AARP Hearts Streetcar


Via Planetizen:

Streetcars make not only healthier communities, adocates say, but also healthier people because they walk to the stops instead of climbing into autos.

Full article, which I’m told was the centerfold of the most recent AARP newsletter, here.


18 responses to “AARP Hearts Streetcar”

  1. Just observing the construction process on the Eastside Streetcar, I think I figured out a way that track could be laid with a small fraction of the labor used in the present process…where the railbed is going into an existing street. It would require the building of a vehicle that could do it, yet with with relatively simple modifications.

    Already in the construction of large structures there are some types of equipment which have greatly simplified the labor process and also ensured greater accuracy. Ever hear of a “laser screed” for concrete floors? It would also depend upon the condition of the underlying roadbed, but I think most city streets are on pretty solid bases.

  2. Hey, are you trying to eliminate some of those shrinking construction jobs? S&W do a great job of getting in, getting it done and getting out. It appears that the custom work like platforms and major crossings, both road and rail, are where more time and disruption is required.

  3. Staci and Witbeck actually have a custom machine they use to pour the concrete around the tracks already, so I think they’d be very interested in other ways to create custom equipment to speed the process.

    Maybe you should try to sell your idea to them!

  4. Streetcars make not only healthier communities, adocates say, but also healthier people because they walk to the stops instead of climbing into autos.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t buses do that too?

  5. Al, the argument is that streetcars foster more intense development to form more easily walkable communities. (The extent to which other developer subsidies have an influence on this is, of course, hotly debated.)

    It’s why the moniker “development oriented transit” is applied by streetcar proponents.

    In an unchanging world (no increase or decrease in the developed environment, population, etc.), and in a world in which ride quality and noise do not influence passenger behavior, then yes buses can do exactly what streetcars do from a transportation perspective. (And, arguably, you can run more bus service for the same money *if* capital dollars could be spent instead on operations.)

    However, if you intend to plan for future growth in a way that results in denser, more walkable communities as that development occurs, then streetcars combine both a _transportation_ component and a _development_ component, where buses are primarily just transportation.

    Now, like I said before, those arguments are hotly debated. But that’s the rationale, and that’s why streetcar lines are getting built here and around the country.

  6. Al, the argument is that streetcars foster more intense development to form more easily walkable communities. (The extent to which other developer subsidies have an influence on this is, of course, hotly debated.)
    JK: Hotly debated??
    Not really. It was settled years ago when the LRT/developer cartel pushed Portland city council to give developer subsidies because NO DEVELOPMENT was occurring along the new line (except close in.) See Oregonian October 24, 1996:
    “The Portland City Council on Thursday approved a tax incentive plan that will give tax breaks to transit-oriented housing projects near MAX light-rail stations and two other Portland eastside locations.”

    “Developers have been hesitant to build the type of housing Metro says the region needs to attract more transit riders.”

    “Housing developers, both for-profit and nonprofit, testified that the tax-incentive program would stimulate the market for creative housing and mixed-use projects. Projects with 15 or more units would be required to contain at least some housing for people with low incomes.”

    “City Commissioner Charlie Hales explained his vote supporting the tax break by referring to a map showing large blocks of undeveloped land near light-rail stations.

    “We have an investment that hasn’t been well capitalized on,” he said.”

    “The tax breaks, which apply to buildings but not land, will generally have the effect of shifting the tax burden to other taxpayers.”

    You can read the whole city council transcript at:
    http://www.portlandfacts.com/transit/lightraildevelopment.htm

    PS: If you know where to get a video of this session, let me know at Jim at SustainableOregon.com/

    Thanks
    JK

  7. JK –

    We were discussing the Portland Streetcar, which hadn’t even broken ground in 1996. It opened in July of 2001.

    Some portions of the MAX system arguably operate as a streetcar, but the entire context of this discussion has been about the style of streetcar implementation as exemplified by the Portland Streetcar, not regional light rail.

    And no, the argument has not been settled.

  8. Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t buses do that too?

    I lived and worked in Seattle from 1998 through 2002 and we were building walkable communities like crazy with no streetcar in sight, only buses. The condo fervor there preceded Portland’s Pearl District by several years.

  9. Hey, are you trying to eliminate some of those shrinking construction jobs? S&W do a great job of getting in, getting it done and getting out. It appears that the custom work like platforms and major crossings, both road and rail, are where more time and disruption is required.

    In my observation so far, there are three items that are greatly contributing to the the cost of laying track, in the present method.
    1. A much larger swath of street is dug up than what should be necessary to incorporate two rails into it.
    2. A lot of handlabor goes into the rebar cages that are then laid into the new, very wide, railbed.
    3. A large volume of concrete has to be poured and finished off to bring the railbed back to grade.

    IF it was possible to only cut away two trenches in the street that would acommodate the rails, plus some perpendicular trenches to add metal cross ties ( as is being done in the present construction method) I think the tracks could be stabilized from deviating out of parallel. The tracks would have to be shimmed and then also pinned with long steel pins to the underlying concrete roadbed. A smaller sleeve of reinforced high strength concrete would be poured to surround each rail.

    I realize the streetcar is 31 tons, so this probably wouldn’t work on streets that are thinly paved over gravel…or brick, as much of Seattle has. It might not even work on our old, concrete main thoroughfares. The critical factor is the weight of the streetcar vehicle as it passes over each point. Undoubtedly the present method does produce a nearly indestructible rail bed; the question is, how much is necessary?

    A machine to cut the rail trenches out would be pretty simple: two pairs of diamond saws cutting through the paving, followed by pneumatic chippers to break the material and remove it—-all of it on a drivable vehicle that could be guided by a laser sight. The laying of the track, rebar and concrete would follow normal procedures.

    Food for thought….

  10. Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t buses do that too?

    I think it’s all a matter of perception. The Portland Streetcar seems “new” because we didn’t have any streetcars for about 45 years (give or take a few years) before. There was already a very slick advertising (a.k.a. “social engineering”) campaign going on for the Pearl District, and the Streetcar immediately became part of this effort.

    IMO, it would’ve been just as easy to run ads with the then-new 2000 and 2200-series TriMet buses, explaining that worry-free transit is just a few steps away from destinations like Powell’s, 23rd, Rose Quarter, etc. Again IMO, all the region needs to do for a similar campaign is new TriMet bus fleet numbers 2940-3099 or so, which would at least be a start towards what’s needed.

    The area still has quite a few bus routes that bring people closer to destinations (assuming they still run at the day/time one needs/wants to go there) than a single streetcar line. Granted, Streetcar takes a different route and that might work better for one going to/from the main library or the art museum. But for those using connecting services, Streetcar options involve going all the way down to PSU and hoping the bus you need doesn’t turn on Madison to go over the Hawthorne Bridge, or several blocks of dodging aggressive panhandlers-by-trade, petition pushers, and donation drones.

    Everytime I’ve been at one of those screenings of the Lincoln Policy Institute piece on the Urban Growth Boundary, everyone in the room laughs when it gets to the part where they speed up the MAX and Streetcar footage to make it seem faster and therefore cooler.

    There’s no doubt that public transit is important for mobility of the retired and elderly. Probably what’s more important is that the overall system works for them, otherwise there’s a huge increase of much more costly ADA-mandated paratransit demand.

    Something I’ve been meaning to mention somewhere at some point (and I’m probably not the first to notice)… and that’s how the 6th Ave. “Union Station” MAX stop is actually in front of the–*GASP*–Greyhound Station. The 9 and 77 both get passengers to Union Station there closer!

  11. “MO, it would’ve been just as easy to run ads with the then-new 2000 and 2200-series TriMet buses”

    Jason, as a bus user I disagree.

    Rail transit is simply better and more attractive to many riders. That isn’t, entirely, irrational. They are easier to board, easier to get off, easier to stand-up on, easier to get a bike on and smoother running. And, unlike buses, they no one is ever going to move the route which is important if you are spending several hundred thousand dollars on a condo.

    If you don’t believe it, look at the 15 bus in Northwest. It is actually quicker downtown than the streetcar. But a lot of people still use the streetcar instead.

  12. It is useful to keep in mind that Streetcar has its roots in communities it serves. NWDA was advocating for it long before it was adopted by City Hall. The Central City Plan which had a ton of public input called for a fixed route connector between neighborhoods in NW, West End and U. District. The late Bill Naito was a strong advocate as well as many other business leaders. Streetcar came into being with broad community AND business support, a common enterprise that is almost the exception to the rule as publicly funded projects go.
    And the proof its success is in both ridership and investment within 2 blocks…way more than even the most ardent supporters imagined.
    Now I’ve got to go catch the 85 to the Rose Quarter…we need both buses and Streetcar and MAX. Its called a System.

  13. …we need both buses and Streetcar and MAX. Its called a System.

    Totally agree 100%! And improvements to one or the other shouldn’t come at the expense of operating the other two or three.

  14. However, if by investing in rail…Streetcar or MAX, you can reduce operating cost/ride and attract more riders (ie serve more riders at lower cost), you would be remiss not to make those investments.
    I think the best investment to be made on the bus side is in operator training and hiring…they are the big variable in quality of service, due to how they drive and how they relate to riders.

  15. Any two components of a system can be viewed as competitive with each other, when you have a finite budget. Since TriMet only has a limited pot of money to work with, every dollar not spent on X can be spent on Y instead.

    This doesn’t just apply when X is one mode (“bus”) and Y is another (“rail”)–it can apply as well to different routes within the system running the same mode. Why don’t riders of the 9 complain about all that money being spent on the 14? Or vice-versa? Or on suburban frequent service lines like the 57? Should riders of the Streetcar or the Yellow line complain about money being wasted running Blue trains out to Gresham? Yet–you never hear this sort of complaint; it’s only the different modes which are widely framed as hostile to each other (and then, it’s almost always the trains that are “stealing” from the busses).

    Given that, complaints which hold that bus and rail are somehow in “competition”, are a bit fallacious. Jason, are you suggesting that TriMet should only add service, and never remove it; and/or if TriMet doesn’t have sufficient operating revenues to bring a new service online while maintaining existing ones, it shouldn’t–even if the new service may be better in some fashion than the old services to be cut?

    More to the point–how should TriMet decide which services to add or expand, which to maintain, and which to decrease or eliminate?

  16. If you don’t believe it, look at the 15 bus in Northwest. It is actually quicker downtown than the streetcar. But a lot of people still use the streetcar instead.

    It can be, but what if you’re looking to get to PSU or the Pearl from 23rd? Most people I see taking the streetcar (myself included) aren’t looking to get all the way to downtown.

  17. “what if you’re looking to get to PSU”

    It would be quicker to take the 15 and transfer to the streetcar or MAX. But my point was not that the streetcar replaces the 15 for every trip. Its that many people prefer tail transit which is why, even when going from downtown to 23rd, many people choose the streetcar over the 15 bus.

Leave a Reply to Lenny Anderson Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *