Can a Streetcar cost less than a Faux Trolley?

[Dashing Dan]

But why would someone invest in a higher density development if the capacity isn't there to support it?

[thelakelander]

I see, we're ignoring the economic development benefits associated with fixed transit, although this is a major goal of the city and urban core neighborhoods.  

Anyway, I hope everyone here already knows that LRT is basically a streetcar operation designed for rapid transit.....right?  Considering the ROW width of our urban core streets, I see no reason that we can't design a streetcar operation that moves within its own lanes instead of mixed-traffic.  That alone, would significantly boost capacity.  Before pigeon holing and stereotyping an entire mode (as that chart seems to do), let's define the type of operating services, land use benefits and financial costs, we desire.  Once these goals are in place, we can then have a logical discussion on the streetcar vs. faux trolley  (remember faux trolleys serve a different purpose than fixed transit).

Anyway, I made the same point about Florida's HSR project that I'm going to make right now.  You can do a lot of things with rail infrastructure.  If we're going to now argue about capacity, it can always be designed to be upgraded to LRT, if desired.  For example, in Charlotte, they operate heritage streetcars and LRT on the same tracks.  In Memphis, their recent streetcar line down Madison was designed to LRT standards.  So, when capacity needs to be increased, all they'll have to do is purchase larger LRT cars.

The Charlotte Trolley is a heritage streetcar which operates in Charlotte in the U.S. state of North Carolina. The line runs along the former Norfolk Southern right of way between Tremont Avenue in the Historic South End in a northerly direction to its terminus at 9th Street Uptown. It runs on tracks shared with the LYNX Blue Line.

The Charlotte Trolley represented the return of streetcar service to the city of Charlotte since the closure of its original network on March 14, 1938, which had been in operation since May 18, 1891. The return of the trolley came on August 30, 1996, running in the evenings on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights and Sunday afternoons for an initial six month trial period. The trial period occurred on a 1.8-mile rail line between the Atherton Mill trolley barn and Stonewall Street.

Through the initial six months of operation ending on February 28, 1997, the trolley saw a ridership of 25,000. As a result of the success of the trial run of the trolley, Norfolk Southern awarded the trolley a one-year extension of the agreement to use its track.

After a new bridge was completed over Stonewall Street, 7-day a week service commenced between Atherton Mill in the South End and 9th Street Uptown on June 28, 2004. Operations prior to that date was run by a group of volunteers (some retirees) where some of them was hired by CATS (Charlotte Area Transit System) which has operated the Trolley since that time. At that time, CATS purchased 3 replica trolley to Car #85, a vintage trolley dating back to the 1920's.

Service was temporarily halted on February 5, 2006, when construction began on a new track system for the Charlotte LYNX light rail system. Initially service was to only be halted for a year, with the trolley running approximately a year before light rail service commenced. However, by November 2006 CATS determined it would be unfeasible to run the trolley service with the corridor still under construction. Service resumed on April 20, 2008, and the vintage trolley cars now run on the same tracks as the LYNX trams.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_Trolley

[thelakelander]

If you don't want to pay for track infrastructure to support LRT style service along a streetcar line (I assume, you'd want stops spaced closer than 1/4 - 1/2 mile apart), you can just purchase modern streetcar vehicles with larger capacities when ridership demands.  Adding an extra car or purchasing a higher capacity vehicle when the demand reaches such a level is way cheaper than having to widen a road with constrained ROW or adding more buses to clog and pollute the already congested streets (remember, when you plan, you plan for the future, not today's conditions).

[thelakelander]

But why would someone invest in a higher density development if the capacity isn't there to support it?

This sounds like a good question for the developers that spent hundreds of millions of their own money building TOD along new streetcar lines in Portland, Tampa, Kenosha and Little Rock.


http://www.urbanindy.com/2010/10/25/report-from-railvolution-portland/

Let's introduce some streetcar related TOD facts into this opinionated discussion.  Here is a link to a Fort Worth streetcar study that has compiled some statistical data on recently completed or proposed streetcar projects across the country.

http://visioncincinnati.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/streetcar-data-in-other-cities1.pdf

[Dashing Dan]

I'm not giving opinions just pitching high hanging curve balls.

[thelakelander]

Cool.  I like playing the role of a roided up Barry Bonds.  I'm ready for another pitch.

[Dashing Dan]

OK

As an alternative to LRT vehicles on streetcar tracks in mixed traffic, how about articulated buses?

(Given the TOD angle, that one might be more like t-ball than a hanging curve.)

[thelakelander]

On the land use side, increases in density could be allowed for either option.

I missed this one remark. You can rezone land use as much as you want to but that doesn't mean transit oriented development and density actually happens.   The type of infrastructure you invest in will determine the style of built development that takes place.  Historically, the fixed mode "stimulates" denser development because of its permanence.  The rubber wheeled option doesn't, because of its "flexibility."  Thus, if you want economic development (this is what we want in places like Brooklyn, LaVilla, Downtown, the Northside, etc.), you invest in things that spur the style of development you seek.  If walkable economic development and job creation isn't a concern or you just want to provide feeder lines to a fixed transit spine, go with rubber wheeled options.

Here are a few quotes from a Summer 2010 St. Louis article on this exact issue.

As many as a half-dozen modern or vintage trolley lines might soon join the nearly 30 such systems operating in U.S. cities â€" and St. Louis hopes to be one of those getting on board.

"Streetcars are making a comeback because cities across America are recognizing that they can restore economic development downtown â€" giving citizens the choice to move between home, shopping and entertainment without ever looking for a parking space," said Peter Rogoff, administrator of the Federal Transit Administration.

Plans for a Loop Trolley have crept along for years. But on July 8, the U.S. Department of Transportation gave the project a $24,990,000 "urban circulator" grant. Such grants also went to streetcar projects in Cincinnati; Charlotte, N.C.; and two in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The department picked the winners from among 65 projects seeking funding.

A total of $293 million in grants handed out last month is part of President Barack Obama's "livability initiative" to better coordinate transportation, housing and commercial development.

Portland, Ore., developer John Carroll, a fervent advocate of the streetcar project, said the Pearl District's residential density is highest on the blocks closest to the rails. Daily ridership, projected at 2,700 when the line began service, is approaching 13,000, he said. Carroll said that key to the streetcar's success was making it "a driver" of economic development.

"Our punchline is that we're not going to be a photo opportunity for Grandma and the grandkids," he said. "It will be a vital component of the regional transportation system. Our basic plan doesn't involve cool ideas. We wanted to pour concrete that mattered to the community."

San Francisco's streetcar line is an integral part of the Bay Area's transit system.

Ford said daily ridership peaks at 24,000 during the summer tourist season but added that the line also gets heavy use by daily commuters connecting to light rail and the city's subway system.

He said streetcars do more for economic development than buses.

"Rail projects are very expensive," Ford said. "But rail projects tend to be permanent. And you get the economic development around stops that you normally don't see with bus operations."

http://www.stltoday.com/business/article_19a93293-77db-570c-b3ac-a720bea8bf14.html

[thelakelander]

OK

As an alternative to LRT vehicles on streetcar tracks in mixed traffic, how about articulated buses?

(Given the TOD angle, that one might be more like t-ball than a hanging curve.)

Articulated buses don't spur TOD either.  At least not in this country so far.  In Canada, Ottawa has combined them with dedicated busway infrastructure.  That has been a success, but the cost of constructing dedicated busways is just as high as building full blown LRT.  I think Cleveland's Health Line is probably one of this country's best recently completed BRT corridors.  However, its really more of a "complete streets" project than bus transit.  Some development has taken place.  However, it would have happened regardless of the roadway infrastructure investment because of the universities and medical facilities that were already expanding along Euclid Avenue.

In addition, since we happen to be talking about a transit corridor connecting DT and Riverside, I don't think either of these end points would benefit from larger buses running in their streets.  Quite frankly, we need to be getting rid of the ones already operating in DT (the skyway should be the DT peoplemover) and BRT through a historic residential district is flat out a bad idea.

[thelakelander]

By the way, I see little benefit to placing streetcars in mixed traffic.  Let's take a street like Park through Brooklyn.  It's a constrained 60' roadway facility with two 5' sidewalks and four 10' vehicle lanes.  Instead of keeping the four lanes, take it down to two for vehicles and use the extra 20' for transit and bicycle lanes.  If you want to speed in your automobile, take the six lane Riverside Avenue or Interstate 95.

[Dashing Dan]

just fyi, the lanes on Park street thru brooklyn are 8'.  I measured them myself with a wheel.  But you don't need 4 lanes through there, that's for sure.

[thelakelander]

That must mean the sidewalks are 9' wide.  That's even better.

[Dashing Dan]

I don't recall that you have a full 60' through there, but maybe you do.

[tufsu1]

if it is 4-8' lanes with 2-9' sidewalks, the total ROW is 50'...same is true with 10' lanes and 5' sidewalks

[thelakelander]

I could have sworn it was 60' wide but it could be 50'.  I don't have access to Google Earth right now but whatever it is, I know its pretty narrow.