The Portland Streetcar: A case in point

[betts]

Although this isn't about OKC specifically, it does offer food for thought:

The Portland Streetcar
Reinventing Transit: report case study

The Portland Streetcar is estimated to prevent 70 million miles of vehicle travel annually. Source: Portland Streetcar, Inc.

Streetcar facts

Portland Streetcar ridership has grown steadily since opening in 2001 and currently serves 13,000 riders per weekday.
The service began with a 2.4 mile line initially costing $54 million and has expanded three times since, adding 1.6 miles, bringing the total capital investment to $103 million.

Offering a convenient way to get around downtown, the Portland Streetcar has helped spur extensive development and is a central part of the city’s transportation network.

Together with Portland’s light rail and bus system, the streetcar is one reason why automobile use (measured in vehicle miles traveled per capita) in Portland has actually declined by 6 percent since 1990, in contrast to the average for U.S. cities which has grown by 10 percent.

In fact, the Portland Streetcar is estimated to prevent 70 million miles of vehicle travel annually, thereby avoiding more traffic and pollution.

Economic development
In addition to creating new jobs directly, the Portland Streetcar has helped stimulate $3.5 billion in new development in downtown Portland and revitalized old neighborhoods that were in decline.

Within a three block distance from the streetcar, real estate investment has surged, with density increasing over 40% in just a few years. The subsequent development surrounding the streetcar represents over 5 million square feet of new construction including 10,000 housing units.

[Urban Pioneer]

Here is a video:

YouTube - The Modern Streetcar

[Spartan]

The Portland Streetcar is estimated to prevent 70 million miles of vehicle travel annually. Source: Portland Streetcar, Inc.

I would say it's even "prevented' an even longer number of miles of vehicle traffic when you take into account that the trips that people are taking are through an area that is much denser due to the investment of the streetcar in an area. First comes streetcar, then comes density. In a mile stretch of area along the Portland streetcar are all the businesses and homes you'd find along a 5-mile stretch of road in OKC sans streetcar.

IF OKC built streetcar, the investment would come. There is no other way to bring about the kind of urban growth that we want WITHOUT waiting 10/20 years. This brings high quality urban infill instantly. A bus route is a laughable replacement because it has no real effect on a neighborhood. A developer looks and SEES the rails in the street and the wires above the street and everyone knows that the streetcar will come by here, so he builds a development there. You see a bus stop sign and you either tend to completely ignore it and focus on other surrounding elements, or you scoff and immediately think of uncomfortable seats, smelly people, inefficient buses, clouds of exhaust, gum stuck on the floor, etc etc.. either it will have no impact (best scenario) or the developer will try and build away from the bus stop.

The sad reality is that most people, especially the people who are looking to move downtown, wouldn't be caught dead on one of OKC's city buses. Streetcar would be a big-time game changer not just in downtown but for all of OKC's mass transit services.

[betts]

Agee completely, Spartan. I think investment around the streetcar line would mushroom. It could be the most transformative of all the MAPS projects, IMO.

The other issue that the article didn't mention is that for every car mile not traveled, there is less wear and tear on city streets. Over time, mass transit saves money on street repair as well.

[betts]

Here are excerpts from an additional article regarding rail in Phoenix from Trains magazine.

"People are happy in Phoenix. The light rail line that opened in 2008 is swarming with passengers and beat ridership expectations.

When Phoenix opened its first light rail line in December 2008, it joined Los Angeles, San Diego, Portland and Minneapolis in debunking the myth that metro areas with low population densities and rail don't mix. With a city-wide population density of 250 people per square mile, the Phoenix area epitomizes the car culture.

Since Phoenix voters approved a 2/5 cent of sales tax in 2000 for the line, $5 billion in public and private real estate has been invested along the line. In it's first quarter 2000, revenues went up 13 percent in downtown Phoenix businesses."

[mugofbeer]

Take a look at Dallas and see how development has exploded around light rail stations. Dallas did it right and let developers buy the prime land in exchange that they build light rail stations FOR the DART system. Denver has chosen to build all the rail stations themselves and its costing them an arm and a leg more than it should. So far there has been NO development along the light rail line in Denver.

[betts]

Take a look at Dallas and see how development has exploded around light rail stations. Dallas did it right and let developers buy the prime land in exchange that they build light rail stations FOR the DART system. Denver has chosen to build all the rail stations themselves and its costing them an arm and a leg more than it should. So far there has been NO development along the light rail line in Denver.

That's a very clever idea, actually.

[mugofbeer]

Unfortunately, OKC isn't Dallas or Denver. At this point, I don't see OKC having the density to support such a system profitably. What I would be in support of would be the provision of funds and zoning laws passed to preserve right of way for future light rail or streetcar lines. Light rail can also operate at street level tho its rather dangerous.

[PLANSIT]

Take a look at Dallas and see how development has exploded around light rail stations. Dallas did it right and let developers buy the prime land in exchange that they build light rail stations FOR the DART system. Denver has chosen to build all the rail stations themselves and its costing them an arm and a leg more than it should. So far there has been NO development along the light rail line in Denver.

This is factually incorrect. There are numerous examples of TOD along both the SW and SE lines. Anyone who has ridden either one of these lines in the past year would be astonished by the development around many of the stations. The SW line has significant TOD at the Littleton, Oxford, and Englewood stations. The SE line has TOD in many different stages with plans to develop at several stations.

Check out the RTD TOD Status Report

If you have a source for the DART station PPP, I would be thrilled to read it. I can't find anything about such a partnership.

[PLANSIT]

Unfortunately, OKC isn't Dallas or Denver. At this point, I don't see OKC having the density to support such a system profitably. What I would be in support of would be the provision of funds and zoning laws passed to preserve right of way for future light rail or streetcar lines. Light rail can also operate at street level tho its rather dangerous.

No public transit system in the United States is profitable. None, Zip, Zilch, Nada. Not Denver, Not Dallas, Not New York.

And how is at-grade light rail dangerous? Sure it takes getting used to for those who haven't been around it. Left turns are a little tricky, but countless cities across the U.S. have at-grade LRT and Modern Streetcar. They seem to do just fine. Concluding that it is rather dangerous, given its history to the contrary is irresponsible.

[mugofbeer]

This is factually incorrect. There are numerous examples of TOD along both the SW and SE lines. Anyone who has ridden either one of these lines in the past year would be astonished by the development around many of the stations. The SW line has significant TOD at the Littleton, Oxford, and Englewood stations. The SE line has TOD in many different stages with plans to develop at several stations.

Check out the RTD TOD Status Report

If you have a source for the DART station PPP, I would be thrilled to read it. I can't find anything about such a partnership.

Nope, factually dead-on. Englewood station was a public development project and is the only thing close to what I am referring to. I am not talking about development around a station. I am talking about development that INCLUDES the station. There isn't anything at the Littleton station or the Oxford station that wasn't already there other than the renovation of the old Littleton train depot. The only place a large scale development has been planned is at the Broadway station and the renovation of the Gates plant but that has been shelved due to the economic downturn - even then, RTD built the station on its own.

In Dallas, examples of private development of DART stations would include the Cityplace stop, Mockingbird station, Baylor Ambrose station, U of Dallas Tanger Mall, etc. Not all were funded and built this way but several were saving DART millions.

[gmwise]

Just keep this in mind.

Great American streetcar scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If we get a system in, protect it!!

[Spartan]

Take a look at Dallas and see how development has exploded around light rail stations. Dallas did it right and let developers buy the prime land in exchange that they build light rail stations FOR the DART system. Denver has chosen to build all the rail stations themselves and its costing them an arm and a leg more than it should. So far there has been NO development along the light rail line in Denver.

I'm not sure about this. I know that the developments all have 'station' in the name, i.e., Mockingbird Station, but the actual station there is underground and completely separate from the mega development. I'm not sure if the developer paid for the underground and completely separated DART station or not. As for Denver, there actually is a lot of development along the LRT in Denver. That's worked pretty well for them. I'm really envious of some of their TODs (transit-oriented-developments).

I say if Phoenix can do it, we can. Dallas and even to some extent Denver aren't particularly dense cities. The density in those areas of town came AFTER the light rail was put in. All you have to have is a reasonable population that's being connected from point A to point B and it typically works if it's planned right.

[mugofbeer]

As part of the agreement for the City of Dallas to allow the builder to develop what they wanted on the Mockingbird site - which was an extremely dense urban development, they agreed to build the station as part of the development. This was done - what? 15 years ago?

As far as Denver, I rode the SW line for 3 years until the SE line opened and rode it every day until a year ago. There's nothing of the type I am referring to along the RTD system except for the Broadway station - that is currently stalled due to the economy.
What development, exactly, are you referring to in Denver that wasn't there before the RTD line?

What Dallas and Denver have are massive congestion. Dallas due to population and Denver due to an inadequate highway system.

[MikeOKC]

I think the Dallas METROPLEX has done it right. The financial participation from cities that are part of DART means that the transit system truly is metro-wide, and the planning has been long-range and it's been a boon for many neighborhoods and smaller communities within the metroplex. The stations ARE a focal point in some areas that had been fairly neglected. I've posted here about DART on several occasions and offered links to some background material.

One thing about Portland. There are two sides to the coin with the success of Portland's massive and impressive system. It's been a magnet for many on the down and out to invade Portland. The social costs have been high. Not that that's relevant to the discussion concerning light rail in OKC, but it's a sociological phenomenon that's been interesting to watch.

[mugofbeer]

Thats not to say DART has been flawless - far from it going way back before the first track was laid and they built that $1 million board room and the boondoggles to Europe. They have done some things that have helped them stretch their dollars that OKC would be wise to look at - including public/private/partnerships

[Spartan]

As part of the agreement for the City of Dallas to allow the builder to develop what they wanted on the Mockingbird site - which was an extremely dense urban development, they agreed to build the station as part of the development. This was done - what? 15 years ago?

As far as Denver, I rode the SW line for 3 years until the SE line opened and rode it every day until a year ago. There's nothing of the type I am referring to along the RTD system except for the Broadway station - that is currently stalled due to the economy.
What development, exactly, are you referring to in Denver that wasn't there before the RTD line?

What Dallas and Denver have are massive congestion. Dallas due to population and Denver due to an inadequate highway system.

There's some good examples on here.
East Metro New East Metro Area Projects (Including Stapleton)
North Metro New North Metro Area Projects (Including Boulder)
South Metro New South Metro Area Projects Page
West Metro New West Metro Area Projects Page

The area around the Arapahoe Station is especially hot right now.

And I didn't know that about Mockingbird Station in Dallas, even though the DART station 'feels' a lot older than the development (the mixed-use district doesn't feel quite 15 years old). A lot of it is actually brand new..

[MikeOKC]

Thats not to say DART has been flawless - far from it going way back before the first track was laid and they built that $1 million board room and the boondoggles to Europe. They have done some things that have helped them stretch their dollars that OKC would be wise to look at - including public/private/partnerships

Oh, agreed. As with anything where dollars are involved and many interests are vying for a piece of the pie, there's always problems. You are right, it's been far from perfect.

[PLANSIT]

Nope, factually dead-on. Englewood station was a public development project and is the only thing close to what I am referring to. I am not talking about development around a station. I am talking about development that INCLUDES the station. There isn't anything at the Littleton station or the Oxford station that wasn't already there other than the renovation of the old Littleton train depot. The only place a large scale development has been planned is at the Broadway station and the renovation of the Gates plant but that has been shelved due to the economic downturn - even then, RTD built the station on its own.

In Dallas, examples of private development of DART stations would include the Cityplace stop, Mockingbird station, Baylor Ambrose station, U of Dallas Tanger Mall, etc. Not all were funded and built this way but several were saving DART millions.

Did you even glance at the status report? No, developers did not build the station, but whether the station is IN the development or a part of the development is meaningless as long as development is occurring as a result of the station being nearby. Is it as extensive as Mockingbird? No. But there is no doubt that the stations themselves were a catalyst for TOD. More so on the SE line.


And everything I'm reading about Mockingbird states that it was built around the station. Not one article, report, or fluff piece says anything about the developer, Hughes Development, actually constructing the LRT platform itself. Are you confusing the name of the entire development, Mockingbird Station, with the actual construction of the physical LRT platform? I'm seriously interested in knowing, because I have not heard of such an example for any system.

ULI Article

DMN Article (page 6)

[PLANSIT]

I forgot to mention that I do agree with the idea that Denver didn't plan around stations as well as they could have, especially on the SW line. However, they learned from those early mistakes and most of the Fastracks lines have detailed plans for TOD around many of the stations - whether it's public, private, or some kind of PPP.

Eastlake

Here is a lesson's learned PDF about the SE line.

[mugofbeer]

Did you even glance at the status report? No, developers did not build the station, but whether the station is IN the development or a part of the development is meaningless as long as development is occurring as a result of the station being nearby. Is it as extensive as Mockingbird? No. But there is no doubt that the stations themselves were a catalyst for TOD. More so on the SE line.

And everything I'm reading about Mockingbird states that it was built around the station. Not one article, report, or fluff piece says anything about the developer, Hughes Development, actually constructing the LRT platform itself. Are you confusing the name of the entire development, Mockingbird Station, with the actual construction of the physical LRT platform? I'm seriously interested in knowing, because I have not heard of such an example for any system.

ULI Article

DMN Article (page 6)

Its 15 or so years ago and I don't have time to look up articles of what happened. While living in Dallas, there was a stink about the developer wanting to build Mockingbird station with more square footage than some thought the roads in the area could handle - the old "It will cause too much traffic congestion so scale it back" thing. As part of the compromise, the developer included the construction of the station as part of the development.

I 100% agree that in some locations, stations can be a catalyst for development. Its just that in Denver, there has been no effort to form those public/private partnerships. That's why I think cities such as Denver that are still building their light rail systems are fiscally foolish NOT to encourage developers to build around each and every station and let them build the stations. It could save them hundreds of millions of dollars.

Anyway, back more on subject:

Here's something interesting from the Dallas Morning News:

Dallas considers downtown, Oak Cliff trolley routes | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Dallas-Fort Worth Transportation News | Dallas-Fort Worth News

[Architect2010]

What Dallas and Denver have are massive congestion. Dallas due to population and Denver due to an inadequate highway system.

So what you're saying is, we should wait until our infrastructure is crippled by this massive congestion before we even attempt to building a streetcar system? I'm confused by your stance here. Do you support a streetcar system or do you just merely oppose a large city-wide system at this point? Honest question.

[PLANSIT]

So what you're saying is, we should wait until our infrastructure is crippled by this massive congestion before we even attempt to building a streetcar system? I'm confused by your stance here. Do you support a streetcar system or do you just merely oppose a large city-wide system at this point? Honest question.

And that's the billion dollar question. The Federal New Starts program is set up in a manner in which the projects with the highest ridership potential coupled with corridors with the most congestion usually get first priority. So, in essence we would have to wait until all the highway infrastructure is at critical mass before we were deemed "ready" for funding.

Why though? Why should we be reactive to the situation? Why can't we be proactive and build a system, along with proper land use policy, that in 30 years will significantly change the way we develop and grow? Yeah, you're not going to get the crazy ridership numbers people want at first, but you've just laid a foundation for people to live a different lifestyle, maybe one where automobility isn't a must.

So, the short answer is that most places aren't proactive. They wait until there is a problem. Citizens want to see results in the here and now. Public Transit is a long term issue. We aren't in a good position for Federal New Starts money in our current state. Hopefully, the citizens of OKC and Central Oklahoma realize that transit is important to them and we can just fund much of it ourselves.

[mugofbeer]

So what you're saying is, we should wait until our infrastructure is crippled by this massive congestion before we even attempt to building a streetcar system? I'm confused by your stance here. Do you support a streetcar system or do you just merely oppose a large city-wide system at this point? Honest question.

No, but IMO, please realize that mass transit rail systems cost BILLIONS to build and years to build. If you want to make the point that gasoline will go back to $4, 5, 6, 7.00 per gallon and federal money was available, I would support construction of a large-scale system. But from my experience when I was in Dallas before DART started and in Denver while they have been hashing out their RTD rail, the fighting over rights of way, where stations will be, inevitable cost overruns, etc, takes a long long time. If MAPS3 money were available today to set the foundation - that is, get the long-term plan and the right of way issue out of the way, then go for federal money to construct, that might be a way to go. Small scale streetcars - not sure how much they would be used unless it is built as a rotator around downtown or includes the med school, American Indian Museum area. This is my least favorite part of MAPS3

[Spartan]

Here's some pics from the last time I was in Dallas.. development along the DART.