Mothball the Atlanta Streetcar?
It's an expensive device that needs great urbanism in order to provide a return on investment -- but we're not providing that urbanism.
In a new op-ed in the Atlanta Journal Constitution [paywalled], former Council member and early Beltline champion Cathy Woolard makes a great case for Beltline rail, but she opposes extending the current streetcar to it.
In fact she calls for mothballing the existing streetcar. I'm surprised by my own reaction to this.
Here's a passage from the op-ed:
Ridership on the Atlanta Streetcar is virtually nonexistent and costs us a lot of money to operate this train to nowhere. No real leadership has stepped forward to say what needs to be said: the Atlanta Streetcar is too expensive, was poorly conceived and should never have happened. Many operate under the belief that we can’t receive funding for transit on the Atlanta Beltline unless it is part of the extension of the Atlanta Streetcar.
Well folks, it’s time to put on our big girl pants and do something bold.
Mothball the streetcar. Give up. Stop. Save it for later if it makes sense to restart. Do not extend this folly to the Beltline.
Stop studying the studies. The density needed to provide riders exists in the Northeast and Southeast corridors and is rapidly being built in the Southwest and Northwest corridors. The alignment is there, and the need for fixed rail is studied and established and doesn’t need to be revisited until our “Atlanta Way” leaders get the results they want, which is no transit on the Beltline.
Solicit bids to design and build transit on the Atlanta Beltline now. Other cities have figured out how to build transit lines quickly and with reasonable budgets.
Five years ago I would have immediately disagreed with ditching the streetcar. I like it, I ride it, and I believed back then that we could correct the issues with it.
But this month marks 10 years since the streetcar began service and it's becoming clear to me that Atlanta leaders and property owners have little will for converting 100% of the dead spaces near the streetcar tracks into rail-supportive density.
Atlanta also shows no political will for providing the streetcar with the lane priority it needs during big Downtown events.
It's a noble cause to call the city out on these failures, but as much as I hate to say so, it increasingly feels like a lost cause to me.
I'm not saying that I completely agree with Woolard that we should mothball the streetcar. That would be a huge move, and it's possibly even more pessimistic than I'm willing to be. But I'm surprised to find that I can now at least see a reasonable argument for it.
It's been over 15 years since ATL got the TIGER federal grant for the streetcar.
We've had 15 years for addressing the urbanism of the route. Some progress has been made, to be sure, but not nearly enough.
I don't believe simply connecting the streetcar to the Beltline is the answer. If it's just a matter of connectivity, it's a 10 minute bus ride from Ponce City Market (and the Beltline beside it) to North Avenue MARTA Station.
In summary, I believe that rail on the Beltline itself is *much* more important than a streetcar extension to it.
And if Atlanta leaders and property owners can't improve the urbanism of the streetcar route in a total, holistic way, soon, then a serious conversation about the potential for shelving it makes sense.
What say you?
Late to this discussion but I agree that the streetcar was poorly conceived. I lean towards keeping it just because the infrastructure exists, but would be happy to change my mind if I saw data that made it clear beeline rail would happen more quickly or more affordably without the streetcar connection.
I also think branding will matter a lot for beltline rail. I think 'Streetcar' carries a lot of unnecessary negative connotation that 'tram' doesn't have. 'light rail' is pretty good but may be good to avoid on this project too since a lot of the NIMBY argument against beltline rail seems to be about the noise it'll produce or how pedestrian infrastructure would be better. I think good messaging here can emphasize that an at-grade tram can serve as a walking accelerator without being a loud eye-sore or replacing pedestrian infrastructure.
I view the streetcar's purpose differently than the way I believe you are seeing it, according to your article. (If I understand it correctly)
To wit: I don't think the streetcar should be expected to be a catalyst for urban development - at all. In fact, I'd be surprised if it were.
Instead, I think transportation modes should do the opposite - totally go where the people already are. Especially expensive transportation modes - and even more especially, modes that aren't free-flowing like cars on roads, but are locked into a small loop as the streetcar is.
The fact that it goes in a circle and isn't connected to other modes just adds to that sense of it being, to me, an island - not a catalyst for anyone to come in and put money into developing a site along the route.