HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Sacramento Area


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted May 9, 2007, 2:28 PM
urban_encounter's Avatar
urban_encounter urban_encounter is offline
“The Big EasyChair”
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 🌳🌴🌲 Sacramento 🌳 🌴🌲
Posts: 5,984
Streetcar revival closer

Streetcar revival closer for West Sac
Council will consider seeking a financing plan for
the project that would link Sacramento and its
western neighbor

By Lakiesha McGhee - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B1



The last time trolley cars rolled through West Sacramento was in 1941. Efforts in the area to revive the cars date back 30 years.

Tonight, the West Sacramento City Council will take another step toward resurrecting a streetcar system that would link the city to Sacramento via the Tower Bridge.

While many uncertainties remain -- including how to fund such a project -- the council will consider jump-starting a financing plan, further studies and designs.

The idea is to transport residents, visitors and workers in and around the two cities' downtown and riverfront areas. Short streetcar trips and fewer cars on the road will promote more "walkable" areas, spur economic activity and increase land values, city officials said.

"The streetcar concept is one that has taken off all over the country," West Sacramento Mayor Christopher Cabaldon said in a telephone interview from New Orleans. He said he made a point to ride and learn about the trolley cars there while on a business trip.

"It's not just an alternative option for transportation, but for living," he said.

A year ago, West Sacramento joined Sacramento, the Yolo County Transportation District and the Sacramento Regional Transit District to plan a streetcar system. A series of community forums helped gain public feedback. A grant was secured from the Sacramento Area Council of Governments for a feasibility study.

The consultants who were hired to conduct the study were told to keep the project within a $50 million budget.

The study, which was released this month, recommends a preferred route stretching 2.2 miles, from the West Sacramento Civic Center on the west, over the Tower Bridge, to Sacramento's midtown on the east. Existing light-rail tracks along Seventh, Eighth and K streets would be used for a portion of the route. A fleet of eight cars would operate 10 minutes apart.

The route would help connect new townhomes, high-rise office buildings and other developments on both sides of the Sacramento River. The streetcar line could expand to other areas, including the former railyard in downtown Sacramento proposed for retail and 10,000 homes, officials said.

The partner agencies will be asked to accept the study and initiate preliminary engineering designs, environmental studies and a financing plan. The preliminary work would be funded by state transportation funds already secured.

"There has always been a desire for a streetcar or historic trolley car in Sacramento," said Azadeh Doherty, principal planner for the Sacramento Department of Transportation.

In 1995, Sacramento conducted a streetcar study for operation only in its downtown, she said. But lack of funding and other priorities caused the trolley car idea to lose momentum.

"Now we have two mayors who are very supportive and interested, so the climate may be just right," Doherty said. "The streetcar project also is proposed to be funded mostly with private resources, which wasn't the case before."

In addition to the $50 million needed to build the streetcar system, annual operation and maintenance would cost $2.5 million to $3.5 million, according to the feasibility study. An assessment district or community facilities district is suggested to help pay a significant portion of the costs.

To avoid competition with other light-rail projects, federal funds would not be sought, city officials said.

Supporters are hoping the benefits of a streetcar system will help sway the business community and potential developers.

"It will be very good for economic development," Yolo County Supervisor Mike McGowan said. "Businesses will want to be on the trolley line because it's a secure, fixed route."

Unlike bus routes that can change, streetcar lines are more permanent and provide a steady stream of people to storefronts.

"The streetcar is often referred to as a pedestrian accelerator," said Mike Wiley, deputy general manager of the Sacramento Regional Transit District. "People feel comfortable, safe and secure hopping on a streetcar, traveling five or six blocks and then walking the rest of the way to get to a development."

Officials are looking at streetcar success in cities such as Portland, Ore., and Tampa, Fla. They recognize streetcars as being more cost-effective to build and operate and less disruptive to street traffic than light rail.

Many of the cars are an attractive addition to a downtown as they replicate historic trolleys or feature a sleek, modern design.

Wiley said the streetcar would complement light-rail service, which is designed to move more people longer distances.
__________________
“The best friend on earth of man is the tree. When we use the tree respectfully and economically, we have one of the greatest resources on the earth.” – Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted May 9, 2007, 4:00 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Here's the images from the bee's article:



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted May 9, 2007, 4:11 PM
sugit sugit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: DT Sacramento
Posts: 3,076
- City of West Sacramento Council Meeting: May 9th
- Presentation to RT and Yolo County Transportation District: May 14
- City of Sacramento Council Meeting: May 22

Feasabilty Study
http://www.cityofwestsacramento.org/...eports/ai6.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted May 9, 2007, 4:59 PM
TowerDistrict's Avatar
TowerDistrict TowerDistrict is offline
my posse's on broadway
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: in an LPCA occupied zone
Posts: 1,600
i hope to check out one of those presentations, and I really want this thing to work. What worries me about the preliminary routes above, is that they seem to be aiming to install the system where it is convenient - rather than where it would work best. There has been a lot of lost ridership for light rail for just that reason. They ran the tracks along heavy rail corridors because it was easy and cheap - but now there are stations in the middle of nowhere that don't service the neighborhoods and residents that help fund it.

Of course there's the flip side to that in transit oriented development - building new construction with the specific intention to utilize light rail. But it would be a shame to see such a cool idea as streetcars suffer because the development didn't follow quick enough.

I also wonder if they plan on running the streetcars during weekends. If they ran a line down 16th street, people could park in city owned lots under the freeway, and ride it to all the restaurants, clubs and galleries between 15th and 19th. Just a thought.
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------
Map of recent Sacramento developments
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted May 9, 2007, 5:08 PM
sugit sugit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: DT Sacramento
Posts: 3,076
I was disappointed to not see a line on 16th street as well. That could be a street that in 5 or so years could really benefit from a streetcar.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted May 9, 2007, 6:49 PM
Fusey's Avatar
Fusey Fusey is offline
Repeat!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 5,496
I totally agree. Right now the bus routes that lead to light rail are so irregular and not timed very well. With the restaurants and apartments popping up near 16th Street (1801 L, L Street Lofts, etc.) it's inconvenient for a lot of people to walk 10 or so blocks to light rail. The current plan looks like all the different transit lines zig-zag too much.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted May 9, 2007, 8:34 PM
urban_encounter's Avatar
urban_encounter urban_encounter is offline
“The Big EasyChair”
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 🌳🌴🌲 Sacramento 🌳 🌴🌲
Posts: 5,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDistrict View Post
i hope to check out one of those presentations, and I really want this thing to work. What worries me about the preliminary routes above, is that they seem to be aiming to install the system where it is convenient - rather than where it would work best. There has been a lot of lost ridership for light rail for just that reason. They ran the tracks along heavy rail corridors because it was easy and cheap - but now there are stations in the middle of nowhere that don't service the neighborhoods and residents that help fund it.
Well said..

I think it would be a real shame if this system doesn't go further into Midtown, so as to take advantage of everything that's happening down there.
__________________
“The best friend on earth of man is the tree. When we use the tree respectfully and economically, we have one of the greatest resources on the earth.” – Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted May 11, 2007, 1:02 AM
urban_encounter's Avatar
urban_encounter urban_encounter is offline
“The Big EasyChair”
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 🌳🌴🌲 Sacramento 🌳 🌴🌲
Posts: 5,984
W. Sacramento pursues more streetcar studies
Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, May 10, 2007
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B2



WEST SACRAMENTO -- The West Sacramento City Council on Wednesday night approved initiating further studies and plans for a $50 million streetcar system linking the city to downtown Sacramento.

The unanimous action will set in motion a financing plan, preliminary engineering designs, environmental studies and more extensive public outreach.

West Sacramento is the lead agency on the project, which also involves Sacramento, the Yolo County Transportation District and the Sacramento Regional Transit District. The three other agencies also will consider the project this month.

"There's a very strong correlation to development of a streetcar system and land values," Mayor Christopher Cabaldon said. He explained that building a streetcar system before other developments would allow the city to capitalize from increased land values.

Residents who attended the meeting voiced concerns about cost, but were generally supportive.

"This is a huge step forward with a nod to the past," said David Nybo, who plans to build 550 homes not far from the proposed route. He said developers will be encouraged to design projects worthy of the streetcar route.

A feasibility study recommends a 2.2-mile route from Sacramento's midtown, over the Tower Bridge, to the West Sacramento Civic Center on West Capitol Avenue, which is currently home to low-budget motels.

Construction planned for West Capitol Avenue include extensive landscaping and sidewalk improvements, a transit center, a satellite campus for Sacramento City College, a community center and 82 homes to replace an adult motel.

-- Lakiesha McGhee
__________________
“The best friend on earth of man is the tree. When we use the tree respectfully and economically, we have one of the greatest resources on the earth.” – Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted May 12, 2007, 6:07 AM
TWAK's Avatar
TWAK TWAK is online now
Resu Deretsiger
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 15,648
So...would this be able to be upgraded to LR, like that bus line in frisco? Eventually LR is supposed to head out to UCD.
__________________
#RuralUrbanist
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted May 15, 2007, 4:39 AM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 5,079


These routes chosen in downtown Sac. are all on road where the least amount
of NIMBY people will complain. No one lives on Capitol Mall and there is very little
going on there after 5pm... what a joke. Light Rail is already on K Street so who's
gonna care about Street cars there too. Putting Street cars on actual busy streets make
more economical since in that more people use those through fairs to support
the system. I know they have J and L in the plans, but by the time they actually
get the system running down those roads it will be 20 years from now.

I wonder if the City will float a bond measure to pay for this proposal?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 5:34 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
I agree with you that this proposed route is out of the question...but for different reasons. Running down CapMall all the way to 8th Street would ruin the whole mall concept which might some day be redone into the nice ceremonial way. I think using the existing light rail tracks whenever possible is smart because its cheaper, faster and that's where the new developement is going to be concentrated. I also don't actually see how putting streetcars on busy streets make any more economical than putting them on side streets.

This streetcar proposal is entirely West Sacramento-centric. We need to create a streetcar route that is both practical and cost-effective, a route that will provide residents and visitors alike with an alternative to the car and promote planned growth areas in both cities not just in West Sacramento.

I've come up with my own route. Tell me what you think. It starts at the West Sacramento Civic Center, down West Capitol Ave, over the Tower Bridge and then turns onto 4th Street -past the western entrance to the Downtown Plaza and tunnel entrance to Old Sacramento, through the now isolated Chinatown and onto the existing light-rail tracks which will be front of the new Sacramento Valley Station at The Railyards. From there it follows the light-rail track to the K Street Mall and then north on 12th Street. At I (Eye) Street the streetcar turns east and runs along I Street turning south onto 19th Street and then east onto Capitol Avenue. Then the initial line would turn onto 21st Street. At R Street the streetcar would run under the LRT bridge and then connect to the existing light-rail tracks at 19th/R. Then running along the R Street Corridor the streetcar will follow the light-rail track to 12th Street and then onto R Street and run west turning onto 3rd Street back Capitol Mall and West Sacramento.

I first considered the streetcar sharing the existing railroad tracks between 19th and 20th streets with freight trains but ruled it out for a number of reasons. In order for the streetcar to use the tracks they would have to overcome the FRA safety and non-interference requirements and land for stations would have to be acquired -both of which would be too expensive. It would cost less to simply lay new tracks on 19th and 21st streets and avoid the freight tracks altogether.

I thought this route out -as which streets would be best to use. For example H Street, west of 16th Street, is in some ways preferable to I Street. However, east of 16th Street, I Street is much more preferable than H Street. Since there is no easy way to get from H Street to I Street in Midtown I chose to keep the streetcar entirely on I Street from 12th to 19th.

The route takes into account new or developing districts/neighborhoods and major tourist areas. The streetcar would link together- Raley Field and Riverwalk, Old Sacramento, intermodal station and The Railyards, K Street Mall, the Capitol, Convention Center and Theater District, Midtown West, and the R Street Corridor.

A near-term extension should first consider the existing densities and walkability. For this reason the first extension should be in Midtown Sacramento. This extension route would make a loop, from 21st Street, running east along Capitol Avenue, then up 26th Street (to avoid the congested 28th Street), skirting the western side of Sutter’s Fort Park (in front of St. Francis Church) and then west onto K Street, then south onto 21st Street, under the LRT elevated tracks and back onto the light-rail tracks at R St. The extension line would connect the network to Midtown East and the growing Sutter’s Fort District and the Alhambra Corridor.


Last edited by ozone; May 16, 2007 at 7:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 6:04 PM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 5,079
I like the idea about taking it up to the Sutters Fort area but what about
taking it down 16th street? Street cars there would kick ass
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 6:33 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
As you can see I tried to avoid interferring with major traffic routes from the freeway. Unfortunely 16th Street is one of those major streets. However my route does cross 16th at R Street and I Street so that section of 16th that is seeing the majority of the activity now would be serviced.

What about in the future running an extension from 5th or 10th, down to Broadway, then east to the light-rail tracks and back to R Street?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 6:45 PM
COASTIE's Avatar
COASTIE COASTIE is offline
Vizcaya Mansion 04/15/06
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suisun City/Inching towards SAC
Posts: 63
I really like this idea
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 6:57 PM
TowerDistrict's Avatar
TowerDistrict TowerDistrict is offline
my posse's on broadway
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: in an LPCA occupied zone
Posts: 1,600
Does anyone know if streetcars had ever crossed the freight rail tracks between 19th and 21st? I'm not sure how that would work - and from the looks of the draft plan - I don't think the city cares to figure it out.
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------
Map of recent Sacramento developments
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 7:47 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
A major challenge facing this streetcar line's will be how to devise a safe way for the streetcar and freight railroad tracks to intersect at Capitol Ave and R Street. The railroads fear that they would be liable in the event of a collision between and streetcar and a train, and usually reject any solution other than a grade separation. I read on the web that New Orleans had a similar problem but do not know if anything was resolved there.

Satisfying federal safety requirements at the intersection is the greatest challenge but we have the technology available, such as electronic warning systems, to avoid collisions. Since streetcars would be smaller than lightrail and the freight trains run infrequently I think a compromise could be reached. It's about time that the railroad companies and the FTA realize that they cannot stop progress forever.

Last edited by ozone; May 16, 2007 at 11:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 8:26 PM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 5,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone View Post
As you can see I tried to avoid interferring with major traffic routes from the freeway. Unfortunely 16th Street is one of those major streets. However my route does cross 16th at R Street and I Street so that section of 16th that is seeing the majority of the activity now would be serviced.

What about in the future running an extension from 5th or 10th, down to Broadway, then east to the light-rail tracks and back to R Street?

I would think that if the lines were run on major routes, there would be fewer
NIMBY protesting it... because it would be running on an already major thruway.
Many of those street you proposed are entirely residential for several
blocks, IMO that’s just asking for trouble when a neighborhood unites
to block the plan. If the proposed tracks were on street where mostly
business lined the street, I would think less people would have a problem
with that... and most of those streets are major traffic routes.

Great map and ideas ozone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted May 16, 2007, 10:49 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Thanks. You make some interesting points innov8. However, only Capitol Ave east of 21st Street is mostly residential for several blocks. I Street from 12th to 19th is more business than residential and K Street from 21st to 26th is quite mixed with both businesses and houses. Capitol Ave in East Midtown is where the no. 36 bus route is today so if RT were to move that bus over to another street then the residents might not object so much to having a streetcar instead of a bus. The only way I can see to avoid a mostly residential street is if there was a turn-around somewhere in the Sutter's Fort/Alhambra area so that the streetcar returns on K Street. But Capitol Ave is an historic streetcar route and it would put the streetcar close to 18th/Capitol which is a kind of the new epicenter of Midtown.

Running a streetcar down an arterial also has it's problems. I chose to go down I and K instead of J Street because it would interfere less with the traffic coming out of downtown and yet still serve the J Street businesses. The traffic and parking issues pose a problem on J Street and you can bet there would be objections to it as well. J St. carries a lot of traffic day and night and I think putting a streetcar on it would just create a major safety issue for the pasengers.

Having said all that, I did think of these issue before and orignally thought that the streecar could just run down 19th Street thus avoiding the crossing the tracks altogther and in the future maybe a separate trolley could run into East Midtown.


Last edited by ozone; May 17, 2007 at 1:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted May 30, 2007, 10:58 PM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
The streetcar plan is very West Sacramento-centric because West Sacramento is really taking the lead on this project. There is a lot of room to grow on both sides, and the idea is that this $50 million project provides a proof of concept to justify expansion, and it means trains running in five years, not in a decade or more. Sacramento is willing to let West Sac hold the ball on this because, I think, they're just happy to have a neighboring city who *wants* better public transit, unlike, say, Roseville (who doesn't mind sponging off of Sacramento as long as we pay for the whole thing and they reap the benefit) or Elk Grove (who fears that public transit will draw "undesirable elements.")

One thing that gets mentioned in these articles is the idea that trolleys over the Tower Bridge stopped in 1941, which isn't quite right. Technically, regular-service streetcars NEVER rolled over the Tower Bridge, which was built in 1935, although they did run over its predecessor, the M Street bridge.

Sacramento Northern's interurban trains, that came through a couple of times a day (between Oakland and Chico,) stopped in 1941, and the electrical overhead came down in around 1951-1953, but diesel-powered freight trains across the bridge continued until 1962. The last time streetcars (as in regular neighborhood-serving cars, not interurbans) were in regular service in West Sacramento was in the 1920s. They were subsidized by the land developer, who also owned the interurban line and the streetcar company (and owned stock in the power company.) They operated the streetcars at a loss for a decade, until all the land was sold, then stopped subsidizing the streetcars. Because they built West Sacramento as a very dispersed single-family development (mostly 1-5 acre lots, with 1 or 2 homes on each) there wasn't enough commuter traffic to pay for the streetcar, and they stopped operating over the bridge. After that point, riders had to catch the interurban (for a lot more than a nickel, and only a couple of times a day) to get from West Sac to downtown, or buy a car if it was too far to walk. Part of the Tower Bridge's advantage over its predecessor was that it was far better for auto traffic: the M Street Bridge was a single-track railroad bridge with nine-foot wide "outriggers" for pedestrian AND vehicle traffic on either side.

The main challenge West Sacramento has at this point is building dense enough and transit-oriented enough to provide sufficient ridership--and not give up the ghost once all the projects are built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2007, 1:14 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
I understand what you're saying wburg about WeSac taking the lead and all. It seems like Mayor Fargo just gives lip service to the idea. I just don't see the latest plan put forth by WeSac as very viable. As you said the challenge they have is building up enough to provide sufficient ridership. I also disagree with the idea of reintroducing the streetcar primarily as a development tool (even though that's what it was used for in the past) and not primarily as a transit option for the existing transit-supportive areas like Midtown.

By the way I just read your article in Midtown -Old vs. New (Old Sacramento). Do you know what's going on with the Ebner reconstruction?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Sacramento Area
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:32 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.