Seattle abuzz with new construction
Back from an interesting trip to the upper left hand corner of the U.S.: Seattle, Portland, Salem, and the Oregon Coast. A great time with family, and a good time reconnecting with these cities and places.
In Seattle, we rode the new South Lake Union Streetcar. Unfortunately, the streetcar was known as a trolley during all of the planning leading up to its construction, so now, of course, it’s called the S.L.U.T. Tee shirts are available.
The S.L.U.T. alignment
The trolley doesn’t run far, yet – about 20 blocks north, then 20 blocks back south – but it represents a powerful tool as Seattle (and all cities) begins to chuck the car. We were last in Seattle four years ago, and barely recognized the place this time for all the new, and very dense, construction. The South Lake Union neighborhood is taking shape, after decades of planning, on land that was mostly one story light industrial sites, or surface parking lots. Currently new residential space is retailing at about $350 a square foot. Getting pricey.
In Portland we arrived at Union Station, having taken the very enjoyable Amtrak train from Seattle. Three and a half hours of delightful scenery away from the crushing madness of I-5 traffic. Nice.
Union Station in Portland used to be in an industrial area. Now the Pearl, the new and booming neighborhood in NW Portland, comes right to the tracks as one enters the city. This has happened with blazing speed – we were in Portland a year ago and the station was still high and dry. No longer – it has been swallowed by the neighborhood.
The big story in Portland was the City Council’s consideration of a new vehicular bridge for I-5 over the Columbia. The cost: $4.2 billion. The state DOTs want 12 lanes. The City Council wants 6 lanes, tolls, and lanes for the light rail system, bikers, and pedestrians. Building new highway infrastructure is a fool’s errand in these times, but at least they seem to know this, and are trying to hold some kind of line. We’ll see what happens.
The existing I-5 bridge at Portland, over the Columbia River.
The proposed 12 lane I-5 bridge – unlikely to matrialize at this scale.
And at the Oregon Coast, near Lincoln City, we found ourselves wondering what will happen to these places – long, linear places along the coastal highway that is Route 101. Jammed with cars and RVs, the highway runs through Lincoln City at a very slow gait. And there’s no way to get there except to drive. Of course in the not-so-old days you could get to Newport, a bit to the south, by train. But no more. Interesting to think about what will happen here as cars no longer work.
Between the Pacific and Route 101, Lincoln City, Oregon.
Back home in DC, the City Council is holding hearings this week on the implementation of our new streetcar. Most opposition has vanished in the face of rising gas prices, but there are still some die-hard opponents moaning about how we should be spending more money on roads and buses and forget streetcars. They note that traffic and congestion have become unbearable here. So lets build more roads and make it even worse!
Hey folks – your car is obsolete. It’s over. Sorry, but the automobile age is done. Come back when somebody perfects a personal vehicle that the planet can live with.
And our Metro system is already running over capacity. Buses are the most expensive form of urban mass transit, and have the lowest capacity. Build streetcars. In DC they say we can have a good set of alignments by 2030. Hmm. Bet it happens sooner.
Re: your last graf “Buses are the most expensive form of urban mass transit, and have the lowest capacity. Build streetcars.”
Since the discussion is moving into the green-eyeshade realm, please see Exhibit 1-6 at this link:
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp100/part%201.pdf
Streetcars operating in mixed traffic like your Seattle photo are certainly appealing, but at far greater expense [both capital and operating] with little or no additional system capacity benefit over conventional bus.
Rail really shines at high passenger volumes on dedicated rights of way. It’s fine to prefer to ride rail (as I do) but wrong to claim that streetcars are cost-effective (they are not).
Thanks for sending along the Transportation Research Board’s excellent publication, the TCRP “Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual.” I hope my readers will take a moment to get to know this important reference standard. And I especially hope they will look at Exhibit 1-6. And perhaps Exhibit 1-7 as well…
These charts only look at capacity, and not at capital costs, life cycle costs, or operations and maintenance (O&M), but at first glance, streetcar looks pretty poopy in 1-6. But then take a look at bus in mixed traffic, just so we are comparing apples to apples. The little diamond labeled “Highest Observed in North America,” when tracked up to streetcar, falls short.
And then take a look at 1-7, and look at “Bus in Mixed Traffic” as against “Light Rail (on Street).” Hmm. Now bus is looking pretty lame.
But us transit advocates shouldn’t argue with one another. (My bad). Readers, this debate has been going on for a while. You can learn more by taking a look at a study that Portland did a couple of years ago, of streetcar vs. bus, apples to apples. Streetcar won. Or you can look at a study that PBQ&D did for the City of Austin. Streetcar won. Higher first cost, lower O&M, higher ridership.
(And while you’re at it, take a look at the estimated economic development value created by the presence of streetcar: between $1 billion and $1.5 billion in benefit. Bus in downtown, in mixed traffic, simply cannot create this kind of value for cities).
In the end, cities need more and more transit, more and more density, and fewer and fewer cars. Bus is transit, and that’s good. Subway, too. All tools. Streetcar to Dulles? Not a good option at all. Streetcar on H Street? Terrific!
There are plenty of studies that look at first cost, capacity, and O&M costs. Readers, go forth and research. But it really starts to get interesting when you look at this data for European cities: streetcars in those dense settings perform in extraordinary ways.
Thanks, jag.
Not to pile on here, but a PBQ&D study recommended rail over bus? As Captain Renault would say, “I am shocked…shocked!”
Less shocking is the fact that a city of Austin’s size has been unable to get downtown light rail approved and funded (a 2000 referendum was defeated, and the measure won’t make the ballot again until 2010 at the earliest; please see http://www.kxan.com/Global/story.asp?S=8643820).
No, Austin is very sensibly building commuter rail in dedicated ROW, and – here’s the best part – pursuing BRT-lite downtown; please see http://allsystemsgo.capmetro.org/capital-metrorapid.shtml
Seattle and Portland have very appealing streetcar systems, but this simply is not an appropriate template to be applied nationwide, especially in smaller cities.
BRT-lite?? Does that mean that is doesn’t have much taste, and gives you lots of gas?
BTW, Portland and Seattle are both smaller than Austin. But then transit in Texas is an oxymoron anyway.