July 26, 2007
Transit on Thursday: Trolleys and Tribulations Edition
But let's face it. Though it's among the nation's best and most extensive transit systems, Metro is just not very well-designed for travel within the city. The rail network's hub and spoke design is clearly geared toward suburban commuters. The bus system struggles to play a dual role with its long, straight commuter lines and winding neighborhood routes. The result is that many areas of the District are fairly isolated from significant transit access. Spotty bus service and no rail service affect both affluent areas like Georgetown and Chevy Chase, and less well off sections of the city such as Trinidad and much of Southeast.
What's more, as the city continues to grow, the demands commuters place on Metro will continue to grow, further frustrating local neighborhood travel. The Silver Line extension to Dulles, for example, is great for folks in far-off Tysons, Reston, and Herdon. It'll give them a much-need transit option, and help relieve congestion on suburban roads and highways. But it'll also dump a significant number of riders into downtown Orange Line stations, making local Metro travel increasingly more complicated.
D.C. needs another public transit option that is focused on providing local neighborhood service -- an option like streetcars.
Photo by Telstar Logistics
Streetcars are a relatively inexpensive way to provide top-notch local transit service that pulls from the best features of both bus and rail. Their slower pace and frequent stops are perfectly in sync with a resident who needs to pick up groceries, visit the doctor, or make a run to the hardware store. Discrete routes along metal tracks and a distinctive appearance integrates a streetcar line into a neighborhood in a way that makes a bus route seem generic. This can create economic development and neighborhood character that the S or X Metrobus lines could only dream of.
The benefits of streetcars have been clear to District transportation officials for a while now. Working from the city's emerging development patterns, they've planned a network of seven lines that fill in the gaps that Metrorail leaves and Metrobus cannot adequately serve. Looking at their plans, it's not hard to imagine how streetcar service would round out D.C.'s transit system. Going cross-town from Northwest to Northeast would be a cinch. Much of Northeast, including H Street, Benning Road, and Minnesota Avenue, would be connected with Union Station. American University students would finally get a direct transit link, and the two wards east of the river would be connected to each other along a northeast-southwest direction that makes a lot of sense. Though the details are up in the air, and funding is not yet especially forthcoming, the streetcar network envisioned by DDOT has real potential to increase residential mobility, reduce car usage and congestion, and open up new areas of the city to business and development.
That's why we found it odd when Examiner transportation guru Steve Eldridge took a recent trip to New Orleans as an opportunity slam the streetcar idea as an inconsequential novelty.
...on first blush these trolleys seem to serve a very similar purpose as the Circulator buses. They carry a large number of out-of-towners on a fix route through a busy business district for one set price... It occurs to me...that the Washington region has accomplished what it set out to do and has in fact replicated the service of the trolley with the D.C. Circulator. The question yet to be answered is whether that is enough and what else a trolley such as the one down here in Na’ Lins can provide.That opinion stoked quite a bit of controversy. Eldridge gave a sampling of reader responses later that week, with one reader suggesting Eldridge look to Portland, Oregon's famed streetcars for a better idea of what such a system could offer. Other letters holding Portland up as a model followed (some more forcefully than others, apparently), and Eldridge took umbrage.
My goal is not to defend or promote any one system over the other. I thought it might be interesting to look into the trolley system since I was going to be in the town for other reasons. I am certain that there are wonderful examples of trolleys in Europe as well in Portland. Sometimes those who advocate for one position or another do so with such passion that they forget things like being polite and accepting of other person’s positions.
The local chapter of the Sierra Club, which is currently pressing the District to move forward on their streetcar plans with all due haste, was not pleased with Eldridge either. In a letter to the Examiner, the Club points to some of those "wonderful examples" which Eldridge allows for, asserting that in D.C., streetcars would be far more than "...a nostalgic toy for moving tourists."
However, just as D.C. isn't New Orleans or Portland, neither are we Toronto or Melbourne or San Francisco. While we can learn lessons from the success of other streetcar systems, ultimately, we need to evaluate our own city's needs and decide whether streetcars make sense. Building a quality network would require a serious commitment (and investment) from the city. On the other hand, the neighborhoods newly linked by an added transit option could definitely help the city achieve its much-vaunted goal of attracting 100,000 new residents by 2013. And as the Sierra Club notes, it would also help ensure that those 100,000 residents wouldn't come along with 100,000 new cars.
|
Forget streetcars, build municipal parking garages and encourage people to drive. Driving in DC is not as bad as people make it out to be, I can beat any bus at any time of day and can beat the Metro (when you factor in waiting time) at night. Driving a car as an adult living in a major city is a reasonable and responsible thing to do. Begging the government to build you a streetcar is not.
The streetcar in Portland is not so great. It serves areas that were already served by bus, which I'm guessing was why it was funded entirely by private money. In my experience it was usually slower than walking.
where do things currently stand with the streetcar proposals? are they just waiting on funding, or are there further hurdles?
Sounds great. Who's gonna pay for it?
Major problem you're going to have is the nimby crowd who doesn't want their streets torn up.
And once you've dealt with that, you then have to deal with dumb urban planner ideas like having the H Street Streetcar terminate nowhere near Union Station, so you gotta walk blocks to get to the subway.
In spite of all this, streetcars are coming to DC eventually. I just hope it doesn't end up like Baltimore's light rail, that basically exists solely to connect Timonium with downtown. The San Fran model seems to work best: cars, busses, streetcars, trolleys, and electric busses that run off the streetcar grid. DC needs a helluva lot more options than busses that are never on time, gridlocked cars, and a hole in the ground.
A streetcar line from Dupont, through Adams Morgan, and into Mount Pleasant, would be great. It'd tie two major neighborhoods- Adams Morgan and Mount Pleasant- into Dupont's Metro system.
And the old trolly round-about is still there...
"A streetcar line from Dupont, through Adams Morgan, and into Mount Pleasant, would be great."
No, it would be stupid. There are already Metro Stations in those neighborhoods and bus lines that run through them.
The "Circulator" bus routes are a total failure and it is rumored that the buses may be sold to another city -- so DC is going to dig up its streets and fill them with rail ruts as part of some expensive new boondoggle??? (To compete with an existing bus system.) Get real. The city can't afford it and it would never generate enough revenue or ridership to justify it. Who dreams these crazy schemes up?
#3 - Light rail lines are in various stages of planning for different neighborhoods. I believe the Anacostia Line connecting Anacostia Metro and Bolling AFB is the furthest along. The link I cited above refers to a different Anacostia line down MLK boulevard. The H Street line is supposed to break ground this year. The idea is to eventually link these various lines together, so you could concievably go from Anacostia to Georgetown via surface rail.
There is some rumbling about moving funds from the Anacostia project to the SW Waterfront project; I think that's what's holding up those first rail lines from being started.
One running from Arlington Cemetery Metro up Constitution to Union Station would help out greatly in moving tourist above ground during rush hour, and help out the blue/orange line when they implode when the silver line opens.
If you're willing to download DC's bloated 3meg .pdf file, you'll see that the streetcars are modelled after the Circulator busses. See, if it doesn't work as a bus, it will DEFINITELY work as a streetcar, because it costs more, and that means its better.
One running from Arlington Cemetery Metro up Constitution to Union Station would help out greatly in moving tourist above ground during rush hour, and help out the blue/orange line when they implode when the silver line opens.
And how does it get accross the Potomac? A new bridge? Only a couple of hundred mil. A line along Memorial Bridge? And ruin one of the great entrance ways into DC (not to mention ruin a part of Arlington Cemetary)? The TR bridge?
Total pie in the sky stuff.
#5- yes, but there is also the 42 bus which accomplishes exactly that. And in my experience it's pretty reliable.
What we really need is some kind of bus/streetcar/SOMETHING between Dupont and the northeastern end of Columbia Heights/Petworth. The H1 bus is great but it only runs at rush hour...and even that is down on Columbia Rd.
Actually CSX is holding up the Anacostia line. The original proposal was to run the line along the abandoned line to Blue Plains (closed after 9/11 when it was decided that shipped massive amounts of chlorine by rail was a bad idea), but CSX asked for way too much money. So DC started the process of forcing them to hand it over. Running the lines on city streets is just a bluff to make CSX lower their price.
The ICC is displacing the Trolley Museum in Montgomery County. Some effort was made to move those still functioning cars to DC's streets to make them a moving museum (at a much lower cost). MoCo put the kabosh on it. Way to think regionally. The Smithsonion has a streetcar sitting in a warehouse in Suitland perhaps that could be brought out of mothballs.
Driving in DC is a bad as we think. Code Orange air quality days, gas above $3 a gallon, thousands of deaths per year. That sounds pretty bad.
@11. Memorial Bridge is clearly wide enough (6 lanes wide with wide side walks). It can spare a lane or two and a little sidewalk space. I am interested in what your definition of a street car is?
I recall reading a study of the St. Louis light rail system. Although the initial capital expenditures were much higher than for equivalent amount of busses, the longterm maintenance costs were much lower. Also, the lifespan of a rail car was much longer than for a bus. So over a ten-year lifespan, you're spending close to 20 percent less than you would on busses.
The streetcar line used to run across Key Bridge. Roslyn used to be the turnaround point where you could transfer to the streetcar that ran to Mount Vernon.
Those nimbys are the same ones that keep electing Barry to office, I doubt they have the ability to plan for the future and realize consequences for their actions.
RJ - Check the .pdf file. The streetcars DC will get are farking huge, nothing like what is pictured above. You'd have a hard time getting two of them across Memorial Bridge without taking out two lanes of traffic. And I'm pretty sure it would have to be majorly retrofitted to handle the weight and banging of steel on rail. A lot different from rubber on asphault.
I think you guys are all a little too cynical about this project. I feel like the addition of streetcars will help take cars off the road and will make intracity travel much easier. In Amsterdam, which is about 20 sq miles larger than DC, they have a plethora of street car lines, a subway system, and buses. The street cars are very fast and efficient and are used mainly for intracity travel by pretty much everyone, while the subway is geared more towards suburban commute. While I was there I found the buses to be a non factor. Anyway while driving is pretty easy in DC, parking can often be a hassle and I for one would probably rather take a streetcar around town than drive myself and spend half an hour looking for parking at my destination.
Unless there are a decent amount of dedicated lanes, no bus or streetcar solution will work well during rush hour. If the streetcar or bus has to deal with bumper-to-bumper traffic and stops every block or two during rush hour, there will be no time incentive for people to switch to public transportation because it will take twice as long as driving. I like the idea of streetcars, but a bus with dedicated lanes would be a far cheaper option, plus existing equipment could be used.
ME: Let the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the engineers work that out, and when they are done we can enjoy the pleasant ride to mall in 2056. I only get paid for the idea, let the others be crucify for the details.
Some good reading on this at: www.dctrolley.org/
I can't believe anyone seriously thinks streetcars will solve any transportation problems. They serve exactly the same function as existing bus routes, which apparently aren't even needed now on these routes, since they pass by largely vacant most of the time.
What is it about a streetcar that is better than a bus, other than the tourist-pleasing nifty factor? They run on the same streets as buses. They stop at the same traffic lights as buses, and are just as slow. And they add a whole new element of horror the the DC traffic situation - for those places where they might run in the median on large roads (like 16th Street), you have one more thing in to look for (where there SHOULDN'T be anything) when making a left turn. There (used to be, when the streetcar was runnning) streetcar/car crashes in N.O. all the time, as unsuspecting tourists fail to look behind them when turning left off of St. Charles street.
Forget the streetcar. What DC really could benefit from is a monorail. Come on now, all together! Monorail! Monorail! Monorail!
Plans have been in the works for a similar project in Arlington along Columbia Pike and it should/could serve as a good model for any potential projects in DC. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/29/AR2006042901271.html
http://www.arlingtonva.us/NewsReleases/scripts/ViewDetail.asp?Index=2011
This seems to be best suited for long stretches in specific corridors throughout town, such as H St, NE, G'town, etc. And it may even have an added benefit of keeping drivers out of intersections on red lights if 10 tons of steel might crush them...
#6- I must have missed the Adams Morgan and Mount Pleasant Metro stations. Could this be, perhaps, because the stations are not actually *in* those neighborhoods? For example, the Adams Morgan metro station is at the zoo...
Stupid to you *pthhppp*
The advantages of streetcars:
1. Lower operating costs
2. People who won't ride buses will ride them
3. A well defined fixed route is easier to understand and attracts more route-side investment
4. Electric powered streetcars pollute less than gasoline, diesel or natural gas powered buses
5. Streetcars are faster and smoother
6. They increase through-put capacity more than buses.
So I'm all for it - whether it's the longer light-rail style cars that DC is planning or single car streetcars.
I'd like a line that ran from the baseball stadium past Navy Yard, the Eastern market metro and the Capitol to Union Station. 3 miles or so - 3 Metro stations on 4 lines, plus four major destinations.
"They serve exactly the same function as existing bus routes, which apparently aren't even needed now on these routes, since they pass by largely vacant most of the time."
Do you even know what you're talking about?? Peeps are packed like sardines on the X2 line serving H Street and Benning Road ALL the time.
Thank you, #25, for answering all the commenters who think there is no difference between a bus line and a streetcar line.
I naively thought these advantages were pretty widely understood by now. That we are still having this discussion tells me the cynics above might sadly be right.
#12, #5 here. (and #24)
- No argument from me on the current efficacy of the 42 bus but appeal and throughput, and therefor ridership levels and capacity, would be greatly increased by a trolley system.
And, though I focused on a N/S axis, obviously a E/W one between other neighborhoods could be useful. It just seems obvious to me that it should build it out from the existing Metro Core, and that Dupont should be a key link.
wow, #24....
anyway, adams morgan is, as you said, served by the woodley park station - which is a 10 minute walk, tops, from the neighborhood, and mt. pleasant is served by the columbia heights station, which is similarly close. does being "served by a metro station" mean a half-block walk to you?
it sounds to me like #6 was only pointing out the obvious - both neighborhoods are close to metro stations AND served by a bus that connects them to dupont. streetcars sound pretty freaking redundant to me.
#5 here again.
#12, check out the GA Streetscape plan for dedicated rapid-transit bus lanes. It has them. What's generally not as widely known is that transportation planners spec such dedicated lanes as first-phase place-holders for future light rail/trolley systems. If I recall correctly, that's planned for about 2030. This information is all online. See:
ddot.dc.gov/ddot/cwp/view,a,1249,q,639152,ddotNav_GID,1754,ddotNav,|34241|.asp
You may not get a link to Dupont, but you'll get one to U Street and further South.
1) A little - $90 vs $135 per RSH (this from a streetcar pusher - www.lightrailnow.org - so I have to assume it's biased in their favor, if at all). This does not consider the huge capital investment needed for streetcars vs. buses; I'd love to see a 20-year amortization that considers ALL costs.
2) I'll give you that - but if people have a perfectly viable transportation option and don't choose to use it, can you honestly define that as a "need"?
3) I don't think DC really has a problem attracting investment right now.
4) Wrong. Don't forget that you need to burn something to make electricity in the first place -- in this area, as most of the country, it's made by burning coal or oil. Even more importantly, up to 2/3 of electricity generated is lost during transmission from the power plant. Natural gas that is burned where it is needed is MUCH more efficient per unit of work - and produces proportionally less emissions - than electricity is.
5) Faster? Really? If they stop just as often, and share the road with cars, then that makes no sense. If they don't stop as often, then you can't compare them to existing bus routes: you must compare them to a COMPARABLE bus route that would have the same stops as your proposed streetcar.
6) Huh?
I remaain far from convinced.
We need a monorail! Monorail systems put Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook on the map.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't streetcars and trolleys two totally different concepts? Isn't a Trolly something that has its own lane and does not interfere with traffice (and vice versa) and a Streetcar (like the ones in Baltimore) something that has a rail on the street itself but shares the same lanes as the rest of traffic?
(I didn't do any research before I posted this, so please indeed tell me if I'm wrong about this)
I'm a transit advocate and a car-free DC resident, but I think that a 50-mile street car system for the district is a waste of money.
To echo a previous poster, an enhanced surface bus network with streetcar-like levels of of service can accomplish the same goals without all the extra infrastructure expense.
Streetcars will never be faster than buses unless they get dedicated right-of-way, which can be given to buses just as easily.
And in exchange for the reduced (local) pollution, you get ugly overhead wires crisscrossing the city. Plus, the electricity for the streetcar is generated at some coal-fired plant somewhere, probably upwind from here.
Articulated (double-long or accordion style) buses can carry over 100 passengers per vehicle. That's close to the planned capacity for these streetcars.
What we need is smart investments in guaranteed right-of-way for our existing fleet of bus lines, and a migration to clean-burning CNG or clean-diesel/hybrid vehicles.
#29- If your standard is a 10 minute walk to one side of a neighborhood that spans 8-10 blocks than, yes, I suppose those neighborhoods have Metro Service. Kinda like Dupont residents could use the Farragut North, Foggy Bottom, or U Street Stations.
Yes, to everything that guest #25 said, plus:
7. Quieter. Buses are loud, especially when accelerating. Not so streetcars.
Also, ME, the Inekon Trio (currently being tested for DC) is a few inches narrower than the old PCC type streetcar picture above.
I support reintroducing streetcars to link various DC neighborhoods, especially those currently underserved by other forms of public transit, but the system should be integrated w/ metro and buses so that we can more seamlessly move around the city w/o having to resort to driving.
>7. Quieter. Buses are loud, especially when
> accelerating. Not so streetcars.
Streetcars QUIET? Are you kidding me? Have you ever been to San Francisco? What planet are you living on?
Look, #37- the SF "streetcars" (really cablecars) are mechanically not at all like what is being considered here. The big difference is that the SF cablecars use an underground cable system to pull them along. Mechanically, the SF cablecars are more like ski-lifts than anything else.
SF's other streetcars *are* quiet.
what kills me is that the 7 corridors called out on the transit page (citation: http://www.dctransitfuture.com/corridors/ ) are exactly routes already covered by buses. street cars need to exist in a niche where buses can't.
despite what some say, the portland street car did, in fact, do this. the street car connected NW portland with downtown portland. these two areas were extremely close but not quite close enough to walk. as a result they were completely ignored by the bus routes.
the street car came in connecting downtown portland and NW portland with the Pearl District in the middle helping revitalize the pearl as well as providing to-and-from traffic for both destinations. this is a short niche trip. now the street car is being expanded to the SW waterfront development which will also surely be a wild success.
what DC needs to do is make its close neighborhoods closer. a street car will do nothing for SE or silver spring. sorry, dreamers, but it won't. it could however help revitalize H street NE or connect Mt Pleasant and Dupont Circle once again. (even though the 42 does this, a street car would be better.)
if they start building streetcar lines up and down 16th street or wisconsin ave it will be a dire mistake.
Are any of the people objecting here to a streetcar system actually residents of the District? This system is not meant to benefit non-residents. In fact, if designed correctly, it should be a detriment to people driving in from the suburbs. There should be (and will be) dedicated lanes down K st. There should be dedicated lanes elsewhere as well. It was your decision to drive into work in DC, I don't see why DC residents should have to bend over backwards to accomodate that choice.
And anyone that thinks the Circulator is a failure is either consciously lying or has absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
Clearly, no one here agrees on what a streetcar is, what a trolley is, whether or not buses are currently utilized enough, and how far is too far when considering metro access. All I know is...the metro is way too crowded. There are areas of the city that are completely inaccessible via metro. Buses can be intimidating--especially to tourists--when there's no assurance of a fixed route. And both streetcars and trolleys are pretty freakin' sweet.
Streetcars combine the convenience of a rail, and the street-level comfort of bus. Personally, I use metrorail infinitely more than metrobus, partially because of the unreliable timing of the latter. If these streetcars can run in a timely fashion, I'm for it. The city has a lot of beautiful streetscapes that you miss when you're underground. This might encourage more street-level retail patronage as the transit is more integrated at the ground level. The only thing I worry about is the overhead wires...
#1, are you serious?!
Speaking of the ICC, it would cost less money to build a Metro line from New Carrolton to Bethesda then to build the ICC.
#39- Those areas are being considered because they are the highest demand areas. They already have proven that demand by for years supporting bus lines, many of which are now being upgraded to dedicated lanes.
Dedicated rapid-transit bus lanes are placeholders for future higher capacity streetcars. We've got to start somewhere, and the reintroduction of this infrastructure (which was removed at the ascent of the car-culture in the 50's and 60's) won't happen overnight.
You residents of AM and MP who would like streetcars that link your neighborhoods to downtown would do well to pay attention to what your councilmember is proposing for your (hopefully) future transit link- Dupont's old Trolley station.
Jamie:
1) I don't have 20 year amortization numbers, but the point is that we're creating a system for more than 20 years. Where would we be if they had been too concerned about capital costs when they built Metro?
2) It's not that people "need" streetcars, it's that the city "needs" more people to use transit. In addition, people in poor neighborhoods in DC often do not have quick and reliable means to get to work centers, therefore their ability to get and keep a job is diminished. A DC streetcar system that would be more eficient and reliable than the current bus system would benefit poor residents of DC.
3) There are plenty of neighborhoods (H St., Georgia Ave., Anacostia) that really could use more investment.
4) There would be less local pollution.
5) This entire initiative is considering strategic use of dedicated lanes. Yes, those lanes would work well with buses too, but buses don't have the other benefits discussed above.
6) What the guest meant to say is that they can hold more people. Just ask someone who has been passed by a two straight full buses (like me) why that's desirable.
Well, I've lived in an apartment that had a streetcar right outside my bedroom window in Europe... running new cars, of course, not restored PCCs from the 1950's. Then I moved to 8th St NE on the bus line, thinking that the decible level would be about the same. Not even close. Not to mention the fumes...
The last time I spent any significant time in SF we saw the PCCs on the F Street/Wharf line. These were noisy. They're antiques. Streetcars also make noise (squealing) when tracks are not designed w/ sufficient turning radius, which can be avoided w/ appropriate engineering.
Why do we have to pretend that the Examiner is a real newspaper? It's just another crazy right-wing Moonie Rag. The people who write for it have no credibility because people with credibility wouldn't work for it. Right wingers oppose public transportation on principle.
why won't the streetcar benefit SE? SE is by far a heavily populated area that depends on public transportation. with the soccor stadium on the table and the baseball stadium across the river, why do you think SE won't benefit?
I'm with Reid. We need to do more to induce demand for transit and to encourage people to make the actual long-run choices necessary to support a transit infrastructure. Catering to the suburbs is counterproductive precisely because it is the suburbs' existence and prominence that has made building an effective transit system so difficult. I propose that once the streetcar is in place we put up signs showing cars stuck in gridlock traffic (preferably with VA and MD plates) with a streetcar whizzing by the cars and captions of motorists saying "well that was stupid...."
I agree with the person who wrote that traffic in DC isn't so bad, except for the parking. But if we build enough parking for all the autos then the traffic would be in true gridlock! I also agree with the person who advocated building Monorails. But why stop there? Why not give anti-gravity machines to everyone? But I definitely agree with the person who said DC residents would never put up with construction in the streets for streetcars. In fact, for streetcars to work, you would have to reserve a traffic lane on congested routes, and this would lead to widespread road rage in the streets!
5:16-While it is owned by an arguably "crazy right-winger" the Examiner has some of the best local coverage, in my opinion. It's certainly better than Express. NPR is full of crazy left-wingers, but it doesn't change the fact that it's got the best news coverage on the radio. Besides, Steven Eldridge is by no means anti-transit. He's not a rabid pro-transiter, but he's certainly not opposed to it. Why don't you read it and judge for yourself.
Urban Architect: A soccer stadium at Poplar Point is very unlikely at this point. But I agree with your other points.
We have "dedicated" bus/bike lanes up 7th street and going down 9th street for the Circulator routes and because of a lack of enforcement they are ignored by drivers. I bike regularly on both of them and I've never been in a situation where multiple cars (who were not in the lane to turn right) weren't driving in the lanes. Unless and until there's some enforcement, the "dedicated" lanes are useless.
Also, Tangerlini, when he was head of DDOT, told community groups point blank that he could get people into trolleys/streetcars who would never think of riding a bus, hence the duplication of existing bus lines. If it gets more people out of cars and onto public transit, I'm for it.
Moose, I think the answer is to actually design the dedicated lane in such a way that no car would think it's a normal lane. This would be way more than just a paint job.
Check out these plans for a K St. busway for an idea of what it could look like:
http://ddot.dc.gov/ddot/frames.asp?doc=/ddot/lib/ddot/information/studies/dc_congestion_taskforce/pdf/k_street_final_report_executive_summary.pdf
about the overhead wires-
When DC did have streetcars in the olden days, they were powered by underground power sources rather than overhead. Each streetcar had a blade that stuck out the bottom of the train into a groove in the street where it was connnected to a power source, and the groove was designed as so not to be open to the air or an old lady crossing the street or a curious kid who wanted to see what was inside. There were obviously problems when it snowed, but one could maybe engineer that away, I think.
Also- streetcars without dedicated lanes are just expensive, inflexible buses. American downtowns had them in the 1890s on, mixed with traffic- average speed was less than 5 mph.
Jamie,
Costs: I'm not sure what study you cite at lightrailnow.org, however, light rail and streetcars are not exactly the same thing. Light rail has a higher initial investment and operating cost.
Energy: While up to 2/3 can be lost during transmission, the loss need not be this high. Plus, controlling emissions is more efficient when done at a central location and on a larger scale. Individual cars, buses, etc. don't come close. Electricity can be generated by a variety of sources, from wind power to coal to nuclear, w/ no infrastructure adjustment required for streetcars. Also the US doesn't control the majority of the world's natural gas supply and price of natural gas has been increasing.
Faster: Even w/o dedicated lanes, drivers tend to behave different toward streetcars than toward buses. Drivers are less likely to cut across tracks to cut off what they perceive as a train. That said, clearly dedicated lanes have an advantage.
Reid @54- Page 4 looks great! But where have all the buildings gone? ;)
Jamie, Reid responsded quite well to your questions, but let me elaborate on a couple of them.
#4 - It is very difficult (impossible?) for 200 small engines to be as efficient or clean as one power plant. Yes, power plants tend to burn coal but still they do so more efficiently than an ICE burns its fuel. Carrying your own powerplant (which is what a car does) means that you have to sacrifice some efficiency and some cleanliness for size and weight.
#5 - even without running in their own R.O.W, streetcars can be faster because new versions accelerate and decelarate faster than buses.
And someone asked about the terms "trolley", "streetcar" and "light rail." They're bascially all the same thing (most of the world calls them trams). Techinally a trolley gets its power from overhead lines via a trolley pole. So all trolleys are streetcars, but not all streetcars are trolleys (DC's old streetcars were powered by underground conduits in the city). All refer to vehicles that can travel on their own or a shared right of way, but generally shared. The "light" refers to the lighter capacity than "heavy" rail like metro.
With modern systems, "streetcar" generally refers to a one car system that travels short distances mostly on streets and "light rail" refers to articulated two (or more) car systems that travels more in it's own R.O.W but may have several at-grade crossings.
Wow, I really just nerded out there.
Great topic, Colin. 58 posts in 4 hours. Lots of informed commentators, too. Good for DC for moving toward this.
I like the idea of streetcars. But honestly--the reason I don't ride the bus now isn't because I dislike buses. It's because our bus system is poorly planned and poorly run, making it excruciatingly inconvenient. Too-frequent stopping, erratic scheduling, overcrowding, unreliability--these are the hallmarks of Metrobus. If Metro would spend a little money to redesign the bus system (maybe even without dedicated lanes), I'd ride it everywhere. Because convenience is the biggest obstacle to bus ridership, I'm sure, not anti-bus sentiment. Washingtonians would ride elephants to work if they thought it would get them there quickly and cheaply. So I can't get over this feeling that streetcars are really a solution to Metrobus inertia. A novelty to compensate for Metro's inability to overhaul a rotten system.
Crystal City orginally planned for a streetcar to connect Pentagon City Metro with Braddock Road Metro, running down Route 1. Kinda makes sense, with all the infill residential highrise development and Potomac Yards. Then they got the pricetag.
It's going to be all dedicated bus lanes. Maybe they know something that DDOT doesn't?
Monkey: Say it with me "Transportation Planners Use Dedicated Bus Lanes As Placeholders For Light Rail". There, now doesn't that feel better? Easy and enlightening, too.
-Mark
They must develop dedicated lanes. Few things are more aggrivating than waiting for a bus to pull a hundred feet up to the shelter because there's some asshole hack standing in the "bus" lane blocking the way.
Major problem you're going to have is the nimby crowd who doesn't want their streets torn up.
Speaking as someone who'd have two streetcar lines going through his backyard, let me say, IMB! Please! If you need any help, let me know and I'll go down to M Street or Maine Avenue with a pickaxe.
Also, as regards the Circulator: I ride it every so often, and I can't really call it either a success or a failure. Sometimes it's nearly empty, and sometimes it's standing room only. It really depends on how the bus meshes with the Metro and VRE lines at L'Enfant Plaza; if a northbound Circulator pulls into L'Enfant when a morning rush hour train has recently unloaded, there are a ton of commuters who will jump onto the bus to get deeper into downtown.
All this nonsense about cost is absurd. There is no American alive today who is paying too much in dues. In fact, people here are doing the absolute minimum. There is a false pride here, kind of like the bad singers on American Idol who claim to be so good, while everyone around them knows they are awful.
We could build a trolley system in one year flat, if we wanted to.
It's about time we started doing more, paying more, and demanding more. We could have rebuilt New Orleans in two years flat if we wanted to. We could have rebuilt the World Trade Center in two years flat if we wanted to. Instead, unlike Americans in the past, we seem to be proud of making a minimum effort and letting people dangle in the wind for decades. There is nothing more repulsive than listening to somebody drone on about how they pay too much in taxes. That is the sure sign of a scoundrel.
We have become soft, weak, complacent, and without group will power. Where are our great deeds? We can't even build a trolley line. Oh, the expense! Where would I ever find the money for that? Good gosh, well, I'm off to lunch in my fourty-thousand dollar Japanese car. Bye!
I agree about the need for transit in the city, but streetcars are NOT the way to go.
Have you ever tried to bike on a street that has tram tracks? I have--in Zagreb, Croatia--and it's terrifying: your tires get stuck in the tracks, despite your best efforts, and down you go. The tracks would take away the bikers' lane (on the far right of the street) and force them to ride in the middle of the street, further enraging SUV drivers who already hate all bikers just for the hell of it.
What's wrong with just increasing the amount of busses on the road? Why tear up the streets and lay down tracks that will endanger the many many folks in DC who commute by bike?
rustmyrtle@yahoo.com
rustmyrtle@yahoo.com - Have ye ever been to the 'Dam? They have all sorts of trams there, and more cyclists than I've seen in any city. Anywhere. Ever. Apart from the Delft, maybe.
Commenter #1 is a prize tool. Do you really think that the long term cost of building loads of municipal parking downtown is less than the cost of investment in mass transit? If you include the actual construction costs, the lost revenue from NOT selling the land to developers, and the aesthetic damage that endless parking lots would do to the downtown area in terms of lowering overall property values and therefore tax revenues. Tosser.
Amsterdam doesnt have hills.
DC does.
@61:
Yes, they realized that suburbanites (even inner-suburbanites) want to drive. They will use the bus if they have to, but an infinitessimal number of people there would make the switch from car to trolley, so the investment is pointless. It makes a lot more sense where more people will be on foot to begin with, and the investment is serving a lot more than a few new arbitrary housing developments.
Whenever there is a fixed route option, significantly more people will elect to try it out -- and more of those occasional users will turn into regular users.
Monkey: There's also the fact that dedicated bus lanes reserve the real estate necessary for *either* rapid transit buses *or* trams up front, while deferring the bulk of the cost for actually constructing a (higher capacity) tram line to the future, when demand will presumably also be higher. This may be what NoVA did. Given Richmond's budget priorities, it makes sense.
-Mark
deejoshy - The problem is, nobody wants to.
As for taxes, clearly we need to be more like Sweden where they just take all of your money. Then again, there's all that sweet, sweet Viking tail, and a chance to go into a sweatlodge with Miss November so she can beat you senseless with birch branches and you wake up naked on a smorgasbord table next to the gravlax with a smoked lamb's head hanging out your ass. Explain THAT to H.R. Block.
Yes, they realized that suburbanites (even inner-suburbanites) want to drive.
BS. I'm the inner-suburbanite who posted at #60, and I hate driving. I would take the bus anywhere and everywhere (or a streetcar, for that matter), if only the buses a) arrived where they are supposed to within, say, twenty minutes of when they are supposed to; and b) were faster than pushing yourself in a shopping cart with a long, gondola-like pole. Or skateboarding. Or crawling with a sense of urgency. What difference does it make, after all, whether my mode of transport has hanging wires and an embedded track? I could care less. I would jetski down the Potomac, if it got me to work on time.
rustmyrtle@yahoo.com:
i'm a bicyclist too, but i disagree with your assumptions about streetcar tracks ruining our city's biking lanes. unless you're a self-righteous s.o.b. bicyclist who thinks he owns the road, you more than likely keep to the right of the lane, which gives you plenty of room to avoid the tracks. if you don't keep to the right, i'd be more worried about getting run down by an even more self-righteous s.o.b. motorist than i would be about the tracks.
Go catch a ride on a VINTAGE streetcar at either the National Capitol Trolley Museum in the Layhil/Bonifant Rd area of N Silver Spring, OR the Baltimore Streetcar Museum off Falls Rd near Jones Falls Expressway. Both open every weekend.
I've been to SF, which has that lovely streetcar pictured on this page - they have a great downtown transportation system with cable cars, streetcars/light rail, AND subway...
Monkey wrote:
"...no body wants to..."
Well, clearly some people do. Should they just shut up, or say "nay" and move to the 'burbs?
*ahem*
-Mark
I'm not sure anyone has mentioned the main reason planners like rail-based transit is they have a proven track record of helping build people-oriented cities with pleasant streets lined with retail.
In addition, the density and investment they encourage can boost tax revenue. Take a look at page 22 of the PDF in comment #10.
#70 - You hit the nail on the head. The advantage of a fixed route is huge. The presence of streetcar tracks is like a promise to potential riders, saying in essence: "There is a train that runs here, it will be along shortly, trust us." Buses are too vague, especially for tourists or the casual, occasional riders venturing into a different part of town - schedules seem unpredictable, routes change, buses tend to bunch up, etc. I have used streetcars extensively when visiting Europe (Vienna, Berlin, other cities in Germany) and found them vastly superior to buses.
When I see a bus stop, I think "hmmm, a bus MIGHT come by here eventually, and might even go where I want to, but I'm not sure I want to take a chance on it." When I see a streetcar stop (in Europe), I think "yeah, this is a reliable, a train will be along shortly, I can rely on it." This doesn't completely make sense, but the psychological advantage of permanent tracks is significant.
I am surbunanite who usually drives when coming into DC on the weekends, particularly if I am going to a neighborhood not well-served by Metro. When I have tried to take a bus, it usually has not gone well - the bus was nowhere NEAR on time, it didn't t stop where the map said it was supposed to, etc. It only takes a few incidents like that to convince me not to bother with the bus. Streetcars would get me out of my car in DC; buses don't. For people like me, if the goal is getting cars off the road, streetcars do that better than buses.
As for the right-of-way issue: In Berlin, I noticed that the streetcars ran down the middle of the street, near the median, so that you had to walk across several lanes of traffic to get to them. At first I thought this odd, but then found that there never was any traffic when the train stopped. It took me a while to realize that the stops were also right after an intersection, and the streetcars activated the light when they stopped, so drivers would get a red light, leaving the street open for people to board the streetcar. It worked amazingly well. There must have been some sort of light-timing going on when the streetcar was in motion too, because somehow the streetcars did not get stuck in traffic, even without a dedicated lane. They were not as fast as a subway train, but definitely faster than buses. Riding around the eatern sectors of Berlin, I kept thinking to myself how much I would love to see a line like that running up 14th Street through the Logan Circle area, or running down K or M into Georgetown.
Most (perhaps all?) streetcar stops in Berlin had little electronic signs, something like what we have on Metro, announcing when the next streetcar would be along. This, too, increases the dependability factor.
Other comparison to buses: It was my experience in Europe that streetcars are quieter, smoother, and cleaner than buses. Overall, much more pleasant to ride on.
The irony is that once, the late Capital Transit and D.C. Transit provided an excellent and extensive electric streetcar system with no overhead wires in the downtown areas. Alas, the CEO of DC Transit, Mr. Chalk, tried to convince a blind Government that streetcars should be retained. A blind Government will forced the demise of DC trolleys; too bad, so sad.
I realize I'm a little late to this discussion, but I took the photo that appears at the top of this post -- it's one of San Francisco's restored PCC streetcars running along Market Street. A few comments about San Francisco's streetcar lines:
-- Comment 38, above, is incorrect. San Francisco also runs electric streetcars, in addition to the cable cars.
-- The streetcars here are a mixed fleet. Most lines use modern cars, but the F Line, which runs through downtown, only runs restored vintage cars. You can read more about San Fran's vintage fleet here.
-- FWIW, there's some research which suggests vintage streetcar lines drive regional economic growth, even if the streetcar lines themselves are not net profitable to operate. More on that here.
No 1 said: Driving a car as an adult living in a major city is a reasonable and responsible thing to do. Begging the government to build you a streetcar is not.
It is just as reasonable and responsible for government to build a new streetcar system; let's say a new streetcar route 20, 30, 40/42, 50,54,60, 70/72, 80/82 and 90/92. It was an unreasonable and irresponsible government mandate that foced the discontinuance of these DC Transit streetcar routes in 1962. While the CEO of DC Transit, O. Roy Chalk was championing the retention of the rail system!