 Streetcar Redux
By Ian C. Colgan
DECEMBER
7, 2007
In October, officials put forth a proposal to the Cincinnati Economic Development Committee to build a 3.9 mile Streetcar line that would connect Downtown to Historic Finlay Market in the city’s Over the Rhine neighborhood. If the city approves the plan, it would join a growing number of cities across the country that have chosen to implement a type of mass transit system that, in the United States, has been used sparingly over the past 50 years.
Streetcars used to dot the American Urban Landscape. In early 20th century, the streets of New York and Chicago were just as congested during rush hour as they are today – except it was due to streetcars instead of automobiles. Virtually every city of a reasonable size once had a streetcar system. However, as the automobile grew in popularity (and the automobile corporations grew in power) streetcars systems were dismantled at a fast pace. By the 1990s, only a few systems remained – most notably in San Francisco and New Orleans. These were used almost primarily to shuttle tourists between attractions rather than move residents to and from work.
Portland, Oregon is the poster child for these new Streetcar systems. Plans are already afoot to expand the city’s existing streetcar line which began service in 2001. This is in addition to the acclaim the city has enjoyed based on its rapid transit system – the MAX Light Rail. Other major cities that have built or are seriously considering building streetcar systems include Tampa, Washington D.C., and Seattle.
Streetcars, or trolleys, are a form of transit system now popularly known as Light Rail. However, it is distinctive from most of the Light Rail systems that have been built since 1970. Streetcars run at grade (often sharing traffic lanes), are powered by overhead electric wires, and serve a localized area, essentially moving people through urban neighborhoods. Light Rail, as it has evolved, is also powered by overhead electric wires but often is grade separated, either above or below the ground. It is also designed to serve a much broader geography, typically connecting suburban areas with a city center. Light Rail cars are also heavier and larger than Streetcars, intended to carry a higher level of daily riders.
 Transit advocates around the county have tried to educate people on the economic benefits of mass transit, and so far, Streetcars appear to be worth the investment. A study done by HDR and Parsons Brinkerhoff found that Tampa Bay invested $55 million in its streetcar line and has since experienced over $1 billion in private sector investment along the 2.5 mile line between Downtown and the Ybor City Neighborhood. Portland reported 100 projects worth $2.3 billion in private sector investment in less than five years, all within two blocks of the streetcar line in the Pearl District.
Additionally, these economic development windfalls have come at a discount compared to other mass transit systems. The cost to build a streetcar line starts at $15 million a mile – Cincinnati’s proposed line is estimated to cost $22 million a mile ($26 million a mile after it is complete and inflation is added on). This compares to between $50 and $100 million a mile (in today’s dollars) it takes to build Light Rail systems like Portland’s MAX system, Houston’s METRORail system, and the recently opened LYNXRail system in Charlotte. These costs are only for Light Rail systems. Heavy Rail systems like Washington’s METRO or Vancouver’s Skytrain typically cost even more.
We may have to wait for the most accurate economic benefits from streetcar systems. It could be argued, for example, that significant private sector investment would have been directed towards the super popular Pearl District regardless of the existence of a Streetcar system. Ditto, perhaps, in Tampa. Regardless, this surge in interest in streetcar systems has other implications in the world of mass transit and economic development.
For years, attempts to develop mass transit systems have been focused on Rapid Transit – systems that had the capability to connect entire urbanized areas. Cities like Milwaukee, Indianapolis and Seattle have struggled for years to implement rapid transit systems, largely because of their enormous cost. Light Rail has grown in popularity due to its capability of accomplishing the goals of rapid transit while generally being more cost effective than other fixed rail systems. The recent interest in Streetcar systems marks a shift in focus from regional, rapid transit systems that move people around a metropolitan area to inner-city systems that move people between neighborhoods. Some cities, like Cincinnati, are looking at streetcars because they see limited opportunity to build rapid transit systems – the city’s topography would make one quite expensive Other cities, like Portland and Washington D.C., already have successful rapid transit systems, and are now focused on implementing better local transit options that will continue the movement to improve their urban neighborhoods.
 The rise of these new Streetcar systems also carries significant opportunity for smaller and medium sized cities. Kenosha, Wisconsin, and Little Rock, Arkansas, cities of 95,000 and 150,000 respectively, have already implemented successful systems. Albequerque is in the midst of building one, and cities like Tucson and Trenton are seriously considering them. The Streetcar has the capability to bring mass transit to medium sized cities that have little to no chance to ever affording a rapid transit system. If the economic development benefits of the Streetcar prove to be viable, that means that smaller cities can share in the benefits.
Research should continue to monitor the progress of the economic benefits from Streetcar systems. If public/private sector leverage ratios regarding streetcar lines are even half that reported in Tampa, it would signify an extremely effective tools for economic development while providing residents, rich and poor, with an enormous amenity.
More articles by this author:
Economy - Shrinking To Succeed
|
|
