The streetcar line planned for Salt Lake City has faced similar criticism, and even the decade-old Portland streetcar, a project hailed by many supporters for causing a $3.5 billion boost to that city's real estate market, still takes fire from critics who argue that the line's funding would be better spent on projects such as road improvements.
http://www.soapboxmedia.com/features/0607streetcarcomparison.aspx
6 comments:
Clearly, streetcars are for increasing real estate values not for transit riders!
And if you talked to the folks at Portland Streetcar, you'd find that they do say that development was (and is) a major reason for the streetcar.
But as for funding for road improvements, road users should be paying for those. The fact that they don't pay their costs is why it takes streetcars to attract devlopment.
if you click on that link and go to the bottom of the page, you'll find a link for an agency called Tri-Ed:
http://www.northernkentuckyusa.com/Home.aspx
They have a "pretzel" logo just like TriMet's...
But as for funding for road improvements, road users should be paying for those. The fact that they don't pay their costs is why it takes streetcars to attract devlopment.
Unfortunately this is a tired old myth.
In Portland, and this is per the PBOT's Director (as stated in a class I took a couple years ago during a presentation), NO GENERAL FUND DOLLARS (read: income/property taxes) are used to maintain city streets.
If you read the ODOT annual report, the ONLY general fund revenue goes to provide roadside litter pickup, and that is only because the Legislature switched the funding sources for that and to subsidize Amtrak Cascades. (Now Amtrak Cascades gets the custom license plate fees that used to go to litter pickup.)
Washington County does receive some property tax revenues as part of the MSTIP, but the MSTIP is voter approved - overwhelmingly, and multiple times. (Can TriMet claim that about MAX?)
In fact, it takes motorists to pay for the Streetcar as a primary source of its funding is from on-street parking meter fees.
If motorists should be paying for their roads - they already are. Are Streetcar riders paying even for the operational costs (never mind the capital costs?) No - since the Streetcar requires TriMet - and thus residents of Forest Grove to Troutdale and Wilsonville to Sauvie Island - to pay $6 million each year - that's $6 million each year that DOESN'T fund buses in those communities that pay into the taxes. $6 million a year that DOESN'T go towards improving bus stops, new buses, more reliable service, new routes, schedules at each stop, and other amenities.
And there is no legal obligation that TriMet pay into the Portland Streetcar, since TriMet is already providing more than adequate service to the Streetcar area with existing bus and MAX service; further there is no obligation that TriMet fund "Free Rail" service to the detriment to bus riders; there is no obligation for TriMet to pay for the eastside Streetcar loop; there is no law, no obligation, no formula - NOTHING - that states that TriMet had to pay for the Streetcar because of increased density. If that were the case, then there is a lot of explaining as to why there are huge gaps in TriMet's service district with no service - i.e. west Forest Grove, south Sherwood, large parts of Tigard, large parts of Oregon City - that get nothing, yet are forced to pay TriMet taxes for no service.
Streetcar riders/users/property owners need to pay up instead of demanding they get everything on a golden platter without paying for it, and insisting that everyone else pays for it.
In fact, it takes motorists to pay for the Streetcar as a primary source of its funding is from on-street parking meter fees.
The city can do what it wants with revenues from renting public space to people's cars. And what if some of that parking demand comes from development done as a result of the streetcar?
$6 million each year
Than why does this document say they only get $3.2 million from TriMet? Moreover, TriMet's said that that they only give the streetcar what it would cost to "operate buses at policy and demand driven headways".
And the FY2012 Approved Budget says that funding for the eastside portion of the streetcar will come from the payroll tax increase--money that might not be there if it wasn't for promises of new projects and services. Moreover, it also says that the commitment was made before the recession, when money wasn't such an issue.
Unfortunately this is a tired old myth.
So, are drivers contributing to the Big Pipe and other stormwater projects that help treat street runoff?
Do drivers pay for most parking, much of which is government-mandated (including in Tigard) or encouraged (by taxing parking lots at a low rate)?
Is it responsible for Washington County not to use a tax (like the gas tax) for the MSTIP that is linked to use?
Do drivers pay for the costs of defending oil supplies? (And transit can switch to electricity or other sources)
Do drivers pay for the street fees that many cities (including Tigard) have?
What about government policies that discourage other options besides driving (see PDF page 77 of the Transit Investment Plan)?
Post a Comment