According to the Intelligencer New Era of September 30, former mayor and Republican candidate Charlie Smithgall described the proposed streetcar scheme to a church group as ”a waste of time, effort and money.” The Intell further reports “And, if he is elected Nov. 3, Smithgall said he will pull the brake on a $150,000 study planned to determine if a $14.1 million trolley line is feasible.”

In defense of his intention to spend a $150,000 for a study, Mayor Rick Gray responded “Much has changed since 2001. Cities across the country have adopted trolley systems as a quick, efficient way to move people between restaurants, shops and businesses.”

What cities have successfully introduced streetcars to narrow streets and experienced success? NewsLanc researched and wrote articles on these supposed success stories and found them either to be rapid transit systems running on special easement or failed systems that lack riders, gush losses and are heavily subsidized.

The last time Gray asked for a feasibility study, then regarding the covention center project, the County Commissioners spent around $150,000 to provide it for him. But the mayor ignored its findings! (Yet Interstate Hotels and Resorts later used its data and projections as the basis for a marketing plan.)

If Gray continues to shoot himself in the foot with the unpopular streetcars and his failed bid to continue providing police protection to Lancaster Township, Smithgall may yet make this a contest.

The following two comments to the article “Streetcar plan would have to pass PennDOT” came in rapid succession and stirred us to reflect on the sense of despair that, no matter what the public will, those few who are the puppet masters in Lancaster will do as they so please.

Commented on September 3, 2009 at 8:56 am:

“So would a traffic plan for the access to the hotel/CC and the alterations to Harrisburg Pike. Those regulatory hurdles didn’t stop those projects and I highly doubt they would stop this one. Opponents better have more up their sleeve than a bailout from PennDOT because I can guarantee that the FIX is in for this hurdle and any other regulatory issues that might arise.”

Commented on September 3, 2009 at 10:44 am:

“I understand that PennDOT waived the need for a traffic plan for the hotel and convention center project. Time and time again, Pennsylvania laws have been circumvented when people in politically powerful positions intervened.”

We too at times lose hope, especially when we struggle to ward off what one long-term observer from out of town refers to as the local establishment’s “inexperience and self destructiveness”.

A poll by a highly reputable national service used by, among many others, the Fox News Network, determined that almost four out of five Lancastrians agreed with the then County Commissioners that tax payers should not guarantee Convention Center debt. It didn’t matter.

A grand jury investigation of those commissioners dragged on for almost a year, dismissing allegation after allegation by an increasingly desperate district attorney. It didn’t matter.

An entire neighborhood begged that an independent study by commissioned to determine whether there was a viable alternative location for the Norfolk Southern freight yard. It didn’t matter.

The proposal to re-establish streetcar lines downtown have evoked reaction in most part ranging from incredulity to anger. Will it matter?

What is the root cause of the disenfranchisement of the public will here in Lancaster? A mismanaged monopoly press has pursued its own business interests or that of its cronies. Years ago NewsLanc urged the Lancaster Newspapers to appoint an ombudsman. It didn’t matter.

Two-thirds of whatever good NewsLanc is accomplishing occurs behind the scenes. We, with others, are currently struggling to prevent another self inflicted public debacle. We hope we never have to report on the matter. But if it occurs, we too will despair.

Thus far, discussion of the proposed downtown streetcar loop has remained largely within the local establishment—the Streetcar Company, the City, the County, the Red Rose Transit Authority, Franklin & Marshall, etc. However, if and when formal construction plans are developed for a streetcar system in Lancaster City, the project would have to pass a thorough review from PennDOT’s headquarters in Harrisburg. This is because both North Queen and North Prince Streets are classified as State roads.

According to Mike Keiser, Acting Assistant District Engineer for Design, plans for any third party to alter the function of a State-owned road would require a Highway Occupancy Permit from PennDOT. The permit review process, Keiser said, would be “pretty significant,” including an in-depth Traffic Impact Study—“If you displace half of your capacity because of a trolley, what does that do?,” Keiser said, explaining the scope of such a study.

PennDOT would also be seeking to understand how a system so peculiar to Pennsylvania’s recent experience would be managed. Keiser referenced the topic of potholes for an example: “Who’s responsible for the maintenance of this area where the track is? It’s not going to be PennDot.”

Keiser noted that, if PennDOT rejected plans for a streetcar system, there would remain one alternative course for the City to move ahead on the project: Occasionally, a State route can be turned back to the local municipality. Some roads in Lebanon City, for example, are marked as State traffic, but are locally owned. The City of Lancaster could potentially request that North Prince and North Queen be transferred to City ownership—“Not likely,” Keiser said, “But anything’s possible.”

While discussing the proposed loop, Keiser also mentioned that PennDOT has already spoken with the City about plans to resurface both North Prince and North Queen next year for an estimated bill of $2.5 million. Regarding streetcars, however, PennDOT has not been formally brought to the table. According to Mike Crochunis, a PennDOT spokesman, “our team knows little about the specifics” and has not yet been approached by the City regarding this particular project. Most of what they know, Crochunis said, has come from the newspapers.

A contributor makes the valid observation “You may wish to do a little research on why trolleys don’t exist anywhere in the states, save for a few cities. Your investigation could start by looking into who (or what special interest) might have benefited from getting rid of the trolleys.”

We will conduct research into this matter as it concerns Lancaster and report further.

According to Wikipedia under the heading “The Great American Streetcar scandal”:

“On April 9, 1947, nine corporations and seven individuals (constituting officers and directors of certain of the corporate defendants) were indicted in the Federal District Court of Southern California on two counts under the U.S. Sherman Antitrust Act. The charges, in summary, were conspiracy to acquire control of a number of transit companies to form a transportation monopoly, and conspiring to monopolize sales of buses and supplies to companies owned by the City Lines.

“The proceedings were against Firestone, Standard Oil of California, Phillips, General Motors, Federal Engineering, and Mack (the suppliers), and their subsidiary companies: National City Lines, Pacific City Lines, and American City Lines (the City Lines).”

However, the article concludes:

“Randal O’Toole of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, argues that streetcars faded away at the invention of internal combustion private automobile and then the bus. At one time, nearly every city in the U.S. with population over 10,000 had at least one streetcar company. 95% of all streetcar systems were at one time privately owned.

“Robert C. Post wrote that ‘nationwide, the ultimate reach of the alleged conspirators extended to only about 10 percent of all transit systems—sixty-odd out of some six hundred—and yet virtually all the other 90 percent also got rid of trolleys (as happened with all the tramcar systems in the British Isles and France).’^”

As reported recently exclusively in NewsLanc, Mayor Rick Gray’s chief of staff, Pat Brogan, outlined the three questions that are driving the City’s consideration of streetcar feasibility:

While fairly comprehensive in assessing the possibility of this proposed system, the City overlooks what should be the most pressing consideration of all:  Will a streetcar system actually contribute to the quality of downtown?

Assume that the state and federal governments provided the city with a blank check to install and subsidize this proposed streetcar loop in Downtown Lancaster.  In such a scenario, according to the City’s current criteria for streetcar feasibility,  it would be a done deal.

However, the streetcars impact on the quality of the lives of city residents would not have been evaluated. After all, a trolley system using the same types of cars was eliminated from city streets over half a century ago, presumably because they were perceived to be more of a burden than a benefit.

Full government funding only tells the City that it “could” install the system—but not that it “should.”

For $150,000, the study ought to address the legitimate sentiment of downtown residents and merchants to trolleys that may well clog the streets, endanger pedestrians, and run virtually empty.

This is a case where it makes sense to look a gift horse in the mouth to make sure that it isn’t a Trojan Horse.

According to Pat Brogan, Mayor Rick Gray’s Chief of Staff, the City plans to first engage an engineering study regarding the feasibility of a streetcar system in Downtown Lancaster before investing additional funds in studying the economic feasibility of such a system. Brogan said that the City is taking this route in case the engineering study shows the proposed system to be technically unfeasible.

Funding for this initial study will be provided by a $20,000 County Urban Enhancement Grant as well as a required $20,000 match from the City.

Last week the Commissioners passed the $20,000 grant for the City of Lancaster to engage what was described as a $150,000 engineering and economic feasibility study regarding the possible introduction of a streetcar loop in Downtown Lancaster City. With $40,000 lined up in City and County funds, a source for the remaining $110,000 was not clearly identified—although one County planning official indicated the possibility of contributions from the Red Rose Transit Authority.

Yesterday, NewsLanc asked Brogan to clarify the source of remaining funds. In the course of her response, Brogan reiterated the three driving questions behind City’s consideration of streetcar feasibility: One is the economic benefit (“if any,” Brogan asserted) of such a system; another is whether such a system could operate without taxpayer subsidy; and, finally, is the question of whether such a system could reasonably work within the City’s existing infrastructure.

Brogan concluded that the Mayor wants to determine the answer to that last question before spending any additional money on the others. For this reason, the City will not yet be in need of funding beyond the $40,000 that has already been allocated.

Brogan plans to meet with Public Works Director Charlotte Katzenmoyer today to begin developing a Request for Proposals for the initial engineering study.

At the August 19 County Commissioners Meeting, the Commissioners approved the 2009 Lancaster County Urban Enhancement Funds, a $2 million package that includes a $20,000 grant contributing to a feasibility study regarding the installation of a streetcar system in downtown Lancaster. The Commissioners passed the funding, but appended deliberate requirements that the study be an independent and comprehensive analysis of such a system’s technical and financial feasibility.

The study was discussed at length by the Commissioners at their August 18 Work Session, as previously reported by NewsLanc.

Prior to the vote, Mayor Rick Gray addressed the Commissioners to stress that this study is being requested by the City of Lancaster and not any private group committed to the installation of downtown streetcars. Gray asserted that the proposed streetcar project is, in no way, a foregone conclusion on the City’s part. Gray also noted that the study will be considering a broad range of options, which could include the use of cars smaller than the one displayed on North Prince Street.

A NewsLanc reporter noted that, with the scarcity of working streetcar systems in the United States, there may be few—if any—firms qualified to undertake such a study with appropriate scrutiny and objectivity. The Commissioners were asked whether they might consider retaining “veto power” in the eventual selection of this firm. The Commissioners stated in response that they do not typically play such a role, however they did note that the Planning Commission will remain involved with the funding allocation process, which would include the selection of a firm.

Gray also responded by claiming that, with other US cities now introducing streetcar systems, there are a number of firms throughout the country that are qualified and experienced for such a study.

Before taking the final vote, Commissioner Stuckey asserted that the Commissioners’ approval of funding for the streetcar feasibility study does not mean that the Commissioners presently support the project. Stuckey described himself as “skeptical.” Scott Martin stated that the approval of this funding should not be viewed as an act of project “ramroding.”

The Commissioners approved the funding, but attached the following set of conditions:

Measurable Outcomes That Relate To This Project:

• Downtown Revitalization

Determination of Project Success:

The economic impact analysis and the engineering study will show if a streetcar system would be sustainable without reliance on taxpayer dollars.

Condition:

That this be an independent, comprehensive study that will assess the impact of a streetcar system in the downtown, and that the preliminary engineering study will assess the impact of a streetcar system on the City’s infrastructure and streetscape. The identification of strategies for ensuring the long-term financial sustainability of a streetcar system with and without public subsidies should also be determined in this study.

Mayor Gray said that he agreed with the added conditions.

Citizens Bill Bonano and Bonnie Miller each strongly voiced their disapproval of the $20,000 expenditure, citing that it would simply encourage the spending of $150,000 on what they considered to be an absurd project. Bonano took a particularly firm tone with the Commissioners, asserting that he was “very disappointed” in their decision.

For more NewLanc coverage of the proposed downtown streetcar project, please click here.