As a new Streetcar Proposal is Floated, Close Scrutiny is Needed

Over the weekend Councilor Andersen mentioned a working group trying to revive a proposal for a cross-river streetcar line. (It's only conceptual and exploratory at the moment, do note.)

Streetcar on Commercial at Ferry, c. 1909
Holman Building on left
(Salem Library Historic Photos)

We would like nothing better than a streetcar revival here! This blog looks back with great fondness at many elements of the streetcar era. It was the most genuinely multi-modal period, with real options, in our transportation history. There are definitely elements to retrieve and revive.

The mixed traffic ecosystem a few years later in 1913
Looking south on Commercial from Court

It is interesting, though, to note in 1920 one of Salem's bike dealers advertising off criticism of the streetcar rather than criticism of the automobile. It's a national ad, but still relevant enough to use locally.

July 10th, 1920

A month later another ad read "Bicycles for Progressive Men. The Bicycle Has Long Since Replaced the Streetcar." At least in the early 20s, the streetcar seemed like a bigger problem and more effective foil than automobiles.

Though the temptation is strong to romanticize a streetcar revival, we should be careful not to hit the nostalgia and enthusiasm for any modern revival uncritically. There are reasons to give proposals extra scrutiny.

1. Value. Any rail solution will be very expensive. Are there alternative solutions at a lower cost that will yield the same or nearly the same benefit?
   
2. Opportunity cost. If we make a great capital investment for streetcar, what opportunities for investing elsewhere will we have to pass by? Does a streetcar hoover up discretionary dollars for things like the bikeway system and sidewalks?
   
3. Cannibalizing walking and biking space. There are constant threats to poach space on the Union Street Bridge. If we want to reduce driving and to make walking and biking more lovely, why do we not reduce driving lanes instead of degrading walking and biking space? Why not reallocate existing auto capacity for higher ends?
4. What about operational expenses and future maintenance obligations? Will a new system cut into existing bus service or make increased frequency less likely?
   

The 1920s are full of talk about streetcar lines losing money, needing to raise fares, and ultimately going out of business.

May 19th, 1921

July 30th, 1927

It is, of course, not merely a local story. National autoist interests and the popularity of motor vehicles worked to devalue streetcar lines (though see skepticism about the urban legend that the car companies worked directly to kill streetcars).

But we should be clear now about which old problems with streetcars are newly solved or likely to be solved, and which old problems are not going to be solved. It may be that the spur to redevelopment offsets operating losses. But if that is part of the plan, it should be very explicit, budgeted for, and not a sotto voce detail. If new rail seems to require taking over the Union Street Bridge, or cut into other walking and biking space, we should be clear on why that is absolutely necessary - as opposed to merely convenient - and a good trade-off.

If we require fares on a new streetcar, but keep the bridges free for automobiles, one is more subsidized than the other. Above all, as long as we refuse to price the Marion and Center Street bridges, we will have a distorted view of demand, which will affect any ridership and revenue forecasts.

Previously and elsewhere:

• Here, "City Club Talks Streetcar - But are we Missing Simpler Solutions?" (2013)
• At Strong Towns, a mixed assessment in posts tagged "Streetcars." 
• At occasional Cherriots consultant Jarrett Walker's Human Transit, also a mixed assessment in posts tagged "Streetcars."
• And a capsule history of the system at the Oregon Encyclopedia and all photos tagged streetcar in the Library Historic Photos collection.
  

The bottom line is not that streetcars are always good or always bad, but that real care is required to build one that meets ridership targets, meets operational budgets and expectations, and prompts the right ancillary benefits like property redevelopment. A streetcar is not always the best tool, and we'll want to examine any serious proposal very closely. When the working group is ready to present formally to the public, it will very interesting!

Reed Opera House and Streetcar on Liberty Street
(Salem Library Historic Photos, 1893)

It's exciting to consider a streetcar concept, but we should be sure it is a good investment, balances trade-offs, and responds to true needs, not just to desire for a shiny new urban toy.