Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Human League Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It is cheaper than building a Metro
> > and is probably the best use of money in that
> > corridor.
>
> Light rail systems are definitely much less
> expensive than heavy rail systems such as Metro.
> Whether they are the best use of money is the
> debatable point. I believe two busses would have
> the same capacity as the proposed streetcars.
> Busses have an advantage in being able to go where
> the streets are, at least for the most part. That
> means that the routes could be easily extended or
> changed depending on user demand or conditions.
>
> Busses however have a poorer image than
> streetcars. This means they are less likely to be
> used by middle or upper income individuals who in
> turn might generate a demand for more upscale
> housing and other development along the Columbia
> Pike corridor. If you look at the Columbia Pike
> website,
>
http://www.columbiapikeva.us/streetcar-transit/ ,
> they don't spend much space extolling the virtues
> of streetcars as vehicles for transportation.
> Most of the arguments are for the development
> potential. I do like the picture of the train in
> front of the Arlington Theatre, although I doubt
> it or any of those other buildings would survive
> the redevelopment.
I'm not a Bill N. cheerleader, but another excellent point. Buses do indeed suffer an image problem, whether related to real issues like unreliability and pollution (at least formerly) or essentially being the transit option mostly for the poor. And by that except in only some cases are generally rejected by the middle class as a true form of transit for consistent use.
Rather, in this case it's seen as a catalyst for redevelopment of that neighborhood, whether by property owners looking to cash in or residents for the longer term looking for something unique and novel for their neighborhood.