|
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Nearly a century ago, electric streetcars carried Eurekans from their homes to the shops and jobs along Spring Street, and moved thousands of tourists from the railroad depot to the Basin Park, Crescent, Palace and many other hotels and attractions stretching along the hillside of West mountain. Today, most of the same buildings are still in place, carefully preserved in one of the finest examples of a Victorian Historic District in the country. Tourists and other visitors - 1.5 million annually - still come to Eureka. But the clickety-clack of streetcars and the clip-clop of horses have given way to the noise and air pollution of autos and diesel buses, competing in virtual gridlock for the same picturesque but narrow street space that existed at the turn of the century. Eureka Spring's position as one of the leading destinations in Arkansas will be further enhanced by the recent opening of a new regional airport, and the improvement in highway access to the area. Thus, the coming years will see even more people - and unless circulation in the Historic District is radically improved - the attractiveness of Eureka Springs will suffer greatly. The Community Electric Trolley Association (CETA), recognizing the need for improved mobility, and aware of the need to preserve the livability of the town for its residents, believes that a return to the electric streetcar along Spring Street, coupled with related improvements to parking, can accomplish a number of worthwhile goals:
Experience and Benefits Realized in Other Cities In recent years, a number of American cities and towns have built vintage streetcar lines or have begun planning for such a system. Descriptions of several operating and planned systems are contained in Chapter IV of this report. For operating systems, surveys in various cities have shown that the vintage streetcar line has had a positive impact and is viewed with favor as a community attraction. Available evidence indicates that benefits are maximized when the streetcar is planned and implemented as part of a concerted and broad-based program of improvements in a community. Further, the benefits require support of business leaders, particularly those whose establishments are served by the line. Finally, benefits accrue over a fairly long timespan, and are not realized immediately. There is a definite need to further explore and quantify the specific economic benefits which are possible in Eureka Springs, and such a detailed study is highly recommended to be undertaken as one of the next steps in the project. Route Alignment The recommended route runs from the present transit terminal on Main Street to Harmon Park. Like the old Citizens Electric Railway, it follows Spring Street for almost its entire length, thus providing direct service to virtually the entire Historic District. This route links to the present area-wide rubber-tired trolley service at the Main Street terminus, and can link to parking at the Harmon Park end of the line. Spring Street is a narrow and congested roadway. Therefore, fitting the streetcar into the right-of-way will have impacts on both traffic and parking. Potential mitigation of these impacts includes construction of a parallel street on existing right-of-way at the northern end of the line, and provision for fifty to sixty off-street parking spaces near the commercial section of Spring Street. These mitigation measures are discussed more fully in Chapter V and are included in the capital cost estimates. The streetcars will be pollution-free, propelled by electric power. Like the streetcars of by-gone days, this will require a single wire suspended over the center of the track. Other cities have reported no unfavorable impacts as a result of the overhead wire, provided the system is properly designed. The support poles can also be used for street lights and signage, and can be an attractive unifying urban design element. A storage and maintenance facility is recommended to be located at Harmon Park, on the same site as that of the former streetcar line. As part of this facility, the historic log entry building to the park is to be restored, and a small interpretive museum may be provided. Vehicles An initial roster of two replica streetcars is recommended. The cars will be historically authentic, featuring varnished wood interiors and brightly painted exteriors. They will provide full accessibility for all users. They will seat approximately 40 passengers, with room for standees in heavy rider periods. Details of the vehicle options considered may be found in Chapter VI. Operations Three alternate operating scenarios are described in Chapter VII. It is important to note that the streetcar will operate in both directions along Spring Street, thus providing a superior service to that currently in effect. The base alternative generally matches that provide by the present bus system, with a car every 30 minutes between 10AM and 5PM. The expanded service alternative increases hours of service until 10PM for the heavy summer season, and increases service frequency during weekend days to a car every 15 minutes. The expanded service alternative retains the lengthened hours of service and increases frequency to a 15-minute headway. Capital Cost The recommended streetcar system is estimated to cost $10,899,000. This estimate includes track, power distribution, vehicles, passenger stops, and a maintenance facility. It also includes both the roadway and parking mitigation measures mentioned above. Engineering and design costs are calculated as a percentage of the project. Because of the preliminary nature of the project, a 25% contingency is included in the overall cost estimate. The capital cost estimate will be refined as part of the engineering and detailed design phase. Operating Cost Estimates of operating costs are based on data from comparable systems, as are rough ridership projections, and the results discussed in Chapter IX. Actual net operating results will vary, depending on the service alternative selected, the fare structure, and the unit cost per mile which will be experienced in Eureka Springs. For a mid-range unit cost of $12/mile, a fare structure comparable to that of the present system, and the mid-range service alternative, the system will require an annual operating subsidy of about $11,000. If unit costs can be reduced to $10/mile or less, the system will reach or exceed breakeven. On the other hand, if actual unit costs rise to $15/mile, and the maximum service level is provided, the annual deficit could reach $72,000. The control of costs and service level is largely within the purview of Eureka Springs, and thus requires careful attention as the project proceeds to implementation. Funding Chapter X discusses a number of Federal, state and local sources of funding for both capital and operating costs. The purpose of this discussion is to identify sources and to suggest possible elements of a funding package for the Eureka Springs project. At this early stage, there are no guarantees that funding can be obtained, but it certainly appears that given strong community support and concerted efforts by elected officials and business leaders, such a package can be developed. The exact definition of a funding plan tailored for the Eureka Springs streetcar project will be a key element of the next phase of the work. Implementation Chapter XI provides an overview of the process of implementing the Eureka Springs streetcar. It identifies the work to be done in the next phase, as well as a potential schedule leading to actual operation of the system in April, 2001. Conclusion Restoration of an electric streetcar system in Eureka Springs, as proposed by the Community Electric Trolley Association, can provide significant benefits to the community, is feasible from an engineering standpoint, and appears capable of being funded. |
| Presented on-line as a public service by Positive Idea Marketing of Eureka Springs, Arkansas. |