Posts about Streetcars

Positive impacts

According to the study, the great benefit of streetcars will be that they tremendously expand the number of households and business properties that are within walking distance of a rail station. With streetcars complementing Metro, the share of DC residents within a quarter mile of a rail stop will increase from today's 16% up to 50%.

That will correspond to an increase in the value of properties along streetcar lines by $5-7 billion. Another $5-8 billion in new development can be expected, resulting in a total property value increase of $10-15 billion due to streetcars.

That would result in $238-291 million in new tax revenue for the city each year, after completion of the 37-mile streetcar network. At that rate it would take only 6 years for the city to recuperate the full $1.5 billion cost. After that, the additional property tax revenues would be pure profit.

Tax revenue isn't the only benefit, of course. Compared to a no-streetcars baseline scenario, over a 10 year period the streetcar network is anticipated to induce 6,300-7,700 new jobs in the District, up to 12,000 new households, and up to 1.3 million square feet of new retail development.

That is a big deal.

The study goes on to conclude that these sort of dramatic results are only practical with streetcars.

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is often mentioned as a less expensive alternative to streetcars. However, according to the study BRT would require exclusive rights-of-way in order to begin to achieve some of the same benefits as mixed-traffic streetcars. The property acquisitions necessary to provide exclusive bus lanes would more than negate any cost savings achieved by using buses, and the impacts on development would still be less. At the end of the day, BRT would be neither cheaper nor as effective.

Meanwhile, the expense of Metrorail and light rail would make them cost prohibitive to use for such an extensive network. If the District wants 37 miles of new transit, they are not options.

Negative impacts

There are of course some negative impacts. The largest of which is the effect such a tremendous increase in development demand would have on affordable housing.

The study recommends a range of policies to mitigate that impact. These include upzoning certain areas for greater density so that supply can keep up with demand, mandating inclusionary zoning in new developments, and greater code flexibility to allow accessory dwelling units such as alley houses.

Another negative impact is that streetcars running on a curbside alignment preclude the possibility of converting parking lanes to travel lanes during the peak period. With curbside streetcars, parking lanes must be either permanent or absent.

The report also mentions the complications inherent to bicycle-streetcar coexistence. It notes that quality bike infrastructure will be necessary along streetcar corridors in order to minimize conflict.

Funding mechanisms

Although federal funding may become available at some time, any realistic scenario for the funding of this network must include a substantial local contribution.

In addition to DDOT's normal funding mechanisms, the study identifies potential other sources of streetcar construction funds. Developer contributions and Tax Increment Financing (TIF) appear to be the most promising.

Developer contributions may be possible where very large developments would benefit from streetcar services, such as at Walter Reed or the Southwest Waterfront. The city could negotiate for a contribution of a few million dollars, knowing that the value of the development will increase by a greater amount with the presence of a streetcar.

Tax Increment Financing has even greater potential to fund a very large percentage of the program. TIF is a process in which the city uses bonds to build the initial capital investment, then repays the bonds using the increase in property tax revenue.

The report estimates that using the TIF process, the District could realistically support $600-900 million in bonds. That would approximate to between 40-60% of the total $1.5 billion cost.

These funding strategies will have to be explored in greater detail, and the negatives associated with streetcars will have to be addressed. But if this study proves correct, streetcars are going to be a big, big win. A decade after the system is built the city will be a better and more livable place, construction debt will be repaid, and the tax revenue will be rolling in.

Cross-posted at BeyondDC.

I distributed a questionnaire to 5 participating candidates, and received responses from Bondi, Garvey, and Kim Klingler. The questionnaire asked about the candidates' positions on the Crystal City Sector Plan, the Columbia Pike streetcar, the need for more affordable housing, and more. The candidates also participated in a January 4th debate at GMU's Founder Hall that featured many similar questions.

While the 3 respondents agreed on many points, key distinctions emerged. Bondi and Klingler offered more pointed, direct suggestions for bolstering Arlington's affordable housing stock, while Garvey's experience serving 15 years on the Arlington County School Board gave her detailed knowledge of the ACPS system's current efforts at mitigating the capacity crisis.

All 3 candidates, when asked about the County Board's October 2011 decision to approve Boeing's new regional headquarters in Crystal City, cited concerns with poor urban planning and citizen involvement throughout the process.

Below are exerpts from the candidates' positions on some of the most significant urban issues in Arlington County right now.

What do you see as the most pressing issue facing Arlington County today?

From the need for more affordable housing to transparent governance, each candidate expressed a different view on Arlington County's greatest challenge. What all three candidates appeared to agree on in their answers, however, is the need for collaborative, systematic planning between the County Board and the County's citizens for Arlington's growth.

Melissa Bondi:

I think the most pressing issue is to mitigate the continued threats to, and losses in, Arlington's affordable housing stock. A significant portion of our diverse Arlington population, from immigrants to seniors to persons with disabilities and young families need access to safe, decent affordable housing.

Kim Klingler:

As Arlingtonians, I believe our most pressing issue is to be able to maintain our identity, diversity, and quality of life as we continue to grow as a community. Therefore, we must pay special attention to:
a. Smart Growth and Transportation.
b. County/Schools Collaborative Planning.
c. Maintaining a Diverse and Caring Community.

Libby Garvey:

I think the most pressing issue is the need for more intentional and transparent systems for planning and improvement to manage growth: an overall strategic plan with clear goals, measurable data points and monitoring systems to see if we are progressing towards our goals and working as efficiently as possible.

What are your thoughts on the practicality and cost of the Columbia Pike streetcar? Is this project a good use of funds?

Arlington plans a $261 million streetcar project along Columbia Pike, which leaders say will drive economic growth and improve mobility far beyond what buses can provide, but critics charge is too expensive to justify the benefits. Bondi is a strong supporter of the project, while Garvey and Klingler expressed some doubts in their answers.

Garvey:

While I can see many benefits from a streetcar, the question for me and many people is, are those benefits worth the cost. Arlington needs a clear cost benefit analysis for the streetcar so we can make an informed decision as a board and a community.

Klingler:

In order to determine whether this $261M investment is justified, we need to take a step back and address the following:
a. What do Arlingtonians want? What is their strategic vision and plan for Arlington?
b. How will the street car project be implemented?
c. Can we afford it?
d. Do we have the resources to appropriately manage the contractors?
With the appropriate planning I think the Columbia Pike streetcar could be a promising investment; however, per my points above, I would need to be convinced that now is the right time.

Bondi:

I am a supporter of the Columbia Pike Streetcar, as an integral piece of Arlington's transportation network that will insure mobility for the residents of Columbia Pike in the near term, and for the region in the long term. Major transportation efforts, like a modern streetcar system, require extensive planning and are subject to rising costs. We need to be able to explain any changes in costs and to provide context that helps to reinforce the overall value Arlington residents will realize through such an important investment.

What is your opinion of the Crystal City Sector Plan and its impact on the economic development of Crystal City?

In response to the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, which could take up to 18,000 jobs from Crystal City and leave millions of square feet of office space empty, Arlington embarked on a years-long planning process to develop a Sector Plan to shape the neighborhood's future growth.

The plan calls for a modified street grid and a shift in demographics to better balance workers and residents. In their responses, Bondi and Klingler are supportive of the Sector Plan, while Garvey is skeptical that Crystal City residents truly had their voices heard throughout the planning process.

Klingler:

If it can be fully executed, the plan will favorably impact the economic development of Crystal City. [However], the plan will need to be updated to address: offering competitive pricing per square foot, lowering and maintaining emergency response times to Crystal City, planning for additional school and health services, and designing appropriate transitions between denser areas and traditional neighborhoods.

Bondi:

Among the positive achievements I see in the plan are: 1) generally better urban design, more walkable streets, enhanced parks and public spaces; 2) affordable housing targets, perhaps the most ambitious yet included in an Arlington sector plan; 3) a commitment to transportation infrastructure, especially streetcar, which is essential; 4) inclusion of a vehicle for on-going citizen participation and monitoring in implementation, through the "CCCRC," a permanent advisory body led by residents.

Garvey:

Residents of Crystal City value the underground networks for their convenience and protection from the weather. They value the small open spaces that provide relief from many tall buildings. [With the Plan], these amenities will be lost. I've heard from several the sense that excellence in planning, emphasis of transit use and preserving the amenities valued by residence were not included in the plan. Only two residents were on the task force and many residents who tried to participate and work on the plan as citizens, finally quit the process in frustration and anger. This is very unfortunate.

Tomorrow, we'll post Bondi's, Klingler's, and Garvey's responses on the impact of defense spending cuts on the Arlington economy, the capacity crisis in Arlington County Public Schools, and what each candidate would most like to improve about Arlington County.

• Melissa Bondi's questionnaire responses
  
• Libby Garvey's questionnaire responses
  
• Kim Klingler's questionnaire responses

The map was published as part of an extensive post that lists every major transit line in the US that will either open or be under construction in 2012.

The list is impressive. Nearly every major metropolitan area in the country is represented, and even more would be if the list included projects in the planning stages but not yet slated to begin construction.

The listed projects range from the gargantuan to the mundane. From New York's Second Avenue subway, to a BRT line in Fort Collins, Colorado.

The three map icons next to Washington indicate DC's streetcar projects and the two phases of the Silver Line. Other local projects, such as the Purple Line, the Columbia Pike streetcar, and the Corridor Cities Transitway, aren't shown because they are still in planning.

Our country still has a long way to go before the decades of automobile-focused planning are fully repaired. Even this list, impressive as it may be, is short compared to the highway construction list from most individual states. But still, we're making progress as a country. We're doing things now that we weren't doing a few decades ago. Transit is reaching more people, in more places.

So let's congratulate ourselves for a solid step forward. But let's not be too happy; there's still much work to be done.

Cross-posted at BeyondDC.

But focusing only on the cost increase obscures that, on a per-mile or per-user basis, the streetcar still costs much less than other projects:

• Beltway HOT lanes: $1.4 billion for 14 miles and estimated 66,000 users per day
  
• Maryland Intercounty Connector: $2.6 billion for 18 miles and estimated 30,000 users per day

These simple figures don't even include the huge cost to road users of buying, fueling, maintaining, and insuring a car. They also omit the massive air quality, public health, climate change and other costs of vehicle pollution, and the strains on open space and government services that come from the sprawling development this highway building enables.

The streetcar's mere $261 million price tag, by contrast, covers a 5-mile segment to be used by an estimated 26,000 riders per day.

Instead of further straining public resources by feeding sprawl, the Columbia Pike Streetcar is expected to help revive an existing commercial corridor, contributing positively to Arlington County's balance sheet over time as new development produces tax revenue while adding minimal costs to county services. "County officials believe that by 2040, 3,900 residences and 2.2 million square feet of commercial development, with 7,000 new jobs, will be added," reports the Post.

Yes, $261 million is a heavy lift at a time of economic uncertainty, but a generation ago, so was Metrorail. "Lots of people were vehemently against an infrastructure investment of that magnitude at that time—especially when the decision was made to move it off I-66 and put it underground, which cost that much more," Arlington County Board Member Jay Fisette told me in an interview. "If any community should be able to point to a historical experience of why this kind of investment is worth it for economic impact, quality of life and community planning value, it's Arlington."

More broadly, the Columbia Pike Streetcar is part of the region's next generation of transportation, along with Maryland's Purple Line and a mix of new and revived DC lines. Streetcars are cheaper and have a smaller footprint than Metro's existing heavy rail, while enticing more riders than buses.

County officials say they're hoping to get word on a federal funding commitment to the streetcar in 2012, which would put it on pace for a 2014 groundbreaking and a 2016 opening. From there, extensions to Falls Church or Alexandria are possible.

"The community has endorsed this for years," said Fisette. "As we continue to refine this project and bring it towards the finish line, I'm confident it will be good for Columbia Pike, our economy, our quality of life, and for beginning the next generation of regional rail."

For example, GEORGE riders rightly wondered why the trip from EFC to the State Theater—only a 15 minute walk—involved a leisurely 14-minute loop through Falls Church neighborhoods. This was GEORGE's fatal flaw. Its routes were designed to serve political purposes.

GEORGE wasn't primarily designed to get the most commuters to Metro as fast as possible or to deliver customers to downtown businesses. Instead, it meandered down the streets of as many Falls Church homeowners as possible to convince them their tax dollars were being well spent, whether or not those streets wanted or needed transit.

One omission is particularly revealing. During peak hours, the EFC loop didn't go all the way to Wilson Boulevard, instead turning right on the residential road of Roosevelt Street. That forced an extra walk to the retail shops at Eden Center and the large apartment and condo buildings of The Madison and Roosevelt Towers, whose patrons and residents were GEORGE's ideal customers.

By targeting low-density, car-reliant neighborhoods, GEORGE was also competing against Falls Church's heavily-subsidized incentives to drive. Falls Church and its neighbors have made big investments of land and infrastructure to provide taxpayer-underwritten parking at both EFC and WFC. Why wait for and pay for the bus if there's free or discount parking waiting at the Metro stop?

Rather than facing up to GEORGE's issues and seeking to streamline service, city leaders pulled the plug.

"Nobody did the market research to see if it was viable," Charles Langalis, a member of the city's Citizens Advisory Committee on Transportation told TBD last year. "It was recommended that the city go to work on a marketing plan, some promotional work for GEORGE, but that never materialized, either."

Now with neighboring Arlington moving forward with plans to build a streetcar down Columbia Pike, a discussion on Tuesday will ask whether Falls Church should make a similar move:

The Falls Church Chamber of Commerce and the League of Women Voters of Falls Church will co-sponsor a luncheon discussion Tuesday November 15 on proposals for developing trolley-car transportation in the city. The event will occur from 11:30 am to 1:30 pm at the Italian Café, 7161 Lee Highway.

Panelists will include Steven Del Giudice, chief of the Arlington County Transportation Transit Bureau, Falls Church Vice Mayor David Snyder and former Falls Church City Council Member Dan Maller. Panelists will review basic information about trolley plans as well as routing options and potential benefits to the city.

Even though they're neighbors who even share a court system, Arlington and Falls Church couldn't be more different when it comes to development and transportation choices. Arlington's population has grown 36% since 1980 by focusing dense residential development around transit, and several new developments have already sprung up down Columbia Pike in advance of the streetcar.

But Falls Church's firm opposition to development has limited its population growth to just 18% since 1980. Even near its neighboring Metro stations, single-family homes and low buildings with large surface parking lots remain the dominant features. On Broad Street downtown, apartments are rare and one-floor retail dominates. Exactly where is there enough density for a trolley?

And even if new density were to spring up tomorrow, would Falls Church's single-family homeowners be willing to let their leaders invest tax dollars to help apartment and condo dwellers? After all, if Falls Church residents would rather sit alone in their cars, angry that traffic remains so bad but happy their tax dollars aren't being wasted on that stupid bus anymore, how are those same people going to be convinced to back a more expensive trolley?

It's loopy.

It's also no coincidence that Portland is both America's top cycling city and home to our country's streetcar renaissance. The same city that most agree is the best urban cycling experience in the country is also home to the largest modern streetcar network.

To be sure, integrating bikes and streetcars takes a bit of extra planning. Amsterdam and Portland both have extensive bikeway networks so that mixing is less necessary. That extra planning is important, and is needed to build the sort of sustainable city that Portland, Amsterdam, and Washington aspire to be.

Nevertheless, the point is clear: Streetcars and bikes are not enemies. They work together all over the world, and they can work together here.

Cross-posted at BeyondDC.

What do you think? What's the best way to make sure bikes and streetcars can coexist in a lively commercial street safely and happily?