I think Civvik was referring to adding bike lanes not the entire streetcar project.

 

The utilities affected should be limited to those located running directly under where the rails are to be laid, and the relocation of manholes and the subsequent lines running to them. If utilities run under a small amount(less than 10 feet)of the track, or are perpendicular to the track, it will not be a problem. Sewers have to be 7 feet deep under the street, water has to be 42", gas has to be 18", and communications 2-3 feet, so the utility depth should not be an issue. As a discalimer this is downtown and things have the tendency to not follow the rules so some problems could arise with communications, but a majority of utilities should be out of the way of this project.

 

  How about street drainage?

 

  If the streetcar rails change the grade or cross-slope of the street, the drainage has to be accounted for. In addition, streetcar rails act like gutters that channel water to low points. Historic Cincinnati streetcar rails had extra gutters built into the rails at low points. I don't know if this practice is still done for modern systems. Any "bumpouts" or modification to the curbs will likely affect the street drainage.

 

    Don't forget about overhead utilities. If there are conflicts with the streetcar wires, something has to be moved. It is good practice to put all electric and communcation wires underground, except for the streetcar catenary. Putting these wires underground is a big expense and involves more digging.

 

    Utilities tend to take advantage of street projects when they get the chance. For example, maybe there is a water main that is 90 years old. Cincinnati Water Works, realizing that it will be more expensive to replace the water main after the streetcar is built, may take the initiative to replace the water main now. Some major sewer and water infrastructure was built ahead of the Fort Washington Way project in this manner.

 

    If the streetcar is supposed to generate new development, the utilities may realize that the present utilities will not be able to support new development and move to increase capacity.

 

    Even for painting jobs, if the on-street parking is affected, it may involve more than just painting. It may involve replacement of any lost parking spaces somewhere else. Post office routes, garbage collection routes, bus stops, streetcleaning routes, and all kinds of other things might be affected. This is why street work takes so long. It is not uncommon for City of Cincinnati street projects to take 10 years. It can be done, but it's not "easy."

 

    The rendering of the bicycle lane a few posts back scares me, especially if it was intended for Vine Street Hill. The "bumpout" for the streetcar stop will lead to ponding of water on the uphill side of the "bumpout" unless the drainage is accomodated. It is possible to add a drainage grate at the low point, but there is a bicycle lane proposed there. It is not good practise to make bicycle ride over grates. Lack of a grate may result in street drainage flowing over the sidewalk right into the waiting area.

 

    Finally, we have existing street car rails in the street that ironically are probably going to be in the way. (Did they have those in Portland?) Those were very substantially built and will not be removed easily.

 

    Street design is not something to be taken lightly, and is not something that can be done quickly.

 

 

^All valid points. My expertise is only in underground affairs. However, as for overhead wires shouldn't the catenary be much lower than any overhead wires in uptown and therefore cause few problems?

 

I cannot foresee the moving of water mains for a project that is so superficial. Some valves may need to be moved but that is the extent that I can anticipate. In reality they could replace all of the mains downtown because they are all over 100 years old.

 

Also, the old underground rails should not be a problem, the saws that cut the street can go right through them I have seen it.

 

 

  "However, as for overhead wires shouldn't the catenary be much lower than any overhead wires in uptown and therefore cause few problems?"

 

    There has been a lot of discussion about the visual effects of overhead wires. On the streetcar lines that I have seen, the catenary really wasn't very bad. However, I couldn't find a streetcar line on a street that also had overhead utility wires. It may be prudent to put all other overhead utilities underground just for political reasons; people will look at the overhead utilities that were already there and say, "Those overhead wires really make this street ugly."

 

    I don't know if it's safe to have overhead electric utility wires and catenary wires on the same street. What if they somehow came in contact with each other? Also, wires get in the way of firefighters. It's hard enough to work around the wires with ladder trucks; adding more wires will just make things more dangerous. I guess this applies more to the Over-the-Rhine section than to uptown.

 

    Existing rails can be removed, but at a cost. Streetcar rails are more substantial in some places than in others. Vine Street was rebuilt fairly late in the streetcar history, so those rails might be set on steel ties in concrete. The last thing to do is forget about them, and surprise a contractor with unexpected cost. This is how costs get out of hand, and projects go over budget.

 

    I doubt that anything from the Vine Street Cable Railway survives, but if they happen to find a cable car conduit, those things can be substantial.

 

    In any case, this is a complicated project.

 

This streetcar would have been a day's work for the guys who built the SR-71, B-2, and F-22. People in Europe and Asia, where subway lines are built routinely that require exponentially more engineering work, would laugh out loud at anyone claiming that this tiny Cincinnati streetcar project is "complicated". 

 

 

>mostly because I don't think it's particularly hard to watch out for stuff as a cyclist,

 

Exactly.  The problem is as often or more the bikers than the cars.  People riding around on a bike have typically spent a lot less time on a bike than driving around, and many are skittish and do dumb stuff. I've never been hit and I've been biking on "busy roads" since I was 9 or 10.  I rode my dirt bike on I-275 between Blue Rock Rd. and Colerain Ave. when I was a kid on a dare.  We rode on Cross County Hwy somewhat regularly. 

 

The larger issue is that there is a certain type of person who thinks any and all bicycle infrastructure that can be conceived should be built.  The only thing that I think would make a big difference is totally separate bike paths like the Little Miami Trail.  Bike lanes on busy streets don't attract much new ridership and give riders a false sense of security.  You could put bike lanes on every hill in this city and only get a handful more people out there riding.  The fact is people think these hills are mountains when they're nothing. On real mountains up around 14,000 feet, you hallucinate, can get disoriented, and that's the last anyone ever sees of you. 

 

Since these hills are so formidable, maybe we should establish a ranger station where people can register before attempting a climb since, you know, Vine St. could turn into a 21st Century Donner Party. 

 

 

 

Federal Transit Adminsitrator Peter Rogoff will be addressng the Opening General Session of APTA's Rail Conference in Vancouver BC tommorrow around Noon EST, and there's a possiblility that he may announce the winners of Urban Circulator Grants for streetcars then. Seems unlikely they would do this out of the country, but it's a perfect audience to hear the news.

 

In any case, seems like speculation of who the winners are could start to leak out during the four days of the conference. These people talk a lot.

You guys who are calling this complicated really should qualify your statement with "relatively." It's just about the least complicated fixed-route transit project there is.

 

"Re-striping projects can get very complicated!" You could be entirely correct. Cutting my toenails could also get very complicated. Many kinds of public projects can get complicated. To make such a declaration is kind of wasting your breath, as I do not estimate road re-striping to be more or less prone to complication relative to other projects. It just requires good planning and management like anything else.

 

It would be wonderful if they buried all the utilities along the route, but I doubt they will. See: Tampa, Portland, etc.

 

 

  "However, as for overhead wires shouldn't the catenary be much lower than any overhead wires in uptown and therefore cause few problems?"

 

There has been a lot of discussion about the visual effects of overhead wires. On the streetcar lines that I have seen, the catenary really wasn't very bad. However, I couldn't find a streetcar line on a street that also had overhead utility wires. It may be prudent to put all other overhead utilities underground just for political reasons; people will look at the overhead utilities that were already there and say, "Those overhead wires really make this street ugly."

 

I don't know if it's safe to have overhead electric utility wires and catenary wires on the same street. What if they somehow came in contact with each other? Also, wires get in the way of firefighters. It's hard enough to work around the wires with ladder trucks; adding more wires will just make things more dangerous. I guess this applies more to the Over-the-Rhine section than to uptown.

 

Existing rails can be removed, but at a cost. Streetcar rails are more substantial in some places than in others. Vine Street was rebuilt fairly late in the streetcar history, so those rails might be set on steel ties in concrete. The last thing to do is forget about them, and surprise a contractor with unexpected cost. This is how costs get out of hand, and projects go over budget.

 

  I doubt that anything from the Vine Street Cable Railway survives, but if they happen to find a cable car conduit, those things can be substantial.

 

  In any case, this is a complicated project.

 

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=tampa,+fl&sll=45.529855,-122.694927&sspn=0.001165,0.002159&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Tampa,+Hillsborough,+Florida&ll=27.961687,-82.443638&spn=0,0.003181&t=k&z=19&layer=c&cbll=27.961006,-82.442777&panoid=UnmThSoi0DHWXUrzZt1TQA&cbp=12,283.93,,0,-12.04

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=portland,+or&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.716829,70.751953&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Portland,+Multnomah,+Oregon&ll=45.529831,-122.694712&spn=0.000579,0.001591&t=k&z=20&layer=c&cbll=45.529858,-122.694789&panoid=Ty2FIz1u9kbhYtapHBNZgQ&cbp=12,107.33,,0,-10.78

 

    I agree with you that this project would not be as difficult in other cities, or in other countries. The City of Cincinnati tends to make things more complicated than they need to be. On top of that, Cincinnati has a lot of existing infrastructure to work around, and has no recent experience with rail. There is no local contractor that has built a streetcar project in the Cincinnati area in the past 50 years.

 

    I also agree with you that it's really not that bad, but I wouldn't call it "easy." 

 

    The new Ludlow Viaduct built in the 1990's almost got stalled because of a last minute proposal to add bike lanes.

 

 

    I don't know what was there before in Tampa and Portland, but in Tampa the electric utilities seem to be pretty high, and the traffic signals are on masts. On Vine Street the wires are not as high, and the traffic signals are on wires.

 

    http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=schwartz's+point&sll=39.116127,-84.515398&sspn=0.003746,0.006877&ie=UTF8&radius=0.22&split=1&filter=0&rq=1&ev=p&hq=schwartz's+point&hnear=&ll=39.116335,-84.51676&spn=0,0.006877&z=17&layer=c&cbll=39.116427,-84.51679&panoid=EqQOtoAIg_44SHXkB6db8w&cbp=12,356.91,,0,5

Back in the day, the height above the ground to the trolley wire in Cincinnati was specified as 17' which I believe was a bit higher than usual.  Today that is the spec'd clearance to the bottom of traffic signals.  That said, on all old photos I've seen of Cincinnati where there were streetcars, the traffic signals were hung on short posts off the side of utility poles, so they weren't under the wires, they were off to the side.  This doesn't work today, but it seems the wires could easily weave through and below traffic signals. 

 

Also traditionally, there were the typical overhead power lines on wood poles like we still have, while the streetcar power was all supported on the iron poles we still have on many streets.  On one side of the street the pole was usually a bit taller with a crossarm to carry other wires for the streetcar power system.  This was all lower than the general electric infrastructure on wood utility poles.  The problem today is that there's cable TV, fiber optics, traffic signal interconnects and such in that lower zone on the utility poles.  None of that existed back in the day, and the telephone lines are pretty much all underground in the city. 

 

Still, assume that all new wiring for the streetcar is conveyed underground, and all existing overhead utilities remained.  Only the wire directly over the track is energized.  The perpendicular span wires are insulated, and the occasional feed wire would also be insulated as well.  The supposed safety issue of wires coming into contact is no more a problem than with the existing overhead utilities coming into contact with other wires on the same pole or trees or whatever. 

 

Speaking of all this, what's the modern standard power system for streetcars?  Back in the day it was 600 volts DC, but there seems to be more and more push to do it all with single-phase AC current, or at least use AC for the distribution even if it's transformed to DC in the cars to run standard traction motors. 

Wendell Young will be appointed to City Council.  He's a strong streetcar supporter.

 

“The streetcar will be a fantastic opportunity to improve our transportation options downtown,” explained Young. “It will fuel job creation and economic development throughout our city, and will help fund city services for our neighborhoods.”

 

http://www.urbancincy.com/2010/06/wendell-young-tapped-to-replace-laketa-cole-on-city-council/

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2010/05/31/daily31.html

Anyone hear this Bortz interview with Cunningham?

http://www.700wlw.com/mediaplayer/?station=WLW-AM&action=ondemand&item=297601370&feed_name=bill_cunningham.xml

 

Bortz takes some digs at Luken, Smitherman, and the Enquirer in response to these articles below

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100605/NEWS0108/6060330/Bortz-faces-new-conflict-issue

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100605/EDIT01/6060329/A-Matter-of-Conflicts-Full-Disclosure-Is-The-Key

 

Apparently Tim Mara was hired by Tom Luken (not stated by the Enquirer in the articles) to attack Bortz/his family and to ultimately stop the streetcar project. 

Speaking of all this, what's the modern standard power system for streetcars?  Back in the day it was 600 volts DC, but there seems to be more and more push to do it all with single-phase AC current, or at least use AC for the distribution even if it's transformed to DC in the cars to run standard traction motors. 

 

The Portland Streetcar is powered by 750V DC current, which is fairly typical for most transit systems. (600V DC is most common on rapid transit systems that use a third rail, while 750V DC seems most common on modern streetcar and light rail systems with overhead catenary, although there are exceptions.) Catenary lines with AC current at much higher voltages are more typically found on intercity and high-speed rail lines. The traction motors themselves will almost certainly be AC, which has become a standard feature on most new transit rolling stock over the past 10-20 years. Compared to the old DC traction motors, AC motors have much smoother acceleration, significant energy savings, and don't require a huge heat-generating resistor grid on the vehicle.

^^ Thanks for the link NBow! Been meaning to listen to this. Love that I had to listen to Car Dealership Ad before hearing the podcast.  ;-)

That interview was epic. Love it.

Bortz's written rebuttal to the Enquirer.  I am so glad he is calling them out. 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100608/EDIT02/6080373/Bortz-Media-cavalier-with-the-facts

 

CHRIS BORTZ: MEDIA CAVALIER WITH FACTS

 

The Enquirer editorial Sunday pointed out some important issues related to questions of ethical standards for elected officials, the role of the Ohio Ethics Commission and the policy implications of some of the Commission's decisions. The editorial was a fair assessment of the ethical landscape and the call for full disclosure is entirely appropriate.

 

 

Another story (on the Local Life cover) has the dramatic headline, "Bortz faces new conflict; Building project poses ethics questions." But that isn't an accurate headline, and the story is incomplete. I am not facing a new conflict. I have always abstained from voting on any matters related to Towne Properties and I am not involved in any of its business with the city.

 

Tim Mara, an attorney who was hired by anti-streetcar activist Tom Luken, has posed these questions to The Enquirer reporter. The motives of Mr. Mara and Mr. Luken are relevant......

 

 

My favorite paragraph from it:

 

"There is no evidence of wrongdoing, but the anti-streetcar activists continue to attack me and my family, and The Enquirer continues to give them access to a powerful pulpit. It's not just The Enquirer, but other media outlets as well. WCPO-TV (Channel 9) allowed Tom Luken to go on the air and falsely state that the Ohio Ethics Commission ordered me to resign. They have also reported that Towne Properties is one of the companies building the streetcar. Towne builds apartments and condos, not railroads, and the fact that I even need to point that out makes me wonder if accuracy is still an important part of journalism."

Bortz's written rebuttal to the Enquirer. I am so glad he is calling them out.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100608/EDIT02/6080373/Bortz-Media-cavalier-with-the-facts

 

CHRIS BORTZ: MEDIA CAVALIER WITH FACTS

 

 

So far I'm liking the comments on that one. 

 

"I may disagree with Councilman Bortz's sentiments about the need for a streetcar system, but I agree with him 100% for calling out the Enquirer for having given entirely too much support for the petty political whining of his opponents."

If anyone is interested, the studio I was in this quarter that worked on creating a comprehensive transit system for Cincinnati that is focused on neighborhoods will be displaying our work during DAAPworks in the Transportation Design studios (6300) of the DAAP building. DAAPworks starts at 5:30pm tomorrow (Wednesday 6/9).

 

Please come out and see our work!

Bortz's written rebuttal to the Enquirer. I am so glad he is calling them out.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100608/EDIT02/6080373/Bortz-Media-cavalier-with-the-facts

 

CHRIS BORTZ: MEDIA CAVALIER WITH FACTS

 

 

So far I'm liking the comments on that one.

 

"I may disagree with Councilman Bortz's sentiments about the need for a streetcar system, but I agree with him 100% for calling out the Enquirer for having given entirely too much support for the petty political whining of his opponents."

 

Enjoy it now.  By 6pm it will be a madhouse.  There's 1 guy with dozens of screen names who takes over every streetcar comment section

Going back to 1966, when he first picked a fight with the Cincinnati Transit Company a month or two after taking his seat on council, Luken has told huge lies and the media has gobbled them up every single time.  I would go so far as saying Luken had a major role in this city not being awarded federal capital funds for a MARTA-type rapid transit system in the early 1970's because he delayed the inevitable public takeover of Cincinnati Transit.  If we had proceeded with a public takeover circa 1969 or 1970, we could have had a major revenue stream for a local match during that very brief time period when the feds funded big projects 80/20. 

 

So while other areas were racing transit proposals to Washington, we had Luken repeatedly calling for the abolishment of OKI.  This could not happen without an act of congress, but the local media nevertheless reported it as some kind of possibility that Luken was going to lead. 

 

 

Federal Transit Adminsitrator Peter Rogoff will be addressng the Opening General Session of APTA's Rail Conference in Vancouver BC tommorrow around Noon EST, and there's a possiblility that he may announce the winners of Urban Circulator Grants for streetcars then. Seems unlikely they would do this out of the country, but it's a perfect audience to hear the news.

 

In any case, seems like speculation of who the winners are could start to leak out during the four days of the conference. These people talk a lot.

Anymore news or leaks with regards to this?

^ Not yet.

It's been quiet around here on the streetcar front lately...

 

That usually means some big news is coming.  Either that or a slew of Enquirer "articles".

^

The former. The Enquirer has fired off its last round.

I dunno man. When you're shooting blanks you never run out of ammo.

I dunno man. When you're shooting blanks you never run out of ammo.

 

They've run out of blanks.  Now they are resorting to Tom Luken supplying NERF ammunition

 

Listening and reading Tom Luken's opposition statements to the streetcar is like the No Country for Old Men Ending.  Bizarre, incoherent, and leaves you with the phrase "What the h*ll just happened?"

Perfect analogy in my book. ;-)

 

 

Last nights 6PM newscast on WCPO had anchor Julie O'Neill reading a retraction regarding their Streetcar where they said Towne Properties was the builder.

^Then don't post it in this forum, because they take a lot of their information, pictures, etc from threads here.  :-D  Actually, that post belongs in the Cincinnati Light Rail thread, because the MAX is Portland's light rail, not their streetcar.

I guess you are right. The enquirer even picked up the ESPNzone closings from this forum.

What exactly is the character of this transit-related "crime"?  Aside from jewelry and cash, it's pretty tough to carry big stuff onto a train without attracting attention. 

 

What's funny is back in the 1910's when cars became more common, so did kidnappings of children and grizzly hitchhiking incidents.  During Prohibition gangsters executed drive-by shootings with machine guns.  All of that was made possible by cars but never blamed on them. 

 

If the Enquirer picked up anything from this part of the forum, they would be less clueless about the streetcar project.

With a population of something like 550,000 people, Portland had 19 murders last years. Cincinnati has a population of 350,000, and we had over 80.

^ Whoa, buddy, there were 60 last year. After 75 in 2008.

 

Let's not make a bad thing worse.

Does anyone know how much the City spends per year on asphalt contracts?  (Actually, I think the City has their own road crew for this?)  I just read a budget of a City that is a suburb of Cincinnati, with a population around 40k, and they spend over 1 million a year just on contract resurfacing.

  "With a population of something like 550,000 people, Portland had 19 murders last years. Cincinnati has a population of 350,000, and we had over 80."

 

    I told you Cincinnati was different from Portland.

 

   

 

  I got trapped in traffic due to a crash on Vine Street at McMillan for about 5 minutes today. I was thinking, "If the streetcar were here today, the entire line would be shut down until this wreck is cleared."

 

  A short tunnel under McMillan and Calhoun would do wonders for travelling time. I'm not sure how a stop at McMillian to interchange with the cross-town bus would work out.

Ultimately tunnels will be needed for any fixed transit solution for Cincinnati. This whole "which hill do we trudge up" conversation is small potatoes in the long run.

With a population of something like 550,000 people, Portland had 19 murders last years. Cincinnati has a population of 350,000, and we had over 80.

 

And New Orleans (with a very successful streetcar system) had a population of 336,000 people and 174 murders.

>Ultimately tunnels

 

OKI's first Rapid Transit plan from 1971 was Washington Metro-esque, with 12 miles of tunnels and 22 miles of aerial. There were going to be subways under all of Clifton/Uptown, Price Hill, and Madison Avenue from Walnut Hills to Hyde Park.  Getting it funded was realistic that year and that year only, as the 80/20 federal split became 50/50 after every city except Cincinnati got in the game.  Atlanta got MARTA, but we had Tom Luken, who instead of getting aggressive about getting that money called for the abolishment of OKI.  The man is incredible. 

 

 

   I got trapped in traffic due to a crash on Vine Street at McMillan for about 5 minutes today. I was thinking, "If the streetcar were here today, the entire line would be shut down until this wreck is cleared."

 

If the streetcar was around that day the people involved in the crash may have been on the streetcar or walking.

 

  ^--- You sure can spin things positively.

 

    In my opinion, the streetcar isn't going to reduce automobile traffic. If anything, it will increase it due to development near the streetcar line.

^ If it means bringing the city to life, I'll take it.

Detroit reduced traffic congestion by losing 1 million residents. 

Luken has hit back via letter to the Enquirer

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/06/11/bortz-can-only-blame-himself-for-entanglements/

 

He says he did not hire Mara as an attorney and attacks the project as well as Bortz.  There has got to be an underlying reason he is fighting this so vehemently. 

 

  "Streetcars reduce congestion..."

 

    No kidding that for a given number of passengers, streetcars take up less space than automobiles. (Pedestrians would take up even less space than streetcars!)

 

    The problem with your assertion is that the number of passengers is NOT constant.

 

    The premise of the streetcar is that it will encourage development. Suppose that it increases the population of Over-the-Rhine from ~10,000 to ~50,000. Suppose that some of those ~40,000 additional residents bring their cars. Even if they ride the streetcar most of the time and drive occasionally, that's a lot of cars on the road, not to mention the need for parking. If the streetcar is successful, there will likely be MORE congestion than there is today!

 

 

There is no problem with his assertion. All things being equal, a streetcar reduces congestion.

 

You could indeed make all kinds of problems for his assertion by stipulating various circumstances. Some may certainly be true.

 

   "Streetcars reduce congestion..."

 

    No kidding that for a given number of passengers, streetcars take up less space than automobiles. (Pedestrians would take up even less space than streetcars!)

 

    The problem with your assertion is that the number of passengers is NOT constant.

 

    The premise of the streetcar is that it will encourage development. Suppose that it increases the population of Over-the-Rhine from ~10,000 to ~50,000. Suppose that some of those ~40,000 additional residents bring their cars. Even if they ride the streetcar most of the time and drive occasionally, that's a lot of cars on the road, not to mention the need for parking. If the streetcar is successful, there will likely be MORE congestion than there is today!

 

 

 

Did you ever consider that while those 40,000 new residents could be more numerous on OTR streets, congestion will be less on the freeways and arterials they used to travel on?

 

Also, there are pretty good data from Portland that people who live in streetcar neighborhoods there tend to travel (by all means, not just driving) about a third as much as people who live in environments without frequent, car-competitive transit.

 

Many downtown Cincinnati residents drive their cars less than 4,000 miles a year.

 

"Streetcars reduce congestion..."

 

No kidding that for a given number of passengers, streetcars take up less space than automobiles. (Pedestrians would take up even less space than streetcars!)

 

The problem with your assertion is that the number of passengers is NOT constant.

 

The premise of the streetcar is that it will encourage development. Suppose that it increases the population of Over-the-Rhine from ~10,000 to ~50,000. Suppose that some of those ~40,000 additional residents bring their cars. Even if they ride the streetcar most of the time and drive occasionally, that's a lot of cars on the road, not to mention the need for parking. If the streetcar is successful, there will likely be MORE congestion than there is today!

 

 

 

Did you ever consider that while those 40,000 new residents could be more numerous on OTR streets, congestion will be less on the freeways and arterials they used to travel on?

 

Also, there are pretty good data from Portland that people who live in streetcar neighborhoods there tend to travel (by all means, not just driving) about a third as much as people who live in environments without frequent, car-competitive transit.

 

Many downtown Cincinnati residents drive their cars less than 4,000 miles a year.

 

...which is few enough miles to make car sharing a perfect alternative.

 

 

  Manhattan, Hong Kong, Paris, London, etc. all have very well developed mass transit systems and they are among the most congested places in the world. Plus, automobile traffic is not the only source of congestion. The transit systems themselves can be congested.

 

  The benefit of the streetcar is enhanced mobility, not less congestion.

 

  "All things being equal, a streetcar reduces congestion."

 

    All things are NOT equal. The streetcar proponents cite increased development as the primary benefit of the streetcar. In fact, for the streetcar to work economically, it HAS to result in increased development.

 

    Increased development is going to increase congestion, even if the new residents only drive 4000 miles per year.