On Thursday, July 16, the Fort Worth Star Telegram ran a story about a joint effort between Dallas and Fort Worth to secure $95 million in federal grants towards building new streetcar lines. The story implied that the funds would go toward a downtown Dallas streetcar, an idea that has been kicking around city hall since it was proposed in the Forward Dallas Comprehensive Plan a number of years ago. When the Dallas Observer’s blog, Unfair Park, picked up on the story, they also reported that it was the downtown Dallas streetcar line that was teaming with Fort Worth in a regional effort to secure federal funding for a new public transportation initiative.

Both sources had it wrong.

Fort Worth’s partner in the federal grant application is, in fact, the little grass roots transportation organization called the Oak Cliff Transit Authority. That organization was founded, in part, on a whim by Oak Cliff resident Jason Roberts, who wanted to see what kind of support there was for bringing a streetcar back to Oak Cliff. He found that there are a lot of residents who want to see the transportation project happen. Now that they have teamed up with Fort Worth, the Oak Cliff Transporatation Authority no longer looks like a community organization with big dreams, but rather a fledgling independent transportation authority with a real chance for success.

We caught up with OCTA board member Jason Roberts and asked him what the partnership with Fort Worth and the potential federal grants means for the OCTA’s efforts to bring streetcars back to Dallas.

Renegade Bus: So where does this leave the Oak Cliff Transit Authority today? Let’s say, best case scenario, everything goes through and you get the funding. What does that mean on the ground?

Jason Roberts: It’s still an uphill climb, but our efforts look more favorable now that we’re teaming up with Fort Worth and approaching things from a regional perspective. Combined, we’ve asked for $96 million Dollars ($48 million for Fort Worth /$48 million for Dallas). Best case scenario, if we receive these funds, we’ll be able to complete a streetcar alignment from Union Station downtown, across the Houston Street Viaduct and over to Methodist Hospital by Feb. 2012. The funds would also allow for the creation of a streetcar repair facility and three cars. With the passage of the recent TIF’s [tax increment financing districts] and MMD’s [municipal management district] in North Oak Cliff, an opportunity exists to expand upon this first segment and go deeper into the community.

RB: What still has to happen to secure the funding?

JR: NCTCOG (North Central Texas Council of Governments) is acting as the facilitator for the grant, so our group (OCTA) and Fort Worth are providing information as needed for COG to complete the combined application. Prior to working together, our organizations had individually begun gathering the necessary requirements to complete the grants, so at this point, we’re just handing COG our existing work to consolidate. Once completed, it will be reviewed among thousands of other proposals, and be graded for its ability to meet the criteria spelled out in TIGER’s [Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery] goals.

RB: What is the significance of the joint application with Fort Worth? I suppose it shows some regional good faith and cooperation. Is Washington receptive, or does it take notice of those kinds of things?

JR: It definitely bodes well, as Dallas and Fort Worth are often in competition for federally funded projects. The most notable instance where the cities came together was DFW airport. In our case, the TIGER grant is specifically looking for projects with a regional scope. When separated, both projects fall short of meeting this criteria, but when combined and given the rail link from the Union Station/DART/TRE, we suddenly achieve the goals set forth by the grant. I couldn’t say definitively what Washington’s take is on the combined effort, but it draws in Congressmen from both cities, so in that sense, we get a doubling of support. Also, when we presented the idea to NCTCOG, they were very supportive and quickly raised us to a “Regional Priority” due to the collaboration.

RB: This OCTA has been kind of quiet for the past year or so, as opposed to say, Bike Oak Cliff (which Roberts also runs). This application came as a surprise. Anything else up your sleeve?

JR: Ha! It’s funny you should ask. There’s quite a bit going on, and I’ve actually begun steps to combine OCTA and BFOC [Bike For Oak Cliff] into an overall Alternative Transportation advocacy organization for the area. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is a natural extension to a streetcar, so both groups’ goals align well. When visiting Portland, it was really hard to separate one from the other. That trip is what lead me down the path to the creation of Bike Friendly Oak Cliff. Another thing to note is that work with OCTA is more long term due to the nature of having to raise large funds and seek out multiple partnerships with private/public interests. BFOC is more immediate in that I can quickly accomplish small goals that foster a “bike friendly” environment. The best example of this is the online community pledge drive we ran at the beginning of the year. Within a month, we were able to raise money to install seven bike racks at area businesses.

As for things on the horizon, I’m beginning to focus on “Safe Routes to Schools” programs for kids, and working with Methodist Hospital to promote bike/ped infrastructure, using the hospital as a hub. They are the largest employer on our side of the river, so having their support is a huge benefit to the cause. In Portland, the city’s bicycle infrastructure was championed by the University, and a local hospital. I’m hoping to model much of our effort from what they originally pioneered.

A couple of other infrastructure projects that we requested are beginning to build some momentum as well. One is turning Tyler and Polk streets back into two-way roads. They were converted to one-way’s in the 1970’s, when car-first planning was in full swing. The bad thing that occurred for these streets is they became wide high speed thoroughfares, and businesses along the streets immediately saw a 50% drop in traffic due to loss of visibility (or inconvenience in turning around). If you’ll notice, when you drive down Tyler, the businesses that set up shop there have much higher turnover rates and are often vacant when compared to a street like Beckley. What spurred this was the recent Tyler Street Bicycle Block Party we held for our friends’ new bike shop. The area felt more dangerous due to cars rushing to meet the light, we witnessed multiple wrong turns, and it just felt hostile to pedestrians

The next project is a test First Sunday block closure on Jefferson Boulevard. I’ve always felt that Jefferson has the greatest potential for walkable/livable development. The problem is, it was built around a streetcar, so parking is minimal, and businesses can suffer due to the congestion. The Texas Theatre opened with 2,000 seats in 1931 with no parking lots. Now, I have 600 seats in the building, and I have to jump through hoops to accommodate cars if I put on an event that is sold to capacity. Our hope is to pitch a “roll-up” street, similar to what you see in some other cities. This is where during the day the Boulevard can be focused on cars, and in the evening, create barricades and build a pedestrian plaza and loosen ordinances on businesses so they can put tables far out into the street and allow for outdoor market spaces. On the back end facing Centre or Tenth, we’d attempt to develop “Parking Districts” whose revenues could be used to fund infrastructure projects along the corridor. You’re starting to see this quite a bit in places like Pasadena. In the end, you have to accommodate for cars, and allow ease of access into the corridor, but you want to keep them out of site from pedestrians to create a “people first” environment.

RB: A few years ago, you guys were working on doing a feasibility study for the Oak Cliff streetcar line. Is that happening/happened?

JR: Yes. We officially completed an initial feasibility study at the end of 2008. We’ve used that to move forward in seeking city, state, and federal funding. I have an amazing Vice President on my team, Luis Salcdeo, who has put in hundreds of hours pro-bono to help complete the study. I tend to get much of the recognition for these projects, but I have a lot of help from people who are some of the most strongly civic minded individuals you’ll ever run across. They work tirelessly in the background, and push me to keep going when I run into roadblocks. They’ve all become mentors and great friends.

RB: As you know, it seems when ever streetcars are mentioned some naysayer enters the conversation and says the whole idea is a waste of time. The common complaints are they are too expensive, no different than a bus, bog down traffic, are actually dangerous, and aren’t a real transportation option. I don’t think these arguments hold as well in more spatially constrained European cities, but in a city as spread out as Dallas, do streetcars really mean a walkable city or will they just be a fancy bus service that can’t change as traffic / ridership patters change?

JR: What we’re seeing in Dallas is a trend that is happening across the US, which is a return to urban-formed areas. Not necessarily the downtowns, but the first suburbs (Oak Cliff, Lakewood, Old East Dallas). When gas prices shot up last summer, we watched ridership on DART hit record levels, and we saw a rash of bicycle fatalities, as more people were looking for alternate transit options and were having to adapt to an environment that wasn’t built for anything other than cars. I’m not necessarily a doomsday-er when it comes to oil and regularly drive myself, but I do think cheap oil is on the wane, so we’re having to deal with an inevitability in regards to moving large groups of people. I also think there’s a generational shift that is valuing Quality of Life equally as much as Standard of Living. We pushed our communities out so far as to spend much of our time that would have been available for recreation or family, and transferred that to sitting in traffic. Our parents’ generation grew up in a time when people romanced cars and car culture – public transit and the like was considered “common”, while the open road represented “freedom.” And while this may still be the case in many areas, I think as a whole, an attitude shift has begun occurring, and people are returning to embracing “people-first” environments. You see cities every month coming online as “walkable,” or “new urbanist” like Portland, Austin, Savannah, Tempe, Boulder, and more. As this trend grows, you and I will take our families to visit and return home and begin asking, “Why are we not developing a similar form?”

As far as the expense goes, a typical myth that gets purported is that gas taxes cover our existing roads. TXDOT recently released a paper noting that roads (excluding tollroads), are heavily subsidized and in some instances would require $2.22 per gallon in gas taxes alone to cover maintenance and upkeep. The reality is, all transportation infrastructure from airports to trains, and roadways to light rails are expensive and do not pay for themselves. Given this reality, we have to look for what provides the most benefit for a given community. Though I advocate for streetcar/bike/ped infrastructure in Oak Cliff, I wouldn’t necessarily promote them in exurbs like McKinney and Frisco. Those communities are much more decentralized and built around a car-first model. Oak Cliff was built as a streetcar suburb which has had to adapt to cars. There’s pro’s and con’s to any form you choose, but if we select a “people first” environment, we’ll see the same improvements cities around the world are showing with greater returns on investment in terms of economic development, and a larger push towards buying/supporting local. When you include this with the improvements in overall health, lowering of obesity rates, effects on environment, and sustainability, the answer becomes all too obvious on which form we should seek.