system was old, losing ridership, and losing lots of money, as more people moved out of the city and into cars. We can wish that the city fathers of 1956 had known what they were doing [[they might have planned fewer freeways, or figured out how to have some kind of metropolitan institutions when that might still have been possible) but they weren't uniquely incompetent.

[iheartthed]

The future looked a lot different in 1956. And the streetcar system was old, losing ridership, and losing lots of money, as more people moved out of the city and into cars. We can wish that the city fathers of 1956 had known what they were doing [[they might have planned fewer freeways, or figured out how to have some kind of metropolitan institutions when that might still have been possible) but they weren't uniquely incompetent.

I thought the ridership thing was debunked? The streetcars were hardly running empty in 1956. I imagine it was a pretty jarring change, if you were a rider at that time, to experience the transition from a rail based to bus system. In NYC they some times replace train service with buses that replicate the train routes so that they can do track maintenance on the weekends. Even on the weekend, which is "off peak," it's always a complete clusterfuck because bus systems don't move people as efficiently as rail based systems.

[beachboy]

Why ever did Detroit sell the streetcars and pull up the tracks in 1956?

At the risk of being called a "conspiracy theorist" <gasp!>, here
is a detailed article on the Great General Motors Streetcar Conspiracy:

Part I: The Villains
http://www.baycrossings.com/Archives...conspiracy.htm

Part II: The Plot Clots
http://www.baycrossings.com/Archives...conspiracy.htm

And for those who must be dispassionate, a more moderate analysis
is provided by Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General...car_conspiracy

Read and weep...

[animatedmartian]

The city the article seemed to be focused on is DC area, which if I remember correctly, has a subway system. Light rail is inferior to the subway so it really shouldn't be surprising the light rail isn't taking off in DC. Perhaps the money spent streetcars would have been better suited on expanding the subway system. Just a thought.

[dtowncitylover]

The city the article seemed to be focused on is DC area, which if I remember correctly, has a subway system. Light rail is inferior to the subway so it really shouldn't be surprising the light rail isn't taking off in DC. Perhaps the money spent streetcars would have been better suited on expanding the subway system. Just a thought.

Exactly. This article is not as doom and gloom as the headline makes it out to be.

"Elsewhere, New Orleans is extending its streetcar lines, while Atlanta, Tucson and Salt Lake City have also moved ahead with similar systems, almost always pegged to the promise of transit-related economic growth.

"'The overall trend is very much on the side of streetcars,” said Art Guzzetti, vice president for policy of the American Public Transportation Association, an industry group. “That doesn’t mean every project in the planning stage is going to happen. In the long run, there will be a lot of projects built.'"

So doesn't this contradict the premise of the article?

Maybe NYC should try to build a streetcar lines up Broadway and 5th Ave? Let's see how that works!

[iheartthed]

Maybe NYC should try to build a streetcar lines up Broadway and 5th Ave? Let's see how that works!

The streetcar lines in Manhattan were all largely replaced by subway system expansions [[with the exception of Second Avenue).

There has been talk in NYC about restoring the street car service between Queens and downtown Brooklyn. There used to be street car lines connecting the boroughs and it was very heavily used, but they were dismantled during the era of the Great American Streetcar scandal. Some people believe that's why those two boroughs, which are the two most geographically close boroughs in the entire city, feel so distant -- the options for traveling by public transit between the two are cumbersome, but it wasn't always that way.

[professorscott]

The city the article seemed to be focused on is DC area, which if I remember correctly, has a subway system. Light rail is inferior to the subway so it really shouldn't be surprising the light rail isn't taking off in DC. Perhaps the money spent streetcars would have been better suited on expanding the subway system. Just a thought.

DC is a perfect example of how not to do a streetcar projects. Streetcars are not a panacea; they are a piece of an overall transportation system. Portland's streetcar struggles to keep up with demand, despite being the slowest motor vehicle I've ever had the pleasure of riding, because it serves a useful purpose.

The DC streetcar on H Street is supposed to connect Union Station to the east H Street corridor in order to revitalize the corridor. To start with, it is a long, ugly walk from Union Station to the streetcar terminus; unlike buses, the streetcar comes nowhere near any station entrance. The project was not well thought out, was planned poorly and executed poorly. The tracks are laid, stations built and streetcars in place, and there is still no projected date for the start of passenger service. There has been shockingly bad management and a complete lack of transparency and cooperation.

I think M1 Rail, like Portland, is getting the parts all essentially right. Of course we'll see, but I was involved in the very early days of M1 and I know the thinking and the process that went into what we are now getting, and of course the public outreach has been exemplary.

[Mackinaw]

The article explicitly focused on cost overruns and the idea that political support for such projects especially in suburban areas wanes if the ask is too high. Thankfully, this is a non-issue in Detroit vis-a-vis M1.

All good points. But definitely not an indictment of transit as both necessary and good for urban areas, nor an indictment of transit being effective and attractive to people-- ridership is essentially at modern highs now nationwide.

[Bham1982]

ridership is essentially at modern highs now nationwide.

Streetcar patronage is essentially irrelevent to national ridership numbers.

Something like 70%+ of daily rail passengers in the U.S. are riding the NYC subway and its sister agencies [[PATH, LIRR, NJ Transit, etc.), so when you hear national numbers for rail ridership, it's basically dependent on one city's annual transit numbers.

[bailey]

The article explicitly focused on cost overruns and the idea that political support for such projects especially in suburban areas wanes if the ask is too high. Thankfully, this is a non-issue in Detroit vis-a-vis M1.

Its not an issue right now because come hell or high water, Gilbert will get his trolley...but it WILL be an issue in less than 10 years when M1 is supposed to be turned over to the as yet to be figured out RTA.

[Mackinaw]

Bham, we are both right. Obviously NYC is one of a kind in population and % transit riders, and predictably weighs enormously on any statistical overview. But then the question is, isolating other metro areas, what are the trends. Last rider, despite low gas prices, ridership went up in San Diego, Baltimore, Denver, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Atlanta, San Fran, Seattle, Salt Lake Side, Riverside CA... but not Detroit.

Bottom line: "The American Public Transit Association is out with new data on the number of transit trips in the United States — 10.8 billion in 2014, the highest in 58 years."
http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/03/0...climb-in-2014/

You don't disagree, Bham, that the posted story is merely about political palatability of costs, right?

[Bham1982]

You don't disagree, Bham, that the posted story is merely about political palatability of costs, right?

I don't even disagree with trolley building. It just isn't real transit, though, and won't be some revitalization magic bullet. It's a tourist/barhopper type thing, and not meaningful in terms of actually building a transit oriented environment.

[bailey]

I don't even disagree with trolley building. It just isn't real transit, though, and won't be some revitalization magic bullet. It's a tourist/barhopper type thing, and not meaningful in terms of actually building a transit oriented environment.

the one nugget of value I see in the trolley building here is the possibility of the barhopping, game going suburbanite will see the value in expansion of it and agree to a regional solution to make that happen. Unfortunately, even with regional buy-in for transit...the people around here in charge of the system seem to be dedicated to dressing buses up to look like trains and calling it a day.

[dtowncitylover]

I don't even disagree with trolley building. It just isn't real transit, though, and won't be some revitalization magic bullet. It's a tourist/barhopper type thing, and not meaningful in terms of actually building a transit oriented environment.

Please go to Melbourne, Portland, Toronto, St. Petersburg, Vienna, Amsterdam, Paris, or Manchester and tell them their streetcars aren't "real" transit.

Pray tell Bham1982, knower of everything, what is "real" transit?

I get that the streetcar goes 3.3 miles. It doesn't go far enough but the fact that a bunch of rich guys decided to pool their money and build this is frankly astounding. I'm not saying we should be grateful and take what they're giving us, but this is where it starts. A N-S line [[instead of a circle) through three vital and growing districts that need better transit than buses. If we want the RTA to work, we need to vote YES to fund it. Plain and simple. That will get better buses, streetcar extensions, and complimenting schedules and fare plans.