Miami sprawl and the car congestion is another issue that could be resolved by developing Metromover in different tranches and on a 10 year plan//like new york did with 2nd avenue metro extension on the east side.

But today it is streetcar time and noone can stop it not even the old/the activists/the independant car sales owner

It is time and the city needs to give answers and action or people won’t be able to move in those new areas in the city , business wont thrive like it was supposed to and taxes wont be paid (real estate /businesses) the area will stay as it is which noone wants to see hapen trust me.

Eventually it is the whole extension of metromover that wont be able to be paid for

If the first step is taken ie the streetcar..more will come development, business, people moving in those areas to be close to work and close to a brand new entertainment district..

the whole miami economy will benefit..and metromover too at the end

FrenchyMiami

Miami sprawl and the car congestion is another issue that could be resolved by developing Metromover in different tranches and on a 10 year plan//like new york did with 2nd avenue metro extension on the east side.

But today it is streetcar time and noone can stop it not even the old/the activists/the independant car sales owner

It is time and the city needs to give answers and action or people won’t be able to move in those new areas in the city , business wont thrive like it was supposed to and taxes wont be paid (real estate /businesses) the area will stay as it is which noone wants to see hapen trust me.

Eventually it is the whole extension of metromover that wont be able to be paid for

If the first step is taken ie the streetcar..more will come development, business, people moving in those areas to be close to work and close to a brand new entertainment district..

the whole miami economy will benefit..

Not from the design district to downtown. And yet, some would compare the costs and utility of streetcars to metrorail, an aples and oranges coparison if ever there was one.

That our county officials have fast tracked the streetcar, while sabotaging the Orange metrorail line (whether on purpose, or by accident, one can never tell), speaks volumes about why we have only 20 percent of the system we need here in Miami dade.

That’s why I’ve always referred to the Miami streetcar, and the Baylink project before it, as the 20% solution. Because it would be guaranteed to keep our transit system inadequate, by substituting a cosmetically pleasing streetcar or lightrail system for what we really need.

When a city needs a real rapid transit system, nothing else will do. And miami needs METRORAIL!

Comparing Miami and San Francisco in a historical context as Carlos has done is great if you’re writing a position paper on why SF grew up denser and more transit-oriented than Miami, but it does little to advance your argument that the proposed Miami streetcar project shouldn’t be built (especially considering that I used SF to address a natural disaster argument, not a one-to-one comparison between the two cities and their transit-orientation).

Another question I want to ask everyone here: did you actually read the Miami Streetcar report or HDR Bay Link report that I have hyperlinked in the article? Don’t you think it’s a little weird that in every case, an urban planning firm of some sort has recommended streetcars?

Moreover, Carlos, are you familiar with Portland, Oregon’s success with streetcars? That is a city that is far less dense than Miami, didn’t mature in any way similar to San Francisco, yet is now an international model for streetcar growth and the transit oriented development that accompanies it. Addressing a few more of your points:

→ Are you aware that about a dozen cities in the US are currently planning or implementing streetcar systems? Most of these cities aren’t as dense as Miami (which is actually the 6th densest city in the US with a population greater than 350,000), yet are still moving ahead in favor of streetcars. Do you think that all of these cities and urban planners are out of their minds?

→ “The streetcars of SF have always been there”. No they haven’t. Once they were built, people had to adjust to living with them just like any other city with any other new transportation infrastructure.

→ “S.F. is more like a west-coast Manhattan. Because it was mostly constructed in the 19th century (and yes, I know about the earthquake), it was constructed for people without cars. But Miami, like L.A., was mostly developed after the car had been invented, which is why streetcars don’t really work in these cities.”

Sure it was, but after 100 years of autocentric transportation policy, San Francisco has changed a lot, just like NYC, Boston, Philly, and other industrial cities that initially matured in a transit-oriented fashion. Despite the high densities and large transit infrastructure, San Franciscans struggle everyday battling cars and the effects of car-oriented growth, so it’s wrong to assume that just because the city relied on transit long ago that it inherently means it should still function like that or even that it always will. Regarding the “streetcars not working in these cities” quote, I think you’re overlooking some key points. The proposed routes for the Miami Streetcar travel through two of the densest corridors in the region. These are places of relatively high population and job density, which screams demand for reliable, quality transit. It’s not like we’re talking about a random streetcar line out on Galloway Rd. or something. Plus, I’m not sure you realize this, but the City of Miami is one of the densest major cities in the US.

→ “We need rapid transit. Something speedy and something that will enable passengers to travel over the gridlock.”

Of course we need rapid transit – and we’re getting it. MDT is trying to expand three routes; the Earlington Heights-MIC connector, the North Corridor (Orange line), and the East-West Line. The North Corridor and the East-West Corridor are two 10+ mile long heavy rail rapid transit lines. Believe it or not, it’s actually a big deal for a city/metro to be pursuing heavy rail expansion like that in today’s funding environment. The vast majority of cities seeking federal mass transit funding are doing so for LRT, Streetcars, and BRT. This puts Miami on par with cities like NYC and D.C. believe it or not – at this point all three cities are expanding their heavy rail rapid transit at comparable rates (e.g. 2nd ave subway & 7 line extension in NYC, Purple line near D.C.). My point is, as one of the other commenters pointed out, the feds don’t give out much money to transit (shamefully) and therefore are very stingy about giving any money toward heavy rail rapid transit because it is so costly. It’s a shame, believe me, but it’s reality for now and planners must deal with it accordingly. That means pursuing “lighter” forms of transit, such as LRT and Streetcars, which most major cities across the country are currently doing.

→ “A streetcar in Miami will mostly be a novelty. Hell, everything is a novelty down here. This is a city that is constantly reinventing itself.”

How do those statements figure into a rational argument for or against the Miami Streetcar line?

→ “This is a city that has always tried to emulate the bigger, more cosmopolitan cities, like NY, Chicago, SF and LA.

In this case, it’s trying to emulate SF.”

Miami is not trying to emulate San Francisco with its streetcar (I’d really like to see any evidence of that). If there’s any city you could argue it’s trying to emulate, it’s Portland. This is not just because of the model Portland has been with streetcar growth, but also because the City hired Charles Hales, former Portalnd City Council member, engineer, and leader of the streetcar renaissance in Portland. Either way, Miami is in lockstep with national trends, so it’s not fair to cherry pick a city to compare Miami’s streetcar building efforts to without any evidence.

→ “But the difference between Miami and SF is that nobody is willing to give up their car. Everybody expects everybody else to give up their car.”

You may have a valid point here, and it’s one of the more frustrating issues to deal with. But again, the comparison between Miami and SF is just not valid for this argument. More importantly though, if not a streetcar line, and if it’s completely out of the question to expand another Metrorail line (or two) over the proposed routes, then what’s the solution? Business as usual? Everyone keep driving everywhere? That’s completely unsustainable and terrible policy. The City of Perth, Australia was in a very similar position Miami is now 25-30 years ago. People were saying the same thing, “transit won’t work here”, “people won’t give up their cars”, etc. However, Perth refused to go on with the car-oriented business-as-usual scenario. Planners and officials pushed forward and have had incredible success transforming the city into a more pedestrian and transit-oriented place. The same can happen in Miami, it will just take some optimism, good policy, and a commitment to transit. Frankly we have little choice if we want to be a viable 21st century city. I recommend watching the videos “Auckland, City of Cars” we posted last week (you can find them through our search feature on the top left of the page).

→ “Streetcars in Miami would be a total failure. It would only cater to those people who live in the corridor east of 1-95.”

OK, nobody is saying that the answer to Miami’s (never mind Miami-Dade’s) traffic congestion, mobility, transit, or livability woes will be magically solved by adding a couple streetcar lines. We’re not saying that blanketing the city/county with only streetcar lines is the answer. What we are saying is that in this particular context, along the proposed routes, the streetcar is the best and most feasible transit option available. So yes, the main line being proposed will indeed primarily cater to people living, working, or visiting along the north-south corridor east of I-95. That’s exactly why this line was designed. It’s not much different from complaining that a new Metrorail line will primarily cater to the people along the route. Well, yeah, of course it will.

→ “The only difference that a streetcar would be from the current bus system is that it would be “cooler” to take it.

No no no. We’ve explained this maybe a hundred times before, so please, please take it upon yourself to read the HDR report I linked to in this post.

Like the trolleys we have in Coral Gables. They’re nothing but a fucking bus, but they don’t look like a bus, so people can ride them and not be ashamed.”

→ Not really. The Coral Gables trolley is “successful” because A) it’s free; and B) it runs a predictable route along one of Miami-Dade’s largest (and fastest-growing) job and housing corridors. It probably helps that they are easily distinguishable from Metrobus, but other forms of transit could be much, much more successful along that corridor as well.

→ “Yes, that’s how people are down here. Very superficial.

This is no S.F. And that is too bad.

Cause S.F. is one of the best cities in the world.”

Even though none of this pertains to an argument for or against the proposed Miami Streetcar, we finally agree that people can be very superficial in Miami. We also agree that Miami is no San Francisco, and that SF is one of the world’s great cities. So wouldn’t it be to Miami’s benefit, whether its intended goal or not, to try and physically and culturally (transit culture) resemble SF a little more?

Arm- Many of the world’s best transit systems utilize multiple platforms (Vienna: 50+ Streetcar lines, 5 Subway Lines, 1 LRT, Multiple Commuter Rail Lines, Buses and waterways)(London: Heavy Rail (Tube), Commuter Rail, LRT, and Buses.) The variety of transit choices should not be seen as a negative trait when they can all be combined to create a useful system. Diffent parts of cities call for different types of Transit. Sadly, the fact of the matter is that in today’s political world, there simply isn’t the funding available to expand two antiquated, underutilized, and very expensive forms of urban transit such as Metrorail and metromover. The details you speak of are very clear: there will be 43 stations, 20,000+ Riders daily, a dedicated ROW along the MacArthur Causeway, Shared stops and tracks with the Miami Streetcar in Downtown creating a core “inner loop”, signalization management, etc. Approximately 50% of Miami Beach residents do not use a car for daily travel needs and various studies (HDR, Parsons, and Corradino) have shown that congestion on the beach will reach intoleable levels by 2011. How much more eveidence do you need to justify this project?

eric- Thanks for visiting and finally commenting. I think what many people fail to understand about streetcars is exactly what you mentioned, these aren’t rapid transit systems, they’re URBAN transit systems designed to enable people to move around an urban core with out needing a vehicle.

Carlos- There are numerous lessons our area can learn from SF, don’t be so quick to discredit it. Rapid transit is great, for sprawled out areas with distinct centers. But how can we expect people to commute on rails if don’t have a dense urban core where commuting is easy to begin with? Miami isn’t as sprawled as LA, yet. Furthermore, as I mentioned above, The Streetcar is not designed to accomodate riders in kendall, Homestead, Pinecrest, or any other suburban bedroom community; its a transportation system for our urban centers, places where people will have the option to live lives not restricted by the constraints of owning a vehicle. It’s an option, not a requirement. Plus rails bring about land use changes where buses cannot…

“It would only cater to those people who live in the corridor east of 1-95.”

Precisely! That’s the point! The Miami streetcar system is often misunderstood because subrubanites wonder how it will help them- it won’t and isn’t intended to because it’s a city of Miami project for a City of Miami Problem: Urban mobility.

Anon #1- The Metromover projects of the 1960s were one of the biggest mistakes the federal government made. It was poorly analyzed and hastily inplemented to cover up for GM’s actions in ripping apart most of the streetcar lines accross the country.

Anon #2- I hear ya. It’s riddled with problems but it still will always serve a limited role in our downtown.