This is Washington, DC’s Streetcar.
It runs through 2.2 miles of mixed traffic
in the United States capitol.
And it was once part of an ambitious 37 mile
streetcar network for the city.
But those plans have changed drastically.
The project was delivered 7 years past its
deadline and tens of million dollars over
budget.
The idea was to increase mobility for residents
while revitalizing an economically depressed
area of the city...
But it's had trouble along the way.....
Similar problems sprung up in Atlanta and
Salt Lake City too.
Still, there’s a massive resurgence of streetcars
underway.
Since 2001, about a dozen streetcar systems
have cropped up across the country.
But why do so many cities want streetcars?
The general goal is based on the idea that
if we build more densely around our transit
stations, then we’ll convince more people
to walk around, bike around, and take transit
to get work to get to school and other destinations.
Streetcars are also touted for their ability
to add a certain... je ne sais quoi to a neighborhood.
You know, every city in the country even around
the world wants to have some type of train
going through their city because they see
it as a positive, modern looking and modern
feeling public transportation system.
The case for building streetcars has historical
precedent.
They’ve been around since the 19th century,
when they were first horse-driven.
Later, in the 20th century, the electrical
versions became really popular in cities.
Their popularity started to fade when cities
turned their focus to building infrastructure
for buses and cars.
But in the last decade or so, streetcars have
made a comeback.
There's been a lot of excitement and enthusiasm
about urban living and some of that comes
with excitement about mass transportation.
But big, sort of traditional heavy rail subway
projects are very, very expensive.
So cities look for something cheaper that
they can do and a lot of them have come up
with streetcars.
The Portland Streetcar was one of the first
in the new wave and has led the way for other
cities.
Its success is often cited in proposals to
exemplify the benefits of a modern transit
system.
But all streetcar proposals are not created
equal.
Some have seen roaring success...
While others, like in Atlanta and D.C see
a ton of criticism
The problem is that having gone for mass transit
on the cheap you get transit that isn't very
useful for transportation.
It looks nice — you have this cool shiny
new train — but if you're running in mixed
traffic you're gonna go as slow, or often
times slower than a traditional bus.
Aside from the slow pace, limited connectivity
has kept commuters away in DC.
I’ve been living here for 37 years and I
like the streetcar.
It’s convenient, the only thing I don’t
like about the streetcar is that it doesn’t
go far enough.
I wouldn’t use the streetcar over the bus
because the bus takes me straight to my job.
Right in front of my job.
The streetcar doesn’t go over the hill,
which I didn’t think made sense, but...
So if they're not improving the commute, why
is there a push for more streetcars?
From my perspective they are almost entirely
designed to support economic development and
not increase mobility.
In Portland, for instance, planners actively
sought development adjacent to the streetcar.
Our narrative was pretty development focused
early on, to the point where people were saying
the only the only reason you built the streetcar
was for development purposes.
Now that we're carrying upwards of 16,000
passengers a day it's very much a mix.
The system succeeded because Portland Streetcar
worked with developers to support their plan.
You have to really look at the development
side of things.
Having the rail on the ground is significantly
important for them.
To see the commitment from the city for them
to make catalytic investments is is important.
Right?
We're asking these developers to build something
that they may not build anyway, but for the
rail investment.
There's a little bit of quid pro quo there.
That kind of focus on economic development
is at the heart of other projects too.
The Brooklyn-Queens Connector, or BQX, a state-of-the-art
streetcar that will run from Astoria to Sunset
Park, and has the potential to generate over
$25 billion of economic activity for our city
over 30 years.
Projections aside, the Brooklyn Queens connector
has already proven to be a contentious issue.
I think one clear reason why the project has
been advanced is, is similar to the streetcar
projects being discussed around the country
which is that there is an economic development
goal in the brooklyn and queens waterfront
by some major investors who want to improve
transportation for basically the new towers
that are being constructed along the waterfront.
The motivation behind development, and its
effects make for a messy debate.
A year after its launch, D.C. is starting
to see the development that tends to follow
transit.
A string of luxury apartments, restaurants
and stores has fueled a real estate boom along
H-street.
There is evidence that suggests that government
expenditures of any sort that provide a public
benefit will provide a sort of a stimulus
for development
You know whether their parks, whether they’re
investments in neighborhood retail improvement,
whether they're better sidewalks —
but it doesn't have to be a streetcar.
There are many ways to attract new investment
and the streetcar may not be the ideal one
or even the right one.
