Archive for the 'Frank Rollason' Category

Streetcar Discussions, Part 2

Published
by
Gabriel Lopez-Bernal
on February 7, 2007
in Frank Rollason, Miami, Miami-Dade County, Sarnoff, Streetcar, Traffic and Transit
. 8 Comments

My lengthy reply to Mr. Frank Rollason:

Frank,

It’s great to finally get some discussion going on this critical issue with some of Miami’s more prominent individuals such as yourself. I followed the election closely and was hoping that your campaign would have taken you a bit further.

The streetcar issue is a difficult situation to address. I’ve given this idea much thought and have tried to analyze its’ impact from all different angles. In the end, I concede that I am a bit of a realist when it comes to this sort of development but I find it difficult to think otherwise especially when I’ve witnessed and studied similar projects rise flawlessly around the United States and the World.

Placing cost the cost of the streetcar aside for a second, I’d like to first discuss the impact that the streetcar would have on the city, its residents, and the future of both.

Development:

As I mentioned previously, the streetcar would serve as an economic engine for the city, steering development along its corridor. You informed me that residents are against further development, a fact which I have come to understand from their perspective, seeing that all upcoming development within their neighborhoods is likely being improperly constructed to suit the needs of urban living elements such as the streetcar (see: New Urbanism.) Their stance isn’t unwarranted, seeing how terribly these buildings were designed and then approved by the hapless commission. Growth, however, is inevitable in every city. A stagnant growth stance by any municipality will in the long run lead to further economic strife for both the city and residents. I get the feeling that much of the anti-growth sentiment can be attributed to the lack of reasonable transportation options to offset the increase in traffic, general regulatory abuse by the city commission to approve every building, and overall disregard by the developers. Not building the streetcar, the area we’ll continue to witness truly devastating projects (ie. 2222 Biscayne, Bayview Market) rise throughout the district. A streetcar combined with the appropriate rezoning would severely alter the type and context of the development which will inevitably continue in the area. By placing better constraints on development within a close boundary of the corridor, I feel that the area citizens will fully benefit from the streetcar, truly creating an environment (detailed in this herald article from 2002) where people can live without the burden of owning an automobile. (Note: the constraints that I speak of are used in various municipalities and include: minimal parking requirements for buildings within a stated distance of the transit corridor, required building/street interaction elements like covered porticos and ground level retail, on street municipal parking, pedestrian-only zones, etc.) I would not endorse the streetcar if such constraints were not enacted simultaneously in order to guarantee its success.

The streetcar is much more than simply another form of transportation; it’s a critical piece of Miami 21 and a vital method of reconstructing our city in manner which caters to humans rather than vehicles.

Economically:

Going along with the constraints I mentioned above, the economic benefit that the streetcar would provide the city is well worth more than its initial costs. Placing constrictions on developments within the corridor such as requirements for affordable housing in the form of rental units would not be unreasonable. Using principles outlined in Miami 21, the city can rezone the corridor to include areas which would favor the construction of mid-density and lower priced rental units or condominiums. The affordable housing units would be cheaper to develop given the lower parking constraints and thus construction costs while eliminating the burden of relying on a vehicle for some of the city’s neediest constituents.

The $200 Million price tag is certain to go up, a fact we can both easily agree upon. However, the state (according to recent reports) would front half the costs leaving the rest to be divided among the city and the county. The city has received $42 Million thus far from its’ share of the PTP, money which must be used for city transit options. MDT could also be sought to fund part of the streetcar. Given that a significant sum of the initial cost of streetcars nationwide is attributed to finding a facility to house and maintain the vehicles, the city could look to partner with MDT to build a joint facility which could accommodate the Miami streetcars as well as the upcoming Baylink cars, saving both agencies large sums of money in the long term. All in all, I’m not saying or thinking that any of this will be easy to accomplish, considering the limited discussion which regularly occurs between the city and county, but, it is definitely a reasonable project which in reality would not require such a grave commitment on the part of the city.

Traffic Concerns:

Traffic will only continue to get worse within the city, plain and simple. With the new developments rising and the plethora of interest remaining in the neighborhood, developers are going to continue to exploit the neighborhood. We’re going to continue to see buildings situated on massive parking pedestals and we will soon witness gridlock bring many streets to a grinding halt.

Running the streetcar in a lane of traffic would actually improve traffic flows along the corridors. Through improved signal timing and using technology pioneered in Toronto back in 1991 with signal priority timing, the corridor would feature advanced ITS which is endorsed by the USDOT. The Toronto study found that total corridor delay was reduced by 35% (better than with bus signal priority timing) and there were no significant impacts on side street queue delays.

The Bus “Alternative”

From the American Public Transportation Association:

The Transportation Research Board Special Report No. 1221, “Impact on Transit Patronage of Cessation or Inauguration of Rail Service” dated 1989, and authored by transportation researcher Edson L. Tennsyson concluded the following:

“Because transit use is a function of travel time, fare, frequency of service, population, and density, increased transit use can not be attributed to rail transit when these other factors are improved. When these service conditions are equal, it is evident that rail transit is likely to attract from 34 to 43 percent more riders than will equivalent bus service. The data do not provide explanations for this phenomenon, but other studies and reports suggest that the clearly identifiable rail route; delineated stops that are often protected; more stable, safer, and more comfortable vehicles; freedom from fumes and excessive noise; and more generous vehicle dimensions may all be factors.”

Click on this link, Transportation Research Record 1221, for the full text of this research report.

Additional Facts:

  • Currently there are 26 existing streetcar/trolley lines operating in the United States and Canada with a whopping 61 other cities actively planning streetcar initiatives. There are over 200 municipalities vying for federal funding leaving funds scarce and competition fierce (Source APTA.)
  • Since 1995, public transit ridership has expanded 25 percent (to 9.7 billion trips in 2005). From 25 in 2000, the country’s fixed-guideway (rail or bus) transit systems are likely to grow to 42 by 2030, adding 720 stations to today’s total of 3,349.
  • Streetcars are experiencing a revival worldwide with new lines opening in Washington DC, Buenos Aires, Paris, and Bilbao, just to name a few…
  • Streetcars were not dismantled due to a lack of ridership, many were dismantled by GM to push for the expansion of roads and highways…

Like I stated at the beginning, I may suffer from viewing things in an idealized fashion but the facts to support streetcars in Miami abound. I realize it will take a large amount of municipal responsibility and government oversight (something we have been known to skimp on in the past) to fully realize the maximum potential this project has to offer the city and constituents. The current arguments against the streetcar are weak, to place it as mildly as possible. Hurricane concerns can be overcome, development can (and should) be better controlled, and construction costs should not run amuck with city’s treasury. The time has come for the city to take transportation initiatives into its own hands to better provide for the upcoming growth we will continue to experience. Thank you for your time, I hope we can continue to discuss this topic further. I have many more reasons why you should support the streetcar including environmental concerns, job opportunities, and tourism…

Let me know if I may share this discourse with the readers of TransitMiami.com…

Regards,
Gabriel J. Lopez-Bernal

Streetcar Discussions

Published
by
Gabriel Lopez-Bernal
on February 7, 2007
in Frank Rollason, Miami, Miami-Dade County, Sarnoff, Streetcar and Transit
. 6 Comments
Sorry about the delay, I have been addressing the streetcar issue with several individuals via e-mail. With the permission of Frank Rollason, I will share my discussions with him over the issue here on the website. Here were his initial thoughts on the streetcar initiative, my thoughts will follow later today:

Gabriel,

I am contacting you just to give another perspective on the proposed streetcar project. I was an unsuccessful candidate for the commission office that Marc Sarnoff now occupies. We both opposed the streetcar project as part of our campaign platforms. My position has not changed. Previous to running for office, I was the Executive Director for two City CRAs through which a large portion of the system would run and from which the City was looking for funding. There is a huge anti-development mentality presently existing in the residential communities of Miami especially in the Upper Eastside. The proposed streetcar project would do exactly what you speak of – encourage additional development along the streetcar corridor. It’s not an issue of whether the streetcar is needed or not; it is an issue of future development and the community has said enough is enough. On top of this, one must recognize that more and more the CRAs’ funds are being siphoned off for projects deemed for the well-to-do and having no benefit for the affordable housing group. One cannot take this project out of context from the other projects for which CRA funds are being sought – increasing commitment to the new Performing Arts Center, a seaport tunnel, improvements to a park slated to house two museums, and a new baseball stadium. All of these cause huge community opposition for the use of CRA funds when affordable housing goes largely ignored. You speak in the pure scheme of planning for development and here, in the City of Miami, the development has already run amuck with little or no planning and no concern for traffic and infrastructure needs. Now, to suggest a streetcar project that mostly serves underdeveloped areas instead of already existing hi-rise residential units is looked at as another example of poor planning and will cause only what you suggest – more hi-rises along the streetcar corridor.

Nothing is as simple as you lay it out because there are always other issues which are impacted, Frank.

Snowed in at Denver

Published
by
Gabriel Lopez-Bernal
on December 26, 2006
in Airport, Denver, Frank Rollason and Miami
. 0 Comments

Here is a letter I received from Miami businessman Frank Rollason to the Miami Herald regarding his recent experience snowed in at Denver’s Airport. Looks like Tancredo shouldn’t throw stones…

Letter to the Miami Herald Editor:

After just spending three miserable days and two nights in the Denver International Airport, I would suggest that Congressman Tom Tancredo spend a little time at home visiting his own “reservation” to see what “Third World” is really like. First, we have an airline domiciled in Denver (United/TED) which flew us into the Denver Airport from Miami knowing full well that the airport was being shut down because of the blizzard; they should have alerted those in Miami whose final destination was not Denver so that other arrangements could be made. In our case, the stop in Denver was for a connecting flight to Honolulu for a 10-day holiday cruise which we did not make. We spent two nights in the airport with virtually no assistance from the airline and absolutely no assistance from the Airport Administration. The outside temperature was well below freezing and the air conditioning on the inside was kept very cold pouring out very cold air starting about 4:00am each day. They also kept all the bright ceiling lights on and the TV blasting all through the night – sort of like being in jail, I would imagine. An extra goodie was the every half hour announcement on the PA system that the airport was closed because of the blizzard. I guess this was for the benefit of the Denver residents who are too stupid not to move out of this frozen tundra state to say like a tropical oasis like Miami. On the first day, we were able to get a very light blanket from the plane as well as a little pillow and those were our provisions for the first night. The food court did stay open and that was great. Many of their employees were stranded, too, and they had to flop on the floor the same as the travelers which tells me their management does not care too much about their employees. In addition, as hundreds of people were sleeping on the floor at the gates and several thousand more in the main terminal, we were pretty much on our own to figure out what to do. No one came to visit during the evening hours from the airline or the airport. On the second night, the airport provided some folding cots for those who were elderly or handicapped – a good thing. These cots take a lot of storage room. What they should consider is stocking up on the slim foam workout mats which could be stacked by the hundreds in relatively small spaces for such an occurrence; I would think if the Airport Administrator spent one night on the concrete or commercial carpet over concrete floor, he or she would recognize the problem. I know, in Miami, we have made provisions for people stranded in both the airport and the sea port, so I would say that Miami is not Third World in this respect and I would not consider Denver Third World, either. Instead, Denver is Bush League which is not even up to the level of Third World! So, Congressman Tancredo, I suggest you remove your head from your posterior and see what you can get done in your own state when problems arise; after all, who would ever expect a blizzard in Denver or people being stranded at the airport? It’s like Miami not being prepared for a Hurricane – we are and Denver is not and that just about sums it up. By the way, please don’t anyone invite me to Denver – the weather sucks and the people in charge of things are not too bright!

Frank Rollason