First you need to convince those on a prospective streetcar line that it's a good thing. That tearing up the streets and a decline in business in the short term will pay off in more foot traffic and customers in the long term. Then you have to convince all the "it's too expensive" crowd that even though you're paying more up front, streetcars cost less than busses to repair and maintain in the long term. And you're generating a whole new customer base: people who wouldn't think of taking a bus (which one? what do I do if I get lost?) will take a streetcar because of the fixed route. And finally, in DC's case at least, you have to deal with the whole "no overhead wires downtown" problem.

Metro stations breed greater density and development. With that development, you need more transport options besides busses. You still have your work cut out for you. The Anacostia test line seems to be going nowhere, and the H Street line is a kind of "streetcar to nowhere." It terminates just short of the Union Station Metro. People aren't going to walk howevermany blocks just to go down H Street. They'll take a cab instead.

I've already thrown a bunch of poop at the Bait Bicyle Thieves. I still say that would make a great movie.

"do you think that allowing overhead wires would kill the "feeling" on H Street?"

Is H St. covered by the overhead ban? I'm not 100% positive that it is in the "Old Washington" zone that prohibits overhead wires.

As to your question, I don't think it would kill the "feeling" of H St. But it's really a moot point. NCPC will never approve of overhead wires so long as there is a glimmer of hope that another option is possible, and Congress will never remove the ban over NCPC's objection.

The primary concern with undergound power conduits is that use of street salt during the winter months wreaks havoc on the equipment, corroding connections and causing power surges and losses. There's also the concern that some dumbass will stick a crowbar in the third rail, fry themselves, and the family will sue the City for $100 zillion dollars for not including warnings stating "Sticking crowbars in the third rail will result in you frying yourself, dumbass" in five languages including Braille.

Considering the death toll associated with open-topped doubledecker bus surfing, this is a serious matter. Maybe!

VRE sold the trains to MARC? Does that mean there will be less trains running on the VRE routes? Wasn't VRE already running at capacity?

Streetcars with underground conduit, please.

Bordeaux Underground Conduit Street Car = Fail

The technology is just not there yet and won't be cheap enough for some time. It is either overhead wires of internal combustion.

reid: h street is certainly in the "old washington zone". it's all part of the l'enfant city plan, so it's covered.

now, the part over the river to the minnesota avenue station, that's debatable, because benning road is the border between the old city and what lies beyond. but, i doubt they would switch from overhead to underground power supply in the middle of a line.

Goph: DC did used to switch between overhead wires and third rails, at least according to Wikipedia:

...in Washington, D.C., local ordinances required electrified street railways to draw current from a third rail and return the current to a fourth rail, both installed in a continuous vault underneath the street and accessed by means of a collector that passed through a slot between the running rails. When streetcars on such systems entered territory where overhead lines were allowed, they stopped over a pit where a man detached the collector (plow) and the motorman placed a trolley pole on the overhead.

Imgoph:
"and there aren't hundreds of them criss-crossing the streets."

I've only seen Boston and San Frans. Boston's and some of San Fran's are unobtrusive. However, some of San Fran's really do look like mid-century Tokyo. But it is my understanding that those spider web wires are only for the electric buses, which need to have both a positive and negative connection (and thus more wires). But I'm not sure.

Johnny:
"Among the legacy of the street cars is the underpasses on Conn. Ave"

Actually, I'm not sure that's correct. The traffic bypass is not the same tunnel as the streetcar tunnel. The streetcar tunnel went (actually, still goes) around the circumference of the circle (from my Embassy Row walking tour I learned that the fact that it goes around the west side of the circle is the work of a rich homeowner on the right side, but who knows if that's really true). I think the underpass and the streetcar tunnel existed simultaneously and didn't intersect.

And I am also totally in the tank for streetcars, but I will admit that it's not really possible to compare the construction costs of the initial system with the (hopefully) future system. For one, they were born by private companies, not the city. And secondly, they were subsidized by the fact that the streetcar companies frequently owned the power plants and made a profit on selling energy.

If we can rebuild even half of the old system, it will represent a much bigger feat than the first generation was.

If you thought Metro train drivers were unintelligible, just wait until you get on a streetcar run by a morlock. It's like they're screaming in Esperanto with their mouth full of marbles.

Ironically, the morlock phrase for "out of service" is the same as for "banana pudding," leading to more than a few awkward moments at the Sizzler buffet line.

massysett: you're wrong on a few counts. first of all, there's no "technology is out of date" argument here. the newest, most up-to-date streetcars are clean, quiet, spacious, and comfortable modes of transport. the basics of the internal combustion engine's design are over 100 years old. are you going to tell me that's outdated technology? i can think of reasons to try to get people out of cars, but that would be a pretty damn weak one.

second of all, the circulator's route is not fixed. if DDOT wants to move it from K street to L street tomorrow, they could do that. there are multiple benefits to having a fixed rail line, and one of them is that the transportation agency running the line can't up and move it elsewhere on a whim.

businesses will feel more comfortable investing along a rail line because they know that's a long-term investment and it isn't going to move. if i buy a building along a bus line, and the move the bus line, i'm screwed for a large part of my foot traffic. on a rail line, i have guaranteed eyes on my display case out front.

thanks for giving me a relevant and local example, reid.