Lobbying for streetcars has become a “rare growth spot in an otherwise difficult business environment,” reports Politico. At least thirteen different lobbying firms are trying to help cities get federal money for building clunky, obsolete rail systems.
The article repeats the usual drivel about how streetcars revitalize neighborhoods and lead to billions of dollars of economic development. Since there’s absolutely no evidence of that outside of Portland, and the only redevelopment along Portland streetcar lines was supported by hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies, all the Antiplanner can say is that a lot of cities are going to be surprised when nothing happens where they build streetcars unless they sneak in their own subsidies to developers.
Imagine how proud the streetcar lobbyists will be as city after city clogs up its streets with slow-moving vehicles that carry hardly any riders because they are slower than walking for most people and slower than bicycling for just about everyone. Yes, they’ll be able to tell their grandchildren, they are the ones responsible for saddling the cities with high taxes in order to pay to operate streetcars that cost twice as much to run as buses and to spend even more maintaining rail lines that were obsolete almost a hundred years before they were built.
This individualized approach towards each patient enables them to produce maximum positive results from the successive continue reading now now viagra properien implementation. BPH stands for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia is a condition when male reproductive health stop working and the man feels it difficult to produce erection cialis purchase online to make intercourse enjoyable activity. These supplements bring a great stability to this element in the body to ensure great pharma-bi.com cialis generika health. Such cialis in cases are contributed by psychological aspects.
For those who read all the way to the end, the Politico story does conclude with some cautionary words by Reason Foundation’s Adrian Moore. I don’t know how deeply the reporter interviewed Moore, but the story doesn’t indicate that Moore said anything about streetcars in particular, just the idea of the federal government funding mass transit in general.
The real lesson is that, when you start using federal funds to support things that seem reasonable, such as providing transit for low-income people who can’t afford cars, before too long those funds will be diverted to corporations that make money from building expensive but pointless infrastructure, public employees to manage to get some of the cushiest pension and health care benefits in the world, and a few snobby yuppies who insist on riding old fashioned rail cars instead of buses.
Thanks to good friend and loyal opponent M. Setty for alerting the Antiplanner to this story.
That reminds me, I don’t know if you’ve followed the proposed trolley line in Milwaukee. It looks like it’s going to end up in the courts. The states legislature passed a law requiring projects to pay for utility line relocation costs instead of the utilities’ ratepayers. Milwaukee appears to be pushing ahead with their line despite not having money budgeted for the $40m – $50m in utility line relocation costs it would need to cover under this legislation.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/new-milwaukee-streetcar-route-wont-jeopardize-success-city-says-b99187173z1-241086451.html
Streetcars v Monorails. A great sci-fi movie!
(See-Another City Gets Conned into Building a Stupid Rail Line February 14, 2014)
Streetcars come up here very often. There is much criticism against streetcars. Is anyone here going to defend them?
Frank spaketh:
Streetcars come up here very often. There is much criticism against streetcars. Is anyone here going to defend them?
OK. Perhaps they can be defended on a case by case basis (though this would be too much nuance for many here compared to blanket opposition but I digress…)
Streetcar critics ought to pause before throwing their poo when considering cases like the South Lake Union Streetcar, which was funded 50% by Amazon as a shuttle between their new headquarters and the main transit hub in downtown Seattle. Similarly, consider the $100 million+ that private developers want to put towards a 3-mile streetcar line along Woodward Avenue in Detroit. Unlike some places, at least some capitalists are willing to put up some money so they obviously see some benefit.
On the other hand, if a streetcar line is just a joy ride, I don’t see much utility or justification. The line in Little Rock comes to mind, which is just another ego sop to Bubba, serving his “double wide on stilts” Library. Another example was a proposal examined for Missoula, MT (County population ~100,000) that wasn’t long enough to serve any transportation function, and not surprisingly, had projected ridership of <1,000 per day.
At a minimum, in the mind of a general rail advocates such as myself, it would be nice if the proposed line actually provides a transportation function in addition to whatever real estate development it is serving. The Little Rock line is highly questionable from this standpoint, while the proposed streetcar line in Baton Rouge may not be, since it would link two major traffic generators, LSU and downtown Little Rock, over a 2.5-3.0 mile route.
Is anyone here going to defend them?
I don’t really know the economic breakdown on Streetcars as well as the Antiplanner. I do feel that streetcars have a better public perception than buses. When I travel to a city for the first time I generally try to figure out how to get around using rail or streetcar infrastructure first, because in my experience that service is more frequent and reliable than buses. Something about American cities with rail and/or streetcar infrastructure just says, “We care about public transit enough to build all this expensive stuff,” so it probably won’t suck.
Bus service in US cities, all to often, sucks, plain and simple. One notable exception is Los Angeles, which has a surprisingly convenient and well-maintained bus system., in my experience.
“the South Lake Union Streetcar, which was funded 50% by Amazon as a shuttle between their new headquarters and the main transit hub in downtown Seattle.”
Source please.
I don’t denounce “streetcars” on the face of it. I denounce streetcars when it is obvious that the intent is real-estate development and not mobility. I denounce streetcars when transit services for low income cohorts, people with disabilities, teens and people without cars are cannibalized in order to fund the capital and/or operations cost for the streetcar. I denounce street cars when they have an obvious negative impact on congestion and travel times. Other than that, streetcars are awesome.
Also, I thought it was the South Lake Union Trolly. You used to be able to get t-shirts that said “I rode the SLUT.”
Ohai said:
“When I travel to a city for the first time I generally try to figure out how to get around using rail or streetcar infrastructure first…”
I do the same thing. However, this is often the rub. Little Rock and the “free zone” in Portland are good examples. These streetcar systems are obviously there for visitors. They connect hotels, convention centers and downtown with ease so that people at their professional conferences can get around no problem. It doesn’t do much for transit dependent cohorts or locals, who mostly rely on the “sucky” (as you put it) bus service.
I’m often astounded at the lengths that city leadership will go to in order to attract visitors (and their money) whilst simultaneously ignoring the constituents that they serve. I know “economic development” is a dirty word around here, but you would think cities would first want to provide amenities to residents before platinum plated projects benefiting visitors.
bennett, you can still get those shirts. They used to sell them on the street corner of Roy and 9th in South Lake Union, but for the last three years, ongoing construction (the “Mercer Mess“) has royally fouled traffic and sidewalks. I’m not sure how businesses in that area have managed to stay open. I avoid Mercer at all costs. Which means I rarely go east.
Going to have to be snarky toward the AP’s “good friend” after not getting a source for erroneous claim. Would be less snarky if the “spaketh” snark stopped.
Here is the original erroneous claim:
“the South Lake Union Streetcar, which was funded 50% by Amazon as a shuttle between their new headquarters and the main transit hub in downtown Seattle.”
I think msetty misread the news article linked from Wiki. This is what that articles actually states: “But private firms paid almost half the $53 million capital cost.” (The sentence before this is particularly interesting: “To some citizens, the streetcar symbolized a Seattle government kowtowing to Paul Allen’s Vulcan, largest landowner in the corridor.”)
According to a NYC.gov feasibility study, “The total capital cost of constructing the South Lake Union streetcar line was approximately $50.5 million. This amount included $25 million from a Local Improvement District (LID) and $25.5 million provided by various local, state, and federal sources.”
RCW 84.33.035 defines a “Local Improvement District” as “any local improvement district, utility local improvement district, local utility district, road improvement district, or any similar unit created by a local government for the purpose of levying special benefit assessments against property specially benefited by improvements relating to the districts.”
So a LID is created by government. Doesn’t seem like Amazon—or any of the other businesses—were voluntarily stepping up to the plate to pay for the SLUT’s capital costs.
Since King County Metro contributes 75% of operating costs and SDOT picks up the rest, there is no way Amazon is paying for half of operating costs.
Another example of msetty playing fast and loose with the facts. Makes you wonder how many other factual vagaries liter the posts of this “good friend” of the Antiplanner.
Hey, Frank, get YOUR facts straight. Wrong again. The point is that Amazon, Paul Allen and other property owners DID pay about half the construction costs of the SLUT.
Here is a portion of the Washington law pertaining to the process and how many city council votes are required to override objections from property owners. I’m not sure exactly how they went about this, not that it really matters (it doesn’t).
Amazon et al also are contributing funding to beef up afternoon SLUT service, if you hadn’t already noticed the prominent mention of this on its website. And for another factual error made by you, I never said they were paying for half of the operating costs.
From this link http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=35.43.
35.43.060 <> 35.43.075
RCW 35.43.070
Ordinance — Action on petition or resolution.
A local improvement may be ordered only by an ordinance of the city or town council, pursuant to either a resolution or petition therefor. The ordinance must receive the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the members of the council.
Charters of cities of the first class may prescribe further limitations. In cities and towns other than cities of the first class, the ordinance must receive the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the members of the council if, prior to its passage, written objections to its enactment are filed with the city clerk by or on behalf of the owners of a majority of the lineal frontage of the improvement and of the area within the limits of the proposed improvement district.
[1965 c 7 § 35.43.070. Prior: (i) 1911 c 98 § 8; RRS § 9359. (ii) 1911 c 98 § 66; RRS § 9419.]
This implies that if there IS an objection from a majority of property owners, any City Council imposing such assessments anyway are going out on a big political limb.
“The point is that Amazon, Paul Allen and other property owners DID pay about half the construction costs of the SLUT.”
Get your facts straight, Michael. Scroll up. THIS is what you wrote: “Streetcar critics ought to pause before throwing their poo when considering cases like the South Lake Union Streetcar, which was funded 50% by Amazon as a shuttle between their new headquarters and the main transit hub in downtown Seattle.”
Amazon did NOT pay 50%. You were WRONG. Admit it. Move on.
OK. amend that to say “…Amazon and other area property owners…”. Doesn’t undermine my point at all.
What’s YOUR point and why can’t you let it go?
From http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#Beside%the%Point.
Quibbling
We quibble when we complain about a minor point and falsely believe that this complaint somehow undermines the main point. To avoid this error, the logical reasoner will not make a mountain out of a mole hill nor take people too literally. Logic Chopping is a kind of quibbling.
Example:
I’ve found typographical errors in your poem, so the poem is neither inspired nor perceptive.
Thank you for the retraction. A factual error is not equivalent to a typo nor is it quibbling.
If you want to move on to the fact that government created a LID that compelled private companies contribute the 50%, we can.
And again, I will be far less snarky if you give up this “spaketh” crap. I’m not a fundamentalist or a zealot or God nor do I speak King James English, and I am willing to admit my mistakes, so I don’t know why this appeal to ridicule is being used. You are far too educated and smart to stoop to this level. It’s perplexing.
Frank, as you spaketh, if you think a factual correction that actually reinforces my point in any way is a “retraction” you’re a pedantic, humorless anal-retentive. If the likes of Jeff Bezos and Paul Allen didn’t want to pay for the streetcar assessment, there is simply no way it would have happened.
You might also think you “scored” by finding a minor error but all that proves is that you are clueless about what wins a debate. Remember I conceded that not every streetcar project makes sense, but that I believe that some do. And the willingness of at least some businesses to pay for <some streetcar lines greatly undermines libertarian “logic” (sic) on the topic. It would be nice if your side wasn’t so knee-jerk had some respect for the judgement of people like Bezos, Allen et al and those folks in Detroit, Kansas City, and other areas where streetcar assessments have been approved, among other things.
And as I’ve pointed out before, politicians generally respond to what their constituencies want, after all, regardless of how apparent knee-jerk libertarians like you seem to believe the system should work. If you haven’t yet gained an understanding of how politics actually works, I suggest again that you buy The Dictators Handbook and read it.
Also, Frank, if you prove to be so pedantic to actually think that the authors of The Dictators Handbook favor dictatorship (as opposed to explaining how dictators and less dictatorial democratic politics work), then you’re hopeless. For evidence on this topic I suggest the blog http://lounge.dictatorshandbook.net/.
Yes, Michael. Name calling is what actually wins debates; at least that’s the conclusion that can be drawn from reading your tirades. Name calling and scare quotes are what Michael Setty, the Antiplanner’s good friend, thinks wins debates.
The fact remains that you’ve committed a bare assertion fallacy by offering no evidence that Seattle businesses were “willing to put up some money”—to be a part of the government-created TID that forced businesses to pay—for the South Lake Union Trolley. You’ve cited an RCW and made implications but have provided no evidence. Then you go off on a red herring about politics and make another personal attack about my understanding of politics, which is your attempt to hand flap away from the fact that you haven’t provided evidence for your assertion.
And there’s your ridiculous claim that Amazon paid for half of the street car, which has been shown to be false, and about which you are having a sad.
The point is that streetcars can be worthwhile if the reason they are built is to serve a transit-related function and they attract enough ridership to justify the use of the streetcar. Probably the original line of the Portland Streetcar and the South Lake Union Trolley fill a void in the bus network that would qualify as transit related. Streetcars that are built solely for development reasons and compete / conflict with the existing transit network are not good, especially when the local transit system has to pay for their operation.
“Probably the original line of the Portland Streetcar and the South Lake Union Trolley fill a void in the bus network that would qualify as transit related.”
Evidence?
Currently, Westlake Ave is served by the 40 and 62 and prior to the streetcar, the 5 and 28. Seeing as how this line is only 1.3 miles long, it’s hard to see how there was a “void in the bus network”.
The original Portland streetcar line is at least longer at 3.9 miles and goes from NW to Portland State, although how many students can afford to live in NW is debatable. As noted here and elsewhere, redevelopment was a major goal. If you have any evidence that this line filled a void in the bus network, I’d like to see it.
I really need to thank the Antiplanner’s good friend for allowing me a chance to learn more about how the Seattle streetcar was financed and its real effects, particularly on small business.
First, Amazon wasn’t located in the South Lake Union streetcar Local Improvement District until it moved there in 2010/11 from Beacon Hill, which is far outside of the LID, years after the LID was created. I can’t find information on whether or not the LID was a one-time assessment or ongoing, but the LID taxes do not show up on King County Parcel Viewer for Amazon’s current address. (I did call the city, only to be on hold for 20 minutes to get a phone number to a woman who is out of the office for another week—customer service at its finest.) Interestingly enough, Vulcan, founded by billionaire Paul Allen, developed Amazon’s occupied real estate. Very cozy.
Others have noted this relationship stating that the LID and connection to moneyed interests was “dangerously close to crossing a line of appropriateness.”
There were 750 business owners in the LID, and not everyone was happy about it:
The same article shows that some of the largest assessments for the LID were paid by taxpayers:
Take 4% off that 50% figure. Yes, it’s pedantic, I know.
Many land owners were shocked by their LID tax bill:
Another article paraphrases “Mike Foley, whose family owns about a block and a half along Mercer Street, [who] said even a one-time property tax could drive out some of the area’s small businesses.”
Would be interesting to know how many of the 750 businesses who were involuntarily taxed folded due to massive tax bills that paid for a streetcar that goes to and from nowhere and is lightly ridden and mostly benefits the third wealthiest person in Seattle and his companies.
Would also be interesting to know if those taxes, like the massive one levied against the Pacific Place mall, translated into higher retail rents, higher retail prices, and decreased jobs.
It’s a highly complex issue that can’t be distilled down to “Amazon paid for half of it.” Or that capitalists willingly paid for it.
In short, streetcar proponents ought to pause before throwing their poo.
Frank you were very lucky to live off the public purse.
You know that streetcars are not complicated or expensive.
You know nothing, Andrew Dawson. You know that I know where you live and work.