,
6 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
The notion that streetcars support redevelopment is based on the false assumption that streetcars make transit more permanent, which is disproven by the history of streetcars. 1/
Transit operating cost is mostly labor. That means that infrastructure is worthless without the funding for eternal operations. This is why transit investment is fundamentally different from roads or buildings 2/
So for a streetcar to be permanent its operating budget must be permanent, which means it must win the battle for funds against other transit services that are actually useful as transit. 3/
A few US streetcars are useful as transit, like the original Portland line and the Kansas City line. I would bet on the permanence of those. 4/
But true permanence in transit requires permanent ridership, which lies in a permanent favorable land-use pattern. That’s why many successful bus lines may well be more permanent than some of the more poorly conceived rail and streetcar lines out there. 5/
Meanwhile, remember: if you want transit to be permanent, it needs permanent high ridership, which requires a permanent favorable land-use pattern. Land-use, not rail in the street, is the only permanence that matters. 6/6
