Streetcars Better, Different
- Posted by ryan on June 4th, 2009 filed in Transit
The Infrastructurist provides a nice list of 36 ways in which streetcars are better than buses. It’s fine so far as it goes; certainly on any given trip I’d rather ride a streetcar than a bus. But the point that ought to be made is that streetcar systems and bus lines are different, and perform best in different roles. Right now, the District has basically two transit speeds — Metrorail and Metrobus. There are a number of corridors that would benefit significantly from investment in fixed-guideway streetcars or light rail. There are others that would benefit from an upgrade to rapid bus. But just as I think it makes no sense that the entire feeder transit network consists of bus routes, I think it would be foolish to serve every bus route with a streetcar.
Streetcars have a high upfront capital cost, which means they’re best suited to places with high ridership and lots of development potential. A lot of lower density neighborhoods will never satisfy those conditions, but would benefit from a reliable connection with the greater transit network, via bus. There’s a place for everything. The point is that transit offers a range of solutions to a range of traffic levels, densities, and community needs. Emphasizing the differences between streetcars and buses, rather than the everywhere-and-always superiority of the former, is key to building the rationale for a sensible transit network.
June 4th, 2009 at 11:19 am
You’re right, but making the case for why streetcars aren’t like buses is necessary because people say stuff like this just about every time they come up.
June 4th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Fair enough.
June 4th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
“they’re best suited to places with high ridership and lots of development potential. ”
Aren’t a lot of local types pushing the meme that development *follows* transit?
If H-Street NE (here in DC) had a metro, or not as prone to traffic as buses, wouldn’t it be better populated?
This of course assumes that the city and the local residents want to increase their population density, in order to increase their amenities…
June 4th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
I guess streetcars aren’t appropriate for less traveled corridors, but it’s so exciting to go to a city like Vienna or Munich that has oodles of streetcar lines stretching out into many different neighborhoods and not constrained to the major arteries.
That said, I think we need to focus on the three absolutely crucial and potentially successful corridors: K St, Georgia Ave., and H st. K st. won’t really lead to more development, but a train that zips without traffic along the Georgetown-to-Union-Station Circulator corridor would be extremely popular and give the expansion a lot of momentum. The other two lines have the advantage of potentially spurring a ton of new development.
Of the three, I only think K st. really needs a separate ROW, but I think it would be awfully helpful for the other two to have one as well.
I’m rambling. Let me summarize: Streetcar, me want.
June 4th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I have it on good (off the record) authority that DDOT plans to install streetcar tracks on the K Street transitway whenever it is built. Like H Street, they’re going to install the tracks and hope to figure out the overhead wire problem some other time.
When will K St transitway get built? Depends if it can get stimulus cash or not. It will be part of an application for the discretionary grants.
June 4th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Yeah, sometimes the discussion gets muddled. It is important to note that different forms of transportation are useful for different situations.