Report: Red Hook Streetcar Network Too Costly
Streetsblog and The Daily News have stories that explore how a DOT study says a proposed streetcar system in Red Hook would be costly and difficult to implement. Streetsblog notes that the study says the streetcar line would “only create 1,822 new daily transit riders” but cost around “$176 million, with another $6.2-7.2 million in…
Streetsblog and The Daily News have stories that explore how a DOT study says a proposed streetcar system in Red Hook would be costly and difficult to implement. Streetsblog notes that the study says the streetcar line would “only create 1,822 new daily transit riders” but cost around “$176 million, with another $6.2-7.2 million in annual operating costs.” There’s still going to be a public meeting about the study in May, but its suggested “short-term improvements” for improving transit in the area include revamping the intersection at Mill Street and Hamilton Avenue to increase and improve access to Red Hook; possibly making service changes to the B61 line and adding new bus shelters; and putting in a pedestrian refuge on Clinton Street and Centre Mall. Meanwhile, the Daily News has this quote from Red Hook Civic Alliance Co-chairman John McGettrick about how Red Hook transportation could quickly be improved: “An alternative they could do in the immediate future would be to provide bus service to Manhattan via the Battery Tunnel.”
DOT to Red Hook: No Streetcar For You [Streetsblog]
Red Hook Trolley Would be Folly [The Daily News]
Photo by sillygwailo.
Okay, from the top:
1. tybur is correct; light rail is most effective when paired with a rezoning but that was rejected.
2. benson, DOT didn’t want to do this study but had their collective arms twisted, so don’t blame them if this was a waste of money.
3. I agree with Sparafucile’s observation about dedicated right-of-ways. Related point: buses can be re-routed when necessary; light rail is forever.
The right of way issue is why I proposed that this could only be used on major arteries such as Flatbush and 4th Avenue. By the way, trams can stop if somebody parks in the dedicated lane, assuming the median isn’t the lane. The systems I have seen all involve a mechanism for the tram to always have the right of way at interections (the light turns green when the tram gets there). I think they still have to look before they go through the intersection though.
Overhead wires really aren’t such a big deal.
Sparfucile… Yes, and? Of course they would have to be dedicated lanes. And they should be. Just like buses should have dedicated lanes where there’s a huge amount of people. This is the shift in the status quo that has to take place.
And about catenary wires. THIS is an eyesore?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/theoverheadwire/1497914672/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/theoverheadwire/1497910842/
Sparafucile +1
Fixed rail like trolleys only work within a dedicated right of way. Otherwise they’re much worse than buses since they can’t maneuver around street repairs, double parking, etc. And catenary wires are a real eyesore.
Jaquar — Don’t you remember, NYC is special. Things that work elsewhere would never work here. That’s the usual refrain.
While not sure whether Redhook merits street cars, I can assure you that in most midsized European cities, some variation of street cars or, better yet, trams, are used to great effect. Indeed, I think trams on major arteries in Brooklyn such as Flatbush Avenue, and maybe 4th Avenue, would be an excellent idea.
It’s “apparent” you require sedatives.
Greenwood cemetery has a cutesy faux-trolley that perhaps could be put to service on the official Judy Garland Clang Clang Clang Went the Trolley route.
tourists would eat it up.