Bridging Theory and Practice Since 1974

Tag: Subway

A Streetcar Named de Blasio

Two months ago, Mayor Bill de Blasio debuted a proposal for a streetcar line that would link the Brooklyn and Queens waterfronts. His announcement was welcomed by many, as it addresses the inequities of travel around New York City. As denizens of the city are well aware, commuting to and from the Manhattan central business district is easy and convenient, but inter and intra-commuting between the outerboroughs is arduous and time-consuming. The streetcar would be the second transit line (in addition to the G train) that does not traverse into the urban core, but rather meanders through the neighborhoods of western Brooklyn and Queens. In addition, it would mark the historic return of streetcar service, which was last provided on October 31, 1956. However, upon closer scrutiny, this reiteration of streetcar service has many shortcomings.

Proposed route for the Brooklyn-Queens street car line

Proposed route for the Brooklyn-Queens street car line. Source: Friends of the Brooklyn Queens Connector

One of the most glaring issues with de Blasio’s plan is that parts of the streetcar line run among mixed traffic. Transportation planners and city officials across the United States often celebrate the idea that streetcars are acceptable only insofar as they are flexible with the environment in which they are built. The prevailing thinking dictates that streetcars should not require any more infrastructure other than the rails that guide the vehicles. Exclusive right-of-ways for transit vehicles are considered unacceptable because they challenge the status quo of an automobile dominated streetscape. It is this planning ideology that is reflected in the latest streetcar incarnation, and which makes the design so problematic.

Well-designed streetcars require more than a set of tracks embedded into the pavement. The underlying principles of great streetcar systems is that they are fast, convenient, and reliable. As Yonah Freemark points out, these basic tenets demand the “[redistribution of] street space away from private automobiles and toward public transit.” The dedication of an exclusive right-of-way ensures that the streetcar can proceed along its route without any obstructions, which raises the operating speed and reduces travel time of the vehicle. Investing more into physical segregation between modes increases streetcar reliability and guarantees regular ridership. There is evidence that the lack of a separated street lane impedes, and even chokes, ridership as seen in the case of the Seattle South Lake Union streetcar, whose ridership numbers declined since its opening. Without the full dedicated right-of-way along the entire line, it is not clear whether the streetcar will exact true mobility in the way the mayor claims.

streetcar_queens

A rendering of the proposed streetcar in Long Island City. Source: Friends of the Brooklyn Queens Connector

The design flaws are not the only issues plaguing the streetcar proposal. While it is true that the streetcar will add a more direct route to the subway system’s current hub-and-spoke layout, the areas it serves are not transit deserts. The neighborhoods through which the streetcar runs are already served by multiple subway lines and a plethora of bus services. Furthermore, much of the proposed route runs parallel to existing subway lines. The streetcar would not actually contribute to transit equity because there remain sizeable swaths of the city that lack any form of rail infrastructure, including most of peripheral Queens, Brooklyn, and the Bronx. Although Staten Island has a standalone rail line, it is not connected to the rest of the boroughs, which leaves the borough isolated from the rest of the city.

Rather than focusing on the streetcar, the mayor should refocus his attention on other plans that would do more to serve transit-starved neighborhoods and that would foster greater regional mobility. For example, New York’s City Council, citing above-average commute times for the Fordham Road corridor in the Bronx, advocated for a new subway connection that would connect several subway lines. Another project worth exploring is the reactivation of the abandoned Rockaway Line in Queens. Both projects are located in transit deserts, and would provide basic transit service to the demographic groups that depends on it most: low-income and immigrant households, as well as households of color.

Featured Image: Credited to The Brown Brothers. The New York Times photo archive, Public Domain.

About the Author: Allen Lum is a 2016 graduate of the Department of City and Regional Planning at UNC. He was born and raised in New York City, and thrives on the constant visual, sonic, and interpersonal stimulation that big city life offers. Allen is a transit enthusiast, which is what brought him to planning school at UNC. He earned his Bachelor’s degree in history at Williams College, and understands the paramount importance of thinking about urban issues from multidisciplinary and intersectional angles. During his time at DCRP, Allen was involved in the Curriculum as well as the Alumni and Career Development Committees, the latter of which he chaired in his last year. He will return to New York and hopes to find work within the area of transit and TOD planning.

Placemaking, Underground: BART to Revitalize all 44 Stations

This article is adapted from a piece originally published by Rachel Wexler and Rachel Dinno Taylor in San Francisco Planning and Urban Research’s [SPUR] journal The Urbanist, on May 11 2015.

Stockholm’s metro system, or Tunnelbana, is widely known as the world’s longest art gallery. Since the 1950s, the system has been contracting with artists to work with their architects and engineers to transform 90 of its stations into fully immersive experiences. Author's photo.

Stockholm’s metro system, or Tunnelbana, is widely known as the world’s longest art gallery. Since the 1950s, the system has been contracting with artists to work with their architects and engineers to transform 90 of its stations into fully immersive experiences. Photo Credit: Author’s Own.

Transit hubs are often massive, and massively underutilized, public spaces. Take for example the Bay Area Rapid Transit [BART] and San Francisco Muni Metro systems. Nearly 500,000 riders traipse the drab halls of these transit stations, heads down and nose plugged. It’s a hairy network of grime encrusted tile corridors reminiscent of a post-apocalyptic county hospital. If you’re lucky, the sweet strains of an impromptu violin sonata may shake you from your destination-driven perseverance and it’s as though an angel had descended into the purgatory of afternoon rush hour. But otherwise, aside from waiting for your train, not much else is going to make you stop.

San Francisco's Montgomery St Station

San Francisco’s Montgomery St. Station.  Photo Credit: Author’s Own.

However, for the first time in its 40 years of existence, BART is planning a comprehensive overhaul of its 44 stations. And, due to the advocacy of the non-profit organization SubArt, they’re considering an aesthetic overhaul to improve the quality of riders’ experiences. Now, with the Triangle light rail system is in its planning stages, is the time for the system’s transportation planners to consider the importance of art, design, and placemaking in the transit planning process. Let’s look at this case study to see why.

Yes, the BART budget is limited: BART must build new stations, perform routine maintenance, and purchase new rolling stock. However, studies investigating the impact of art in transit have proven that it is not just a pretty “nice-to-have” addition. In fact, it can be a powerful tool that can have a massive effect not only on rider behavior, safety, and public perception, but it can also increase economic activity and investment in the areas surrounding stations. Furthermore, these benefits can come about through limited fiscal investment on the part of the transit authority when public-private partnerships are taken into consideration.

BART and Muni Metro stations serve over 90 times more people than the San Francisco area’s most frequently visited museums. The city’s underground transit corridors represent a tremendous opportunity to enhance riders’ experience, engage a broader spectrum of the public in the arts, and reflect the innovative and artistic cultural capital of the Bay Area.

Candidplatz-640x479

At Candidplatz Station, Munich, the walls are covered in colored panels using the full color spectrum. The design riffs on the theme of motion — trains carry riders through the color wheel as they move through the station. Author’s photo.

The United States federal government encourages transit systems nationwide to make use of the cost-effective benefits of art in transit and even allocates up to 5% of federal funds to be used for the integration of art. The Federal Transit Administration states that, “the visual quality of the nation’s mass transit systems has a profound impact on transit patrons and the community at large. Good design and art can improve the appearance and safety of a facility, give vibrancy to its public spaces, and make patrons feel welcome.”

The fiscal efficiency and positive impact of art and design in transit has been documented globally:

  • Studies have shown that riders are willing to walk farther and pay more to use a station enhanced by art and design.
  • They are also willing to wait longer for trains due to the improved environment.
  • Art and design in transit have a multitude of other benefits, from increasing the overall use of public transportation to reducing crime and vandalism in stations, creating a safer environment for riders.
  • Studies have also found that large-scale art and design in the underground increases female ridership, helps with wayfinding, and creates pride of place.
Georg-Brauchle-Ring-640x479

Georg-Brauchle-Ring Station of the Munich U-Bahn

Furthermore, engaging local artists and community members in the planning and execution process can increase cross-cultural respect, community cohesion and pride, and encourage local investment. Other American cities, such as New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Seattle, and Chicago are already investing in significant underground art interventions and many more international cities, including Buenos Aires, Naples, and Taiwan, are reaping the benefits of comprehensive, immersive art and design programs in their public transit systems. BART’s imminent redesign offers the opportunity to demonstrate the global leadership and innovation of the city’s region.

Naples

In Naples, Italy, the positive impact of full-scale art is well documented. Studies show that riders are willing to walk farther, pay more, and wait longer for a train in a station enhanced by art and design.

Art and design opportunities reach well beyond traditional mosaics and murals.  Cities have revitalized their stations with permanent design installations and created temporary exhibits that include light, music, and performance art by local and visiting artists. Shouldn’t the Bay Area, a region known throughout the world for its innovative culture and thriving art community, have dynamic underground metro stations that reflect the vibrancy above ground? In order to achieve a comprehensive and fully integrated revision, collaboration between designers, artists, and the public needs to occur during the planning process. In order to truly revitalize BART, the scope must reach beyond functionality and showcase the diversity of Bay Area culture through design and art that reinforces the importance of place.

Westfriedhof-640x479

At Westfriedhof Station, Munich, massive overhead lamps emit warm red and yellow hues while the walls are lit by diffuse purple. These seemingly massive changes in fact required minimal investment because they were achieved through a cost effective planning approach: city leaders and transit planners included artists and designers as well as engineers from the outset of the design process. Photo Credit: Author’s Own.

Visit SubArtSF.org for news and updates and follow on Facebook/SubArtSF

About the Author: Rachel Wexler is the co-editor of the Carolina Planning Journal and pursuing her master’s degree in City and Regional Planning. Her bachelor’s is in english from UC Berkeley; prior to beginning her master’s she worked as an editor, cook, and musician. Her academic work focuses on economic development, neighborhood revitalization, and placemaking. Her non-academic work focuses on playing in general and playing cello in particular. She also thinks frequently about Oakland, California and Berlin, Germany, both of which she calls home. These are also the urban spaces that brought her to this charming small town to study planning.