I'm not sure that the new VIA leadership is going to correct some of the issues that SAKyle pointed out. There was an article in the ExpressNews recetly about VIA; it might be worthwhile to point out some of these things to someone at the paper. Kyle's summary was great and VIA needs to answer as to why they are not really doing anything but buying new buses and how this is supposed to help.

Alas, the City punted this plan back to VIA, proposing a north-south streetcar line on Broadway instead.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/mediaMan...get&id=1633842
Read more:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...nt-2194202.php
I believe the City could not find all of its $55 Million share for the east-west line VIA wants. Here's how the City plans to fund its share of a Broadway line........

Under the city plan, property owners who would directly benefit from a streetcar would help pay for it. City officials have said the existing Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone in the Broadway corridor has primed that area for a public-private partnership.
The strategy would require the City Council to create a special tax assessment district along the proposed route. At least half of the property owners on that route would have to agree to the district before the council could adopt it. But once it was passed, all of the owners would pay into the district. The city still has to determine the exact reach of the district.
The City estimates the assessment district could generate $15 Million for the streetcar project. The City would issue $32 Million in certificates of obligation and use $8 Million in the 2007 bond savings to pay for project infrastructure. The City does not want any of its money to pay for the streetcar line itself.

Note: 32 + 15 + 8 = 55

Another major difference between the City and VIA is why to spend over $100 Million for streetcars. VIA is more concerned about moving passengers while the City is more concerned about redevelopment opportunities.

My take: The City needs a tax assessment district to fully fund its share for streetcars, and downtown already has a tax assessment district funding other existing projects; that the Broadway corridor is probably the only place they could make a new tax assessment district to support streetcars. As it is, it's a rather short streetcar line being financed by local resources; that Federal money could be used to extend this line further north or east if and when that becomes available.

One way to get around town.

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6117/...4631bd5b_b.jpg

Horse Rapid Transit?

A valid alternative in Texas, a horse. But I wouldn't consider a horse rapid.

San Antonio (city) votes yea on north-south streetcar funding up to $40 Million. Added to Bexar's (county) $55 Million and VIA's (transit) $70 Million, it looks like this streetcar project is a go. There are still issues of details to be resolved, but the political issues are resolved.

A new funding strategy exists to support construction of TWO streetcar lines at the same time, instead of doing it one at a time.

"County and VIA Metropolitan Transit officials have identified enough local funds to build the city's first two streetcar lines without help from the federal government.
They will announce the funding strategies and how they cobbled together the $59 million they needed to finish the system at a news conference today.The total cost for VIA's expansion is $239 million, which includes money for two downtown streetcar lines running north and east, and west and south, plus a slew of other transit projects in and beyond downtown."


Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...#ixzz1dKElX5Gz

http://www.mysanantonio.com/mediaMan...get&id=1742495

I'm not too big of a fan with the current proposed north/east and west/south route. I hope it's revised to at least the initial proposal of north/south and west/east. Hopefully it goes through a redesign now that both lines can be built simultaneously. Maybe it's me, but I really don't want a line running in front of the Alamo either, it just doesn't seem respectful of the space (I mean Ripley's and all those shops already do enough to harm the historical and cultural aspect of Alamo Plaza).

I agree about the current proposed alignment. It should be a Pearl to Southtown line and a Westside hub to Alamodome line.

As for the line potentially going in front of the Alamo, I have no problem. It'd make for a great "hey look!" moment for tourists or local residents. IMO it's not disrespectful at all.

Putting rail in front of the Alamo doesn't seem to fit. People can walk a little to get to it.

The only thing I dislike about a line that goes in front of the Alamo is the turn it takes from Broadway.

It continuing straight down Boadway to Losoya St to Alamo St. into Southtown is probably the best alignment but I still contend the "oh look!" value of the Alamo would kick butt.

I haven't read enough about the plan, but is it a proposed shared right-of-way with vehicles or exclusive right-of-way or both?

My only beef is keeping the bus circulator. I can't figure out if that's simply calling out the trolleys as inadequate buses or if it's some giveaway to some hold out.

I hope it goes away. Give those bus service hours to the 7 or something.

That alignment and circulator were created when funding was only available for one line (first east/west then revised east/north) so as another poster said, they could change the alignment and get rid of the circulator now that full funding of both lines has been secured.

With streetcars, they'll be on shared right-of-ways. Exclusive right-of-ways means light rail, which would be more than twice as expensive constructing, longer trains, faster trains, and lost traffic lanes.
These lines being proposed are around one mile in length. You don't need exclusive right-of-ways for relatively short train corridors. Future expansions in the future don't need to go far; around another additional mile in the four compass directions; with commuter rail or rapid bus proposals for the relatively long commuter corridors.

There used to be tracks along Alamo for many years when the long barracks were used as a grocery store.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1084/...3920ff2b_b.jpg

photo from scanned from Historic Photos of San Antonio

True, and The Alamo complex used to serve as a storage depot and grocery store in the past as well. It wasn't until the mid-20th century (ish) that conservation came to be of importance in American culture. I mean in San Antonio conservation didn't truly get it's foothold until the prospect of HemisFair came about and the need to save dozens of structures was realized. Of course there were a few conservation efforts before HemisFair but that was the catalyst to preserve the old city. We have a duty to respect the structures that citizens of the past did not, either because of lack of knowledge or general indifference. I'm truly glad San Antonio is moving forward with streetcar and I look forward to the day when I can hop on a streetcar, and eventually light rail, to move throughout the city.

However, as a historic landmark we should seek to ensure that such space is preserved as much as we can and limit unnecessary infrastructure and development encroachment from what already exists. Maybe it would make a great tourist snapshot or convenient for moving people (even though Losoya St. seems to do the job) but so would a major road (and not a small tract to move service vehicles) through the Gettysburg battle site, for example.

It simply should be given thought to try and keep such public space a remnant of its character and importance to city and state while visiting all viable options for alternative routes. If I remember right VIA likes a route along Alamo while the city prefers a route along Losoya.

Wait, so we should try to preserve it's character...?

Is that the historic character that had a streetcar line running down Alamo in the early 20th century or the modern character that has no streetcar?

This is what creates such a bad argument when we dive into historicity of cities and urban places. They are constantly changing and evolving.

Preserving history is not maintaining "what is there now" but allowing development to happen while maintaining the sense of place.

No one would argue against a new Opera House replacing a Ripley's House of Wax. But what about the history of Ripley's in Alamo Plaza?

No one is arguing about returning Hemisfair to a vibrant public space - but what about it's 40+ years of history as a dull, lifeless urban island?

Put the streetcar in a place where it will best serve the public. Do so in a way that enhances development, spurs new development, and adds to the charm and character of our great city.

Again, as I stated before, Conservation efforts in San Antonio did not not really begin until the mid 20th century. Streetcar was well along before this. And gone by then too. The Alamo was there well before any idea of an electric streetcar line. All I'm saying is the history, The Alamo Serving As A Major Battlefield And Thus The Site Of Hundreds (possibly as high as a thousand)Of Deaths Should Be Respected For That Matter. The surrounding streets are enough, and for some they are too much as some have called for those streets to be closed off and replaced with replicas of the old mission. I'm not arguing to close streets but instead just move the route, as the city proposed, one block away.

True that cities are changing. However, your argument of allowing development within a place leads to, as scholars describe, a false sense of place. A sort of Disneyfication, if you will. That is a place is not longer a place but instead a space.

Furthermore, I believe some would argue against an Opera House? instead of Ripley's. I'm sure some would argue against any development next to the Alamo. That was just an all-encompassing statement.

And for HemisFair part of the argument is to develop this "dull, lifeless urban island" into what it once was, a vibrant feeling of community by in part bringing back some streets that were removed for HemisFair. The effort would be to restore it to how it began, and not how it has evolved through urban renewal. HemisFair destroyed hundreds of homes and dozens of churches and stores. The effort is to restore this by removing the modernist approach to character and allowing to thrive as it potentially would have. HemisFair served as a means to remove blight, hence even the large hill at the ITC along Chavez so people visiting the World's Fair would not have to see the remaining neighborhoods.

I'm not arguing against development but instead I'm pitching that policymakers do not jump the gun and say oh it's shiny I want it now. Instead I hope policymakers take the time to understand a place and keep up with it.

It's funny because when I read HDRC staff comments sometimes I wonder why they are saying some of the things they do. I think maybe they do it to intentionally piss people off and limit things. Now I'm sounding like them, a bit, gasp!

I think it's silly and pretty stupid to have a problem with street car going in front of the Alamo. No offense.

The Alamo is a whore. We whore it out nationally to attract tourists, it's history aside, it's character is that of a high quality and well producing whore.

Hey whores need protection too, just a different kind. k, lame attempt at a joke.