There is a debate in Lancaster about whether to bring back streetcars to the downtown. It has become an issue in the the upcoming election. I am for alternative forms of transportation, but I don't think this makes sense. Do I wish they had never gotten rid of the streetcars we had? Sure. You can't buy the kind of authenticity a continuously operating line would have. But to tear up the streets now and put the tracks back would be a tremendous cost, both in money and disruption to traffic, both during construction and on-going.
I understand the reasons why some want streetcars. Lancaster is an old city. It is essentially built-out. The streets, which were established before automobiles existed, are narrow and crowded. Parking is scarce. Areas of shopping, eateries and entertainment are sometimes separated by blocks of houses or offices. It is difficult for individuals to avail themselves of all the attractions downtown on foot. People want transportation that is convenient. How are we to solve this problem? If only there were an example we could look to...
Hey, wait, don't European cities have these exact same problems? How do they deal?
photo by Sweetgrzly and nicked from Google Images
Posts
1 comment:
Ex-freekin'-zacktly!
Here's an idea for Mayor Gray, give a property tax break to folks who purchase a scooter or motorcycle for transportation. Split up a few parking spaces into two-wheels-only parking, and encourage the citizenry to ride instead of drive.
Seems to me that there are ways this could be done that would cut down on a lot of cost to the city in the long run, and for a lot less cost than laying down a new trolley line.
Post a Comment