Fort Worthology » transportation

Smart Pro-Streetcar Op-Ed Shows Up in Star-Telegram

Kevin Buchanan — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:17:44 +0000

A pro-streetcar op-ed has appeared in the Star-Telegram. Written by Mike Brennan, planner at Fort Worth South, Inc., the op-ed lays out the case for the streetcar in well-reasoned terms, including directly taking on the criticisms from both the Star-Telegram Editorial Board and certain members of the City Council. An excerpt:

It’s not “political spin” or “flowery language” to cite the documented economic effects of a modern streetcar system; there is irrefutable empirical evidence from streetcar cities, including those visited by council members and other city leaders two years ago.

To many, before this discussion started, a return of the streetcar sounded more like a tourism gimmick than a game-changing modern transit system. Two years into the discussion, however, most of us actively working to revitalize our central city would never call the proposed modern streetcar a gimmick. We have seen how the competitive advantages of walkable, transit-oriented urbanism have returned and how modern streetcar systems are transforming central cities into sustainable economic engines.

Read the rest of the op-ed here.

Charlotte Observer – Streetcar is Sound Strategy, not Silly Frill

Kevin Buchanan — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:15:47 +0000

Couldn’t help but notice this editorial from the Charlotte Observer’s editorial board on their own modern streetcar project. Note the similarities in the issues, right down to the FTA grant win – and contrast the Observer’s forward-looking, hopeful, and progress-oriented attitude with that displayed by the Star-Telegram’s editorial board in their own misleading anti-streetcar editorials.

Our peer cities are getting it. It would be nice if the Star-Telegram and certain City Council members didn’t seem to be OK with Fort Worth falling behind in competition with our peer cities for the hearts, minds, and dollars of the future by trying to put a stop to our own project.

Long-term, Charlotte’s vision must be to lure denser, more cost-effective development to areas with already-built infrastructure. Low-density sprawl sucks up large sums of public money to extend sewer lines, roads and public services over wider expanses.

The streetcar may look like a frill. It isn’t. It’s a fiscally sound investment, and part of a prudent long-range strategy.

Fort Worth Weekly on Streetcar Debate

Kevin Buchanan — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:29:50 +0000

Leave it to the non-Star-Telegram sources to really get the sharp point-of-view on the streetcar issue – Dan McGraw in the Fort Worth Weekly has a great story this week about the streetcar and the FTA funding debate, taking head-on the constant Tower 55 misdirection and other issues.

A few choice excerpts:

Jordan and some others on the council say the city has more pressing transportation needs. But the city has received recommendations from three council-appointed committees during the past three years, all of which were in favor of building a modern urban streetcar system. The council — as well as the planning and development staff — have supported the streetcar idea at every turn in the process.

Dan also addresses the constant “we don’t even know where the streetcar will go yet” refrain from Councilman Jordan and others like the S-T:

“We all know that [Tower 55] is the number-one priority for this city,” Jordan said. “Accepting this grant puts us in a strange predicament, because we don’t know if we need streetcars, we don’t know where they go or how we are going to pay for them.”

However, consultants have made clear recommendations on streetcar routes, public support for streetcars is high, and little of the money needed to fund the streetcar project would come from the city’s cash-strapped general fund.

And on funding:

Suggestions that local streetcar funding would worsen the city’s budget problems seem questionable. The plan is to fund most of the city’s share of streetcar costs with revenue from Tax Increment Finance [TIF] districts downtown and on the Near South Side.

TIFs freeze property values at a base level, and that taxable value goes into the city general fund. When property values rise above that base level, the extra tax revenue stays in the district, to be used for public infrastructure improvements. The TIF dollars could never be used to improve Tower 55 or fund commuter rail.

Kudos to council member Sal Espino, who (despite the Star-Telegram trying to tell us that the entire council thinks Tower 55 is a higher priority) clearly understands how the streetcar will benefit the city’s growth:

For council member Sal Espino, there is a larger issue involved. “Part of the reason we are in this huge budget deficit is that we have promoted suburban sprawl development through the years, and … doing infrastructure for those projects is very expensive,” he said. “Doing urban village developments with existing infrastructure is a much better investment, and streetcars are a part of that.

“We can’t just build more roads all the time,” Espino said.

The entire article is really nicely done. Go read Dan’s article – and definitely compare and contrast the attitude coming from our city’s weekly to that of the Star-Telegram’s Editorial Board.

Star-Telegram Publishes Yet Another Misleading, Untruthful Anti-Streetcar Editorial

Kevin Buchanan — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:18:00 +0000

It’s getting to be almost impressive, the way the Star-Telegram keeps pumping out anti-streetcar editorials that continuously attempt to mislead and misinform its readership. The latest, available here, attempts another assault on the city’s winning FTA grant and continues to make red-herring ties to the Tower 55 project.

A lot of this ground was previously shown false in the last two pieces on misleading S-T editorials, here and here. Let’s dip into a few specifics of this latest one, though.

The city has been studying the potential benefits and affordability of streetcars, even hiring a consultant at a cost of more than $800,000. The trouble is that the consultant’s work will not be completed until November.

It is amazing how completely and utterly ignorant of this situation the Star-Telegram’s Editorial Board is, yet they continue to use their position of power to spread misinformation.

Yes, the first two phases of the HDR study won’t be done until November. What the Star-Telegram isn’t telling you, either due to ignorance or blatant lying, is that the FTA knows this. They city has already told them. They’re OK with it. It isn’t a problem for the FTA. The Star-Telegram’s Editorial Board is trying to paint this as some sort of rush into the streetcar project and an attempt to dupe the FTA, but the truth is very different.

FTA knows our study’s not done. That isn’t an issue. The Star-Telegram’s Editorial Board is being incredibly misleading.

Might the consultant be bringing a very fruitful money tree to help pay for this dream?

This isn’t difficult, Star-Telegram Editorial Board. HDR’s study will identify good funding sources, but there are already likely sources identified – TIF districts in Downtown and the Near Southside, for one example. Potential Public Improvement Districts are another example. The streetcar project will be just like every other transportation project in town – a variety of funding sources, layered together. And once again, it’s very unlikely to require money from the general fund.

Morris and the council have declared another transportation project to be a higher priority than streetcars. They want the freight rail bottleneck known as Tower 55 on the southeast corner of downtown to be fixed. It causes trains to be backed up for miles, shutting off some neighborhoods from emergency services and causing children to crawl under or between rail cars to get to school.

Next month, the Texas Department of Transportation is expected to apply for a $58.4 million federal grant for the $93.7 million project. The BNSF and Union Pacific railroads have pledged $32.8 million, leaving $5 million to be split by Fort Worth and the council of governments.

Oh, good, Tower 55 again! The misleading commentary never stops.

First, it’s a bit misleading to even say NCTCOG’s Michael Morris and “the council” thinks Tower 55 is a higher priority – I wouldn’t call that a universally held viewpoint at City Hall. In fact, at the very meeting the Star-Telegram is referencing, NCTCOG pointed out that Tower 55, commuter rail, and the streetcar were each critical components of the transportation system, equally important to the city’s mobility. They compared them to the legs of a stool.

Even so, let’s look at this Tower 55 thing again.

Tower 55 will not be “fixed” by the upcoming project listed in the editorial. Not even close. The project they’re talking about is a small assortment of at-grade improvements to the rail crossing and its approaches. While there will be some benefits from it, Tower 55 won’t be “fixed” at all. That’s going to take years (decades, even) and billions upon billions of dollars to build one of the two trenches proposed to finally eliminate the at-grade crossing. So, this attempt to paint the streetcar as a threat to “fixing” Tower 55 falls apart right off the bat, because this is no fix to Tower 55.

That’s a minor point, though, compared to the bigger lie – either of omission or commission – the Star-Telegram Editorial Board is engaging in here.

That lie is that the streetcar is some kind of threat – funding or otherwise – to Tower 55. The reality is that they have nothing to do with each other.

It’s especially galling, considering that at the meeting where Michael Morris of the North Central Texas Council of Governments made the talk about the streetcar’s FTA grant, the very same meeting that the Star-Telegram is ranting mindlessly about here, Morris and city staff affirmed that Tower 55 and the streetcar aren’t using the same funding sources. They aren’t competing for funds. Yet, the Star-Telegram Editorial Board (along with certain council members like Jungus Jordan) are continuously attempting to paint the picture that they will be competing for funds.

It’s like talking to a fence post. The Star-Telegram Editorial Board (and other naysayers) keeps bringing up Tower 55 as a reason not to do the streetcar, but there’s nothing in Tower 55 that affects the streetcar, and vice-versa. It’s complete and utter misdirection on their part.

Tower 55 is using X pots of money, and the streetcar will use Y pots of money. Those TIF funds that will likely form a major component of streetcar funding can’t even be used for Tower 55. Michael Morris himself said that the streetcar’s most likely funding sources can’t be used for Tower 55.

Funny that the Star-Telegram leaves that part of the meeting out, isn’t it? Either accidentally or intentionally, the Star-Telegram Editorial Board is being untruthful to the citizens of Fort Worth.

Considering how certain council members and the S-T Editorial Board keep pushing the same misleading, inaccurate points time and time again, it makes one wonder who’s behind all this negativity and can’t-do attitude.

Send the letter if you must, council members. Be polite and grateful for being chosen for the grant. Reiterate how important the Tower 55 project is. But most of all, be honest. Make it very clear that Fort Worth won’t know for months whether streetcars are or will be right for the city.

And since Tower 55 isn’t competing for funds with the streetcar, and the FTA already knows – and is perfectly fine with – the HDR study not coming out until November, this entire editorial is pretty much just pointless spreading of fear, uncertainty, and doubt!

Well-done once again, Star-Telegram Editorial Board.

Near Southside Bike Parking Improvement Plan Progress

Kevin Buchanan — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:47:33 +0000

You may recall that not long ago, we announced a major new bike parking improvement plan for the Near Southside. This project is near and dear to our hearts, because we’re directly part of it – the Near Southside Bike Parking Improvement Plan is a joint venture of Fort Worth South, Inc., Trinity Bicycles, and Fort Worthology.

We’ve selected numerous sites across the Near Southside for a dramatic increase in available bike parking. Phase One is funded and the city’s already on-board, and now we’ve made some more progress.

We met recently with our contractor, Fort Construction, to do measurements for the installation. Trinity Bicycles made a template of the rack mounts, and we chalked out the dimensions of the rack groupings, using the sidewalk in front of Spiral Diner as our test case. As mentioned before, the racks that will be installed are simple “staple” racks, more cost-effective and more immediately recognizable as bike racks than the long-standing Texas-star “lollipop” racks previously installed by the city.

While we’re not completely ready to announce how many racks will be installed in Phase One total, it’s looking like our initial estimates are going to be pretty close, so there is going to be a huge increase in bike parking for the Near Southside. The desire, subject to final figures and site-specific considerations, is to have a minimum of three racks at each location, and up to five racks in higher-demand spots. That’ll mean parking for 6-10 bikes per location, at a wide range of popular Near Southside destinations. We’re also going to save the lollipop racks and are looking into using them to fill out some lower-demand parts of the district later on.

With our contractor on-board, we’re also starting to order the racks themselves, and are in process of getting permits with the city. We’re hoping that it won’t be much longer before you’ll start to see some great new bike parking infrastructure going up all over the Near Southside.

We’re really thrilled to be a part of this project, and can’t wait to show how things progress.

Streetfilms – Cycling Copenhagen through North American Eyes

Kevin Buchanan — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:34:20 +0000

Streetfilms presents a look at the cycling world of Copenhagen, as seen through North American eyes. This is an extra-long Streetfilm, but it’s well worth your time. Big thanks to Clarence Eckerson, Jr. for his work on this one. Clarence’s description follows:

“While Streetfilms was in Copenhagen for the Velo-City 2010 conference, of course we wanted to showcase its biking greatness. But we were also looking to take a different perspective then all the myriad other videos out there. Since there were an abundance of advocates, planners, and city transportation officials attending from the U.S. and Canada, we thought it’d be awesome to get their reactions to the city’s built environment and compare to bicycling conditions in their own cities.

If you’ve never seen footage of the Copenhagen people riding bikes during rush hour – get ready – it’s quite a site, as nearly 38% of all transportation trips in Copenhagen are done by bike. With plenty of safe, bicycle infrastructure (including hundreds of miles of physically separated cycletracks) its no wonder that you see all kinds of people on bikes everywhere. 55% of all riders are female, and you see kids as young as 3 or 4 riding with packs of adults.

Much thanks to the nearly two dozen folks who talked to us for this piece. You’ll hear astute reflections from folks like Jeff Mapes (author of “Pedaling Revolution“), Martha Roskowski (Program Manager, GO Boulder), Andy Clarke (President, League of American Bicyclists), Andy Thornley (Program Director, San Francisco Bike Coalition) and Tim Blumenthal (President, Bikes Belong) and Yvonne Bambrick (Executive Director, Toronto’s Cyclists Union) just to name drop a few of the megastars.”

Star-Telegram Publishes Bizarre, Vaguely Incomprehensible Anti-Streetcar Editorial. Also, the Sky is Blue.

Kevin Buchanan — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:43:36 +0000

Enough people have been asking about this, a bizarre anti-streetcar editorial by the Star-Telegram’s Mike Norman, that we had to at least acknowledge it.

Mike Norman is the Star-Telegram’s editorial director for Arlington and Northeast Tarrant County, so obviously he has a keen, rapier-sharp understanding of central city transit, walkable development, and urban design issues. In this editorial, he rolls on the usual 22-inch chrome wheels of the Star-Telegram Editorial Board’s streetcar editorials – misrepresentation of how TIF districts work, tired old canards about people paying for the streetcar when they aren’t even in its area (I’m glad he points this out, since there are certainly no road or highway projects in the Metroplex that are payed for with funds from people who live nowhere near them and will never use them), and the like. Same story, different day, in other words. We figure you’re all capable of reading our last post on the subject, so why rehash things? There’s plenty of more cheery stuff we could be writing about.

What is unique to Norman’s piece, though, is the tasty chocolate glaze of juvenile, condescending sarcasm he layers on top of the meal for you. This 28-year veteran of the Star-Telegram takes the opportunity to mock young creatives and professionals, classic walkable neighborhoods, and more using the sort of writing that wouldn’t pass muster in a high-school English class.

A few choice examples – we’re not above a bit of snark ourselves:

Streetcars! How exciting! How trendy and modern and new!

Hi, folks. I’m Mike Norman, and I’ve just discovered an incredible writing tool: nuance-free sarcasm! It goes down smooth.

So many of the very best cities are getting them.

Yeah, it’s such a hilarious joke that Fort Worth’s peer cities are investing in better transit! What a riot, that we should be aspiring to compete with our peers for future success!

Up-and-coming young professionals and artists and creative people of all sorts love them, you know. It just gives me goose bumps to think that we could have them in Fort Worth.

It’s all so funny, since there’s no point in a city trying to attract up-and-coming young professionals and creatives! Why would anybody want those types in a city?

(And there’s certainly no way that older folks could possibly benefit from better transit!)

I want them. Oh, I so want them. Want means a lot.

Yes, Mike, that’s why people are advocating for the streetcar – they just mindlessly want them, with absolutely no actual reasons or genuine benefits behind that want.

We want to switch Fort Worth’s future development from auto-oriented to pedestrian-friendly, lower-intensity to higher-intensity, commercial corridors to mixed-use districts and sustainable, walkable urbanism.
Oh, I love those words. Don’t they sound so positive and creative, so 21st century, maybe even 22nd? I’m going to look them up on my iPhone.

Mike Norman: on the record with the position that walkable neighborhoods and reduced car dependency are jokes. So, everybody who lives in Downtown Fort Worth, or the 7th Street corridor, or the Near Southside, or Trinity Uptown, or any other part of town where that sort of thing is going on? All of you who like living somewhere where you don’t have to be shackled to a car to get around, where you can have choices like walking, bicycling, or taking transit? All you developers who are building such projects? All you investors putting money into those kinds of places? The Star-Telegram editorial board thinks you’re hilarious and worthy of mockery. Remember that next time you’re thinking of spending some money on a newspaper.

The people in Washington now see that we’re so smart, and they’re going to give us almost $25 million for this circle route.
That kind of settles it, doesn’t it? I mean, $25 million in free money if we can get the circle route under construction in 18 months (that’s what the grant says). Do we even need HDR anymore? I mean, isn’t all this studying pretty much a waste of time when we all know what we want?

It’s really easy to write incendiary editorials when you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

All indications are that the FTA will let us change the route from what we submitted (a skeletal “downtown circulator” which will likely bear no resemblance to the finished product). They’re not going to force us to take money to build an ineffective system – they’d like it to succeed, too. And nobody, in any shape or fashion, has suggested we don’t need HDR anymore – that’s just idiotic.

In other words, this “point” (?) of Mike’s editorial completely falls apart.

And in closing, one last slice of weird, juvenile writing:

The streetcars are going to be so lovely! La-di-da, la-di-da.

That the Star-Telegram Editorial Board has been reduced to this sort of self-parody so early in the process is fascinating to watch.

Star-Telegram Publishes Misinformation-Filled Editorial on Streetcar Grant – A Fort Worthology Editorial

Kevin Buchanan — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 15:30:02 +0000

Note: in a sense, everything here is an “editorial,” I suppose. This one’s admittedly much more acerbic than our usual fare, though – hence the additional qualifier. Ye be warned.

The saga of the Fort Worth Modern Streetcar project’s recent Federal Transit Administration grant win continues. Now, the Star-Telegram has published an editorial from their Editorial Board urging the city to leave the grant money on the table, and questioning the need for a streetcar.

Now, there are plenty of questions about the streetcar project that need to be answered – nobody’s denying that. We’ve got some of the best transit planners in the world – HDR, Inc. – working on them right now. What’s not helpful is the city’s major newspaper’s editorial board publishing such an error-and-misinformation-filled screed against the project while it’s still in its formative stages.

Let’s go through this editorial’s points and see what we can find that’s wrong with it:

On Jan. 26, the City Council authorized an application for the grant. Council members Danny Scarth, Carter Burdette and Jungus Jordan objected, saying the city should research the idea before committing to it.
They were right.

We have been researching it. We’ve been researching it, in one form or another, since the 1970s (as a commenter on last Friday’s post pointed out). We are researching it even further as we speak. There’s an effort by certain council members (a few of which are named above) and certain city leaders (such as people at the S-T’s Ed. Board) to paint this as some sort of “rush” into a streetcar project, when it’s anything but.

And since we’re actively researching it right now, with extremely talented planners, it’s misleading to suggest otherwise and irresponsible of the S-T’s editorial board (can’t be any more specific, since there’s no byline) for them to suggest that there hasn’t been a ton of research and planning already.

(By the way, there was something in Friday’s S-T article about the grant, a quote from Councilman Jungus Jordan that our planning efforts to this point have been by “laymen,” which is just flat-out wrong. The previous streetcar study before the current HDR one, for example, was put together by a group that included professional city planners and developers.)

The city’s share of this project would be $26.8 million.

Wrong – we don’t yet know what the city’s share of the eventual first streetcar line would be, because we aren’t finished selecting and planning what that first line would be. So, the S-T’s editorial board doesn’t know any more than we do. It could be this much, but we don’t know yet, and the editorial board is wrong to say otherwise.

The FTA grant does require a local match, and it seems like there’s been an effort by some to suggest (or at least, not correct the impression) that the local match is $26.8 million, but that is completely factually incorrect. The $25 million Federal grant would require a local match of $6 million – far less than is being suggested. Beyond that, we don’t know yet – and neither does the Star-Telegram’s editorial board, so they have no business trumpeting that figure like it’s a fact to kill progress before we’re even finished.

Part of this is due to the original FTA grant application being for a “downtown circulator” along a specific route, but I know for a fact that conversations with the FTA since the application was made are indicating that Fort Worth should be able to change the specifics of the route and still get the $25 million. The Star-Telegram’s editorial board is assuming we’re locked into that old downtown circulator line, which doesn’t look to be the case.

With the council struggling to make up a $77 million budget shortfall, even to the point of possibly eliminating property tax homestead exemptions and raising the tax rate, the thought of spending millions on a streetcar project is sheer folly.

This is complete and utter misinformation, and it speaks volumes that the S-T’s editorial board is trying to tie streetcar funding to the city’s budget problems. There’s something very intentional behind this. That, or they’re either not paying attention, or don’t care.

As has been said time after time, both here, by the streetcar planners themselves, and by city leaders who actually have a clue, the streetcar is extremely unlikely to require money from the city’s general fund. The exact funding sources are being determined by HDR, but it’s likely that the funds will come from a combination of Tax Increment Finance (TIF) districts, potential Public Improvement Districts, and other such sources outside of the general fund. A TIF, for example, is set up specifically and only for public infrastructure improvements, everything from new sidewalks to streetcar tracks. That doesn’t take money away from swimming pools, police officers, or street maintenance across the city.

The streetcar will likely wind up with various layers of funding, just like every major project in Fort Worth, and it’s very unlikely it’ll take money from the general fund.

And this is also ignoring the economic benefits of the streetcar project – of course, the S-T dismisses those with its next paragraph:

The flowery language about “job opportunities” and “stimulating the redevelopment of walkable urban neighborhoods with a variety of housing choices” is political spin on an idea whose time is not now.

You heard it from the Star-Telegram Editorial Board: talking about job opportunities brought about by the development and investment a streetcar line encourages is mere “flowery language.” I’m wondering at this point if this editorial isn’t some kind of performance piece commenting on the increasing irrelevance of local newspapers. Does the S-T’s editorial board really want to go on record during times of economic stress as saying that encouraging new investment and job growth by investing in a modern transit system is just “flowery language?”

There are businesses and investments right now who have opened in central city Fort Worth in locations they’ve picked specifically because they’re on potential streetcar lines. The economic growth brought about by modern central city rail transit isn’t a fairy tale – it’s been seen across the United States.

What “idea” is job growth a “political spin” on, Star-Telegram Editorial Board? Does that even make sense? It reads more to me like the Star-Telegram Editorial Board is going on the record as being against job growth through investment in better mobility.

The S-T Ed. Board similarly dismisses stimulating growth of walkable urban neighborhoods and providing a range of housing choices for Fort Worth residents. I was unaware that the Star-Telegram’s editorial board was operating through a wormhole from the year 2000, when gas was cheap and free of supply issues and the suburban home-building industry was roaring. It’s amazing that our sole major newspaper’s editorial board is so out-of-touch with reality.

It’s happening in Fort Worth, and it’s happening all across the country: the central city is being reborn. People aren’t only settling on the fringe of town in single-family homes anymore. It’s disappointing that the S-T’s editorial board still can’t process thinking of the central city as anything more than an office park and a theme park for people from the ‘burbs to enjoy on weekends, but it doesn’t change the fact that encouraging central city redevlopment, walkable mixed-use growth centers in central city neighborhoods, and a range of housing choices is an idea whose time isn’t just now, but has been for some time now. If Fort Worth is to compete in the modern age, we can no longer just assume that everybody’s going to be living at the edge of town and driving everywhere we go – it’s unsustainable from postions of the economy, environment, and infrastructure. And it’s not how our peer cities are doing things anymore – but the S-T editorial board is apparently OK with us failing to be competitive.

(The Editorial Board railing about the cost of the streetcar and then dismissing redevelopment of our center city showcases how much they miss the point – it costs huge amounts of money to pay for infrastructure for new sprawl, S-T Editorial Board.)

First, there’s the $26.8 million in local money needed for the downtown circulator alone. The grant application says the city will seek commitments next month from the downtown and Lancaster tax increment financing districts to cover that cost.
Even if that works, it means $26.8 million in incremental tax revenue that the city will not get — while it’s clear that more tax revenue is sorely needed.

This is so misleading that it’s insulting. It’s also factually incorrect. In basic terms, a Tax Increment Finance District creates a an area where the value of property in that district is set at a base level (the level it’s at when the district is created). The tax revenue from that base level continues to go into the general fund of the various taxing jurisdictions. Then, revenues from any increase in value (due to new investment in the area) stay in that area. What I mean by that is, that extra revenue is put back into the TIF’s area in the form of public infastructure improvements. It can pay for everything from new sidewalks to new street trees to street reconstruction to new bike racks to sewer improvements to streetcar lines.

In other words, the extra revenue in a TIF district is used to pay for public improvements in that district – meaning those improvements aren’t coming out of the general fund. Those improvements, in turn, help to spur more development and investment in the TIF district, which means more revenue for the TIF, which means more investment, etc. etc. all of which leads to new jobs, new businesses, and more economic vitality – all without taking money from the general fund, where the city’s budget shortfall is.

To put it another way, if you took $26.8 million from a TIF to build a streetcar line, you aren’t taking one damned cent away from the city’s general fund, because the TIF is already there, and that money wouldn’t have gone to the general fund anyway because of the TIF. That TIF money can only be used for infrastructure improvements (and it’s money that the general fund doesn’t have to spend on those improvements).

So it’s blatantly misleading and untruthful for the Star-Telegram Editorial Board to be accusing the streetcar project of robbing the city of $26.8 million in tax revenue when that money could only be used for infrastructure improvements in that specific area because there’s a TIF district already in place, and has been for years. If the streetcar project doesn’t use that money, then some other project in that area will – it’s not going to go to the general fund even if the streetcar project dies tomorrow. That’s what TIF districts do.

That the Star-Telegram’s editorial board is trying to insinuate that the streetcar TIF funding would take money otherwise headed for city income is, in my view, either jaw-dropping negligence of the facts or a purposeful attempt to mislead the citizens of Fort Worth.

Further, the need for a downtown circulator has not been shown. The council-appointed committee and some other residents have demonstrated their desire for streetcars, but not yet the need. Public buses and the “Molly the Trolley” people carrier already serve downtown well.

As stated earlier, the route can be changed, so the S-T insisting that it’s a “downtown circulator” isn’t strictly accurate. More to the point, saying that buses and Molly “serve downtown well” really depends on your definition of “well.”

Buses – even fancy ones like Molly – simply don’t have the draw of streetcars in terms of ridership. People who would never step on a bus, even one as nice as Molly, will ride a streetcar. It’s due to a wide range of factors – the fixed guideway making the route easier to figure out, the exact arrival times via electronic signage making the system easier to use, the steel-on-steel rolling system making the ride smoother and more comfortable, the electric power making the ride quieter, and more. If we’re serious about impacting our congestion and air quality problems, better rail transit in the central city is critical. Our buses aren’t enough to cut it anymore – streetcars will encourage more people to get out of their cars and onto our streetcars and sidewalks, growing the health and vitality of the central city in a myriad of ways.

The Star-Telegram Editorial Board, however, seems content with business as usual. They’re OK with doing the same thing over and over and expecting it to keep succeeding – but the world is changing. The young up-and-coming generations of professionals, families, and creatives are changing. Business as usual isn’t enough for them. If Fort Worth’s going to compete on the modern stage, we have to be thinking differently. We’re a major city now, whether the S-T Editorial Board likes it or not, and business as usual will cripple this city in the long term.

Which, as you’ll remember, is a refrain from another major Fort Worth leader – Mayor Mike Moncrief, who said exactly that in his State of the City address:

Commuter Rail, street cars, and other alternative modes of transportation also remain a priority for me and this City Council. Unfortunately, Fort Worth and other major metropolitan areas are finding out the hard way what a mistake it was to design and build cities around automobiles years ago. Friends, we cannot continue to focus solely on building more roads for more vehicles. That’s counter productive at best.
Business as usual is dead!
North Texas requires a transportation overhaul. No more band-aides, no more patches—a complete overhaul!

And yet, the Star-Telegram Editorial Board is a big endorser of business as usual. They’ve come out against innovation, modern transportation choice, and investing in our city’s infrastructure to grow an economy of the 21st century – and they’re doing it via an editorial full of misdirection, misinformation, and factual errors. Makes one wonder what exactly happened behind the scenes as that editorial was being written.

I hope all of you out there write in to the Star-Telegram and voice your support for the Fort Worth Modern Streetcar project:

Letter policy

Submit via e-mail: letters@star-telegram.com

Mail: Box 1870, Fort Worth, TX 76101

Fax: 817-390-7688

Verification: Letters must include printed full name, address and day and home phone numbers for author verification purposes only.

Frequency: Writers are limited to one letter every 30 days.

Content: Must be the author’s original words. Suggested length is 200 words or less. Letters may be edited for space, clarity, civility and accuracy.

Questions: Call 817-390-7599 or contact Jill “J.R.” Labbe, Editorial Page Director

Cheers & Jeers policy

Submit via e-mail: letters@star-telegram.com

Mail: Box 1870, Fort Worth, TX 76101

Fax: 817-390-7688

Please limit your Cheer or Jeer to about 50 words. Full name, address and daytime telephone number are required. There are some restrictions on subjects. Items may be edited.

Questions: Call 817-390-7599 or contact Jill “J.R.” Labbe, Editorial Page Director

And don’t forget – tell Mayor Moncrief and the entire city council the same thing:

Mayor – Mike Moncrief – 817-392-6118 –mike.moncrief@fortworthgov.org
Mayor Pro Tem – District 4 – Danny Scarth – 817-392-6187 –District4@fortworthgov.org
District 2 – Sal Espino – 817-392-8802 –District2@fortworthgov.org
District 3 – Zim Zimmerman – 817-392-8803 -District3@fortworthgov.org
District 5 – Frank Moss – 817-392-8805 –District5@fortworthgov.org
District 6 – Jungus Jordan – 817-392-8806 –District6@fortworthgov.org
District 7 – Carter Burdette – 817-392-8807 –District7@fortworthgov.org
District 8 – Kathleen Hicks – 817-392-8808 –District8@fortworthgov.org
District 9 – Joel Burns – 817-392-8809 – District9@fortworthgov.org

EDIT: Here’s a great comment from reader Michael that further elaborates on TIF funding and its purpose:

“TIF districts are managed by a board of representatives from each of the participating jurisdictions who (as in all other parts of the city) collect property taxes from that particular district. These include, for instance, the City of Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Tarrant County College, etc. FWISD does not participate as they are severely penalized by the State for doing so.

Kevin gives a very good primer on how TIF districts work and, as he points out, it is extraordinarily misleading for the Star-Telegram to mischaracterize this as coming out of the general fund. The very purpose of Tax Increment Financing is to make long-term investments in public improvements (infrastructure) that will stimulate growth. The increase in property value (which is taxable as it would be under any other circumstances) supports the financing of these public improvements.

Therefore, the intent is to invest in public improvements that will support future growth – think of the improvements along Magnolia over the past decade which have attracted very significant and positive development; the result is the transformation of a once blighted neighborhood into a thriving part of Fort Worth which contributes far more to the local economy and tax rolls (including sales tax to the general fund) than it ever would have without those improvements.

TIF districts typically last about 20 years after which all collected property taxes – including those above the base amount – are distributed as they would be in any other part of the city. This is exactly how Fort Worth is going to address its budget shortfalls – through Growth, by supporting a strong business environment that will attract new development, increase property values (and the tax revenues generated by them), increase sales (thus generating sales tax), new jobs (meaning increased consumption in the area), and by pulling residents Into the city rather than out of it to neighboring cities.

One thing is certain… this is Not Amon Carter’s Star-Telegram any longer.”

Councilmembers Clash Over Streetcar

Kevin Buchanan — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 15:29:03 +0000

Incredibly, after the news yesterday that Fort Worth won $25 million from the Urban Circulator grant it applied for with the Federal Transit Administration, there are already forces at City Hall desiring to put the brakes on the enthusiasm and support for the project again, and possibly even tell the FTA “no thanks” on its grant award.

The Star-Telegram has a story that heavily quotes District 6 councilmember Jungus Jordan (in fact, last night when the story was published, Jordan was the only official referenced – it’s since been updated with quotes from District 9’s Joel Burns and State Senator Wendy Davis) saying that the streetcar simply isn’t a priority for the city, that there are still too many unanswered questions, that Tower 55 and I-35 are more important, etc. etc. etc.

“We have a multitude of priorities,” Jordan said. “Our top transportation priority is Tower 55, the crossroads of the rail movement throughout our city. The other top priority is [Interstate 35W].”

Tower 55 is important, no doubt. It’s also a problem that will take billions upon billions, and literally decades, to solve (not to mention a lot of debate about how to solve it). While there are some short-term improvements that can be made, it’s important to note that:

Streetcar funding likely won’t come from the same places as Tower 55 money, and
Things like the FTA grant CAN’T be used for Tower 55 anyway.

It’s a repeat of the same talk from when Jordan and Zim Zimmerman tried to stop the streetcar study from happening in the first place – efforts which a lot of you out there helped to derail thanks to your calls and e-mails to City Hall.

As for I-35 – in the year 2010, when we’re dealing with horrible air quality, sprawl consuming land on the outskirts of town and causing the city to spend obscene amounts of money on infrastructure on the fringe to support it, health concerns, concerns about car dependence, oil dependence, and more, an era when young professionals and creatives are looking for cities with vibrant central cores and progressive transit more and more than tract homes and strip malls, I find it pretty revealing that Jordan wants to go on record as saying I-35 is a top priority. It’s complete business-as-usual in an era when business-as-usual (which got us all the problems above) has pretty well died.

In fact, that sounds pretty familiar, doesn’t it? It’s almost as if Mayor Mike Moncrief said the exact same thing during his State of the City address:

Commuter Rail, street cars, and other alternative modes of transportation also remain a priority for me and this City Council. Unfortunately, Fort Worth and other major metropolitan areas are finding out the hard way what a mistake it was to design and build cities around automobiles years ago. Friends, we cannot continue to focus solely on building more roads for more vehicles. That’s counter productive at best.
Business as usual is dead!
North Texas requires a transportation overhaul. No more band-aides, no more patches—a complete overhaul!

Yet, here we are, five months later, and Jungus Jordan is saying business-as-usual is a higher priority than a modern transit system. Who exactly is calling the shots down at City Hall? It’s clear that remaking our transportation system into something more livable, sustainable, and beneficial for the city is a priority with Mayor Moncrief, so what’s with the flip-flopping from City Hall?

Now, it should be said, Councilmember Jordan has also stated before that commuter rail is a higher priority, because without it, the streetcar wouldn’t succeed. I agree that commuter rail is important for the city (it’d be a bit more meaningful if we weren’t also widening Interstates and building new sprawl, traffic, and pollution-generating toll roads to Southwest Fort Worth for crazy amounts of money, though).

However.

Commuter rail won’t be the determining success of the streetcar project. If anything, it’s the commuter rail that won’t be really successful without a modern, efficient, and attractive local neighborhood rail transit system. The flaw in Jordan’s thinking is looking at the streetcar project as solely a transportation project, when it has other benefits (some likely even greater than its transportation benefits) far beyond transportation. The streetcar isn’t only a transportation tool – it’s an economic development tool as well (in addition to more nebulous but still very real benefits like neighborhood pride, street life, community fabric, etc.).

The central city is Fort Worth’s economic engine. It may only be a small portion of the land in this sprawling city, but it is massively critical to Fort Worth’s livelihood and economy. It contains our two largest employment centers (Downtown and the Near Southside), our deeply meaningful cultural facilities of all sizes (everything from the Kimbell, Carter, Modern, and the like to Bass Hall to Arts Fifth Avenue to Stage West and beyond), and infrastructure designed to support a wide variety of transportation methods. It generates huge amounts of tax revenue that helps pay for parks, street maintenance, police, and more. The central city is how we compete economically with our peer cities across the country for new investment and, these days, new up-and-coming residents who are looking not only for work, but for dynamic and interesting cities apart from the usual tract-homes-and-chain-stores world.

Streetcars have proven time and again to be powerful catalysts for central city growth, able to attract, and shape, new development in central city areas. This isn’t just our love of Portland, Oregon talking (although Portland’s seen $2.8 billion in added value thanks to their streetcar system). For just a few examples – Tampa’s streetcar has generated $1.1 billion in new development. Little Rock has seen $700 million in new value brought to their city. Even Kenosha, Wisconsin has seen $174 million in new value.

And the development the streetcar attracts is a lot healthier for the city than the development a new toll road or a wider I-35 will attract. It’s development in compact central city locations that allow people to get around without adding to the road congestion or air quality problems of the city, as well as development that doesn’t cost the city an arm and a leg to pay for new infrastructure in far-flung areas to support it.

That’s the other key to the streetcar’s economic impact – it doesn’t just attract new stuff. It helps shape that new stuff into a more livable and sustainable form. Like most American cities, Fort Worth gutted much of its central city for parking, wide roads, and freeways. We’ve made better progress than some cities with our Downtown revitalization in the form of Sundance Square, but the Basses have still kept it pretty well solely dependent upon people driving in, parking, visiting, then leaving. We have a smaller Downtown residential population than many cities of comparable (or even smaller) size across the United States. Other districts have made a lot of progress, but the central city is still choked in its potential by its dependence on the car. It costs money to build that parking, and it takes up land we should be using instead for new development (bringing new jobs, new residents, and new economic benefits) and new public amenities like, oh, say, a Sundance Square public plaza.

Did you know that a single structured parking space (meaning a space in a garage) tends to cost at bare minimum $10,000? Usually in the central city, this figure is much higher – $20,000, $25,000, or more per parking space. A space to stick your car for the day is just stupidly expensive. That parking helps choke the potential of the central city. If you’re looking at living in the central city, developers are passing that parking cost on to you. Provide a parking space or two for every condo and apartment, and suddenly you’ve priced out a lot of people who would really love to live somewhere that would let them walk to a lot of stuff, ride their bike, and just generally get around without driving. You’ve also sucked up a lot of space to store cars, space that could instead be earning its developers money and providing new destinations for residents, workers, and visitors.

The T and City Hall have talked about our commuter rail projects a lot, and even show in the station renderings areas for “transit-oriented development.” I’m sorry, but if we’re really expecting much TOD from our commuter rail, we’re living in a fantasy world. A commuter train that runs by ever half-hour to hour (or worse) at limited times of the day isn’t going to do a damned thing except generate parking lots at the stations. Commuter rail is definitely needed, don’t get me wrong – but it’s still yet another way for us to simply shuttle people into and out of Downtown Fort Worth as quickly as possible. It’s the transit equivalent of a big fat Interstate or arterial street.

No, not everybody wants to live in the central city, and that’s fine – but a lot of people would like to, more than a lot of Fort Worth politicians probably realize. If we’re going to be competing on the national stage in the 21st century, simply building more ways to get people in and out of the central city isn’t enough. In some ways, it’s just more business as usual – which, Mayor Moncrief would like to remind you, is dead.

We have to get more serious about creating a healthy, livable series of neighborhoods in the central city, making it a cohesive place rather than just a set of tourist districts and office towers. That’s the sort of thing that is attracting the leaders and businesses of tomorrow in this day and age. We’re seeing it all across the country. The streetcar is a key component of doing just that. It helps shape development into forms that aren’t so car dependent, opening up central city living for new ranges of people, driving new jobs and residences, and more. It does so in ways that simply improving our bus system could never hope to do – while we need a better bus system, it’s not a substitute for the permanence and ease-of-use of a central city streetcar that would attract far more riders and attract development and investment along the route. Buses are never going to do that.

And for the people who don’t want to live in the central city, the streetcar’s development impacts will create more reasons for them to want to take those pretty new commuter trains into town to visit and spend money.

It needs to be said – we can’t keep up the same-old business as usual small-town Cowtown dog and pony show anymore. We’re a major city, and it’s time we put our big boy pants on and started behaving like it. If we’re actually serious about building a Fort Worth for the 21st century, one that competes in the economies of this new world, we can’t just simply concentrate on the Southwest Parkway, widening I-35, and building a new commuter train to shuffle people out of the central city. We’ve got to do better. The arrival of the railroads put Fort Worth on the map, and I truly believe the streetcar will be another legacy project far more monumental in the future than an I-35 widening could ever hope to be. It’s something that will generate huge benefits for us long term. It’ll be giving back when our grandkids are running things. All you’re hearing about these days is Fort Worth’s budget problem, but here we have the opportunity to make an investment that will give back to this city in incredible ways, and some people at City Hall are ready to just give up.

An opportunity, by the way, that the Feds are virtually screaming at us that we should take. Over 80 cities are planning modern streetcar systems, but do you know how many have actually had funding commitments from US DOT to help? It’s an extremely small list – you could count it on your hands, in fact. Fort Worth has been put on an extremely exclusive and deeply meaningful short list of places that can be leaders in remaking our nation with more livable neighborhoods and less dependence on oil (that’s kind of a big deal – there’s that thing going on in the Gulf, for example, that you might have heard about), a position that will mean Fort Worth is generating buzz across the country, but rather than take the lead we’ve got government officials ready to take a nap. We’ve waffled on this enough, and we’re going to be a national embarrassment at the US DOT if we keep it up.

(And I should add that based on what I understand about this FTA grant – which admittedly could be wrong – Fort Worth’s “accepting” the money is basically a formality, and the money is already committed.)

We need to let HDR finish their study, and we need to then let them do the third phase of their study (expect that to be the controversy later this year). To already be talking about stopping before they’ve even finished is just irresponsible. I’m convinced that that’s where Jordan is heading – he’s setting up excuses to kill the third phase of HDR’s study at the end of the year, things like “budget” and “Tower 55″ and the like.

Understand that this isn’t anything personal towards Jungus Jordan. I don’t know the guy. I’m sure if I met him at a bar he’d be fun to chat with. Hell, I disagreed with Chuck Silcox nearly every time he opened his mouth, but he was still a good guy.

I’m just floored by the staggering lack of leadership and lack of vision coming from City Hall. We’ve had opportunity knocking on our door for a while for something that will have tremendous benefits for our city’s future, we’ve had extensive work done for years and years on planning this thing, we’ve had support from the mayor, council members, and the public, and now we’ve got Uncle Sam himself virtually pounding on the door to help, yet we hem and haw and do nothing while we get happy about widening an Interstate that’ll just put more crap in our air and more cars on our roads. If we’re really this freaked by our budget problems, why are some people so eager to slam the door on an opportunity to invest in something that will let our city reap so much economic benefit? If you’ve got budget problems, you can either trim things to the bone, or you can earn more. Rather than closing our swimming pools and cutting back at our libraries then dumping so much onto business-as-usual transportation projects, how about we think forward and invest in something that’ll help us prosper our way out of this situation?

(II don’t believe we’ve ever turned down Federal transportation money before. Certainly not for road projects – even when the result is the disaster that is Rosedale in the Near Southside and East Side, for example, we took the money, knowing that we’d be undoing much of what it paid for in the future.)

I should say that it’s not a total lack of leadership and vision. District 9 councilmember Joel Burns certainly gets it:

“We can’t afford not to take advantage of this incredible return on investment,” he said. “Fort Worth needs a modern streetcar system. This potential investment from the federal government acknowledges our effort to create jobs, have a cleaner environment and have a more livable Fort Worth.”

As Burns points out later in the same article, it’s not likely that the streetcar project will take any money from the city’s general fund, since there are other sources like TIF districts and Public Improvement Districts and more.

Count State Senator Wendy Davis on board as well:

“Given the growth of this region and the limited funds for our transportation needs, we have to be smarter about how we develop and supplement our transportation infrastructures,” she said in a news release. “This is something I’ve supported for a long time — a way to connect walkable, sustainable communities with a transportation mode that does not add more vehicles to an already congested road system.”

As Mayor Moncrief said, business as usual is dead. Let’s see if we can’t do something about that, huh? This is Fort Worth – we’re supposed to be pioneers, right? That’s what the “Cowboys and Culture” thing is built upon.

Let’s also remember this survey, conducted by the ETC Institute for the City of Fort Worth last year:

The streetcar project is the third highest supported project in the survey, and has the most “very supportive” votes of any project. Had the project been listed as what it actually is – a central city streetcar rather than just a Downtown streetcar – I wager it might have even been more supported.

It’s just another piece of info that shows that this project isn’t just something being talked about by random doofus bloggers like me and urban planners – there’s a not insignificant amount of the citizenry who are really enthused about this, as well. This is becoming a movement. It’s the sort of thing that people who want to be mayor in the future might do well to not try and stamp out. The new Fort Worth is speaking.

I didn’t expect it to be necessary again so soon, but you know what? Why don’t you write to every single council member and the Mayor and tell them exactly what you think? I know the “Fort Worth Way” isn’t to stir the pot, but the Fort Worth Way is failing us. Tell them how much you support the streetcar project and what it means for Fort Worth’s future. Tell them you’re tired of more business-as-usual and the lack of vision from City Hall. There’s no vote coming up any time soon, but Fort Worth’s City Council needs to know that people are paying attention even when they’re not voting. Here’s that contact info again – don’t limit yourself to just your own councilmember. Let them all know. (And be ready to let them all know again later this year.) E-mail is cheap:

And while you’re at it, how about you tell the Star-Telegram how you feel as well? They’re the big paper in town. Let them know the streetcar project is important. I hope a lot of you take the time to send things to the Star-Telegram:

Letter policy

Submit via e-mail: letters@star-telegram.com

Mail: Box 1870, Fort Worth, TX 76101

Fax: 817-390-7688

Verification: Letters must include printed full name, address and day and home phone numbers for author verification purposes only.

Frequency: Writers are limited to one letter every 30 days.

Content: Must be the author’s original words. Suggested length is 200 words or less. Letters may be edited for space, clarity, civility and accuracy.

Questions: Call 817-390-7599 or contact Jill “J.R.” Labbe, Editorial Page Director

Cheers & Jeers policy

Submit via e-mail: letters@star-telegram.com

Mail: Box 1870, Fort Worth, TX 76101

Fax: 817-390-7688

Please limit your Cheer or Jeer to about 50 words. Full name, address and daytime telephone number are required. There are some restrictions on subjects. Items may be edited.

Questions: Call 817-390-7599 or contact Jill “J.R.” Labbe, Editorial Page Director

Federal Transit Administration Awards $ 25 Million for Fort Worth Streetcar

Kevin Buchanan — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:50:52 +0000

Incredible and extremely positive news for the Fort Worth Modern Streetcar project (city link / non-profit link) – the Federal Transit Administration announced today that they are awarding $25 million in funds for the Fort Worth streetcar project through their Urban Circulator Grant Program, part of a $293 million investment in urban transit announced today by the FTA.

The exact description of Fort Worth’s win from the FTA is as follows:

Project: Fort Worth Streetcar Loop (Urban Circulator)
Sponsor: The City of Fort Worth and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority
Amount: $24,990,000
The City of Fort Worth and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority will construct a 2.5-mile one-way streetcar loop with between 20 and 25 stops and three vehicles to connect a Trinity Railway Express commuter rail station and Intermodal Transportation Center with the central business district. This will be the hub of a planned streetcar network connecting six designated “urban villages” targeted for redevelopment to the city’s major employment centers, such as downtown and the Near Southside Medical District. Ultimately, the streetcar system will connect residents in four economically disadvantaged areas to job opportunities in major employment centers, while stimulating the redevelopment of walkable urban neighborhoods with a variety of housing choices.

This is a major win for the streetcar project with a significant allocation of funds. United States Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood had the following to say about the Urban Circulator Grant Program:

“This investment by the Obama Administration in our nation’s communities will create jobs, boost economic development and recovery, and further reduce our dependence on oil,” Secretary LaHood said. “Our goals are to provide cleaner, safer, and more efficient ways to get around.”

Federal Transit Administration Administrator Peter Rogoff further added:

“Streetcars are making a comeback because cities across America are recognizing that they can restore economic development downtown – giving citizens the choice to move between home, shopping and entertainment without ever looking for a parking space,” said FTA Administrator Peter Rogoff. “These streetcar and bus livability projects will not only create construction jobs now, they will aid our recovery by creating communities with the potential to be more prosperous and less congested.”

Other cities who got money besides Fort Worth for urban circulator projects include Dallas (for an extension of the McKinney Avenue streetcar), Chicago, St. Louis, Charlotte, and Cincinnati.

We’ll have more to come, certainly. This is a great win for the streetcar project, and we can’t wait to see how things proceed from here.