What about the Bus?
One of the most common questions we are asked when presenting about the revival of our streetcars is — what about buses? Wouldn’t that be a less expensive solution? While bus service may be less expensive to run than building our dedicated infrastructure, would it have the same positive impact on the community? Let’s talk …
We have opened a dialogue with folks from the RideSD advocacy group on this topic. I’m including the paper they have written and shared here. Their position is that Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is more cost effective and can generate similar travel times compared to a dedicated streetcar system. They ask valid questions and make some good points that should be discussed.
One of the key principles Vibrant Uptown has adopted in this effort is that we don’t pretend to have all the answers. Thee are a few key elements that we believe are important to solving our mobility issues, but otherwise we intend to work with stakeholders in government and transit agencies and solicit input from the communities impacted as both individuals and through the advocacy and neighborhood groups who choose to engage. We want the community to decide what will work best for our neighborhoods. As such, dialogues such as this are part of the process moving forward.
Using Google Gemini AI to summarize some of the available information on the comparison between streetcars and buss rapid transit: The choice between streetcars and buses involves trade-offs between high initial cost but long-term performance and urban development benefits for streetcars, versus low initial cost and greater operational flexibility for buses
Streetcar Advantages
Capacity: Streetcars generally have a higher passenger capacity per vehicle, and multiple cars can be linked together to form longer trains with a single operator, making them more efficient for high-demand corridors.
Comfort & Quality of Ride: The steel wheels on steel rails provide a smoother, quieter ride compared to the vibration and noise of a bus on asphalt.
Environmental & Health Factors: Running on electricity, streetcars produce no point-of-use exhaust emissions and avoid the tire particulate matter generated by rubber-tired vehicles. They can also use renewable energy sources and regenerative braking.
Permanence & Economic Development: The fixed infrastructure of tracks and wires signals a long-term municipal commitment to a route, which encourages private real estate investment and higher-density, pedestrian-friendly development along the line.
Accessibility & Wayfinding: Modern streetcars feature low floors for easy, level boarding, which benefits people with mobility issues, strollers, and bicycles. Fixed routes and prominent stops also offer better wayfinding for new riders.
Longevity: Streetcar vehicles and rail infrastructure last much longer than buses and roads, often for decades, amortizing the high initial capital cost over a longer period.
Bus Advantages
Cost-Effectiveness: Buses have significantly lower initial capital costs for both vehicles and infrastructure (no tracks to lay). They are a more cost-effective option for establishing or modifying transit service quickly.
Flexibility: The primary advantage of buses is their ability to change routes easily to adapt to changing demand or reroute around accidents, road construction, or other obstacles.
Adaptability: Buses can operate on existing road networks and climb steeper grades than streetcars, making them suitable for a wider variety of urban and suburban environments.
Speed (in some cases): While often perceived as slower, a bus in a dedicated right-of-way can move people as fast as a streetcar in mixed traffic, as it can go around a stalled vehicle.
Incremental Improvement: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems can implement many of the operational advantages of rail, such as dedicated lanes, off-board fare collection, and signal priority, at a much lower cost than building a new rail line.
Courtesy Gemini AI summary
Ultimately, the most suitable mode of transport "depends" on the specific needs, density, and long-term goals of a city or a particular corridor.
Successful modern streetcar examples generally fall into two categories: systems that have integrated well into a large, existing transit network and those that have been the catalyst for significant economic development and urban revitalization.
North American Examples
Portland, Oregon
: Often cited as the first modern streetcar system in the U.S. since the post-war era, the Portland Streetcar is a standout performer in terms of ridership and is credited with spurring billions of dollars in new commercial and residential development along its route. Its success is often attributed to a unique combination of planning and market factors.
Kansas City, Missouri
: The KC Streetcar is a notable success, with ridership exceeding initial projections. The system is free to ride and has been a central part of downtown redevelopment efforts, helping to generate over $2.25 billion in capital investment near the line. The city treated it as a high-quality, reliable transit option, which resonated with riders.
Tucson, Arizona
: The Sun Link streetcar connects neighborhoods, homes, businesses, the university, and the downtown area. It has been successful in connecting different parts of the city and has been associated with a significant amount of economic revitalization in the area it serves.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
: The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) streetcar system is a massive, first-generation system that has survived and expanded. It operates the most extensive streetcar system in the Americas and serves as a core part of its urban transit network, demonstrating how streetcars can function as a high-capacity, integrated mode of transportation when part of a large, comprehensive system.
New Orleans, Louisiana
: Home to the world's oldest continuously operating streetcar line, the New Orleans streetcar system has long been an iconic and practical part of the city's public transit and cultural landscape.
Key Success Factors
Successful modern streetcar systems often share the following characteristics:
Integration: They are well-integrated with the city's overall public transportation network (e.g., connecting to light rail or bus rapid transit lines).
Reliability & Frequency: High-performing systems offer reliable and frequent service, treating the streetcar as a premier transit product.
Development Goals: Planners have a clear understanding of the system's primary purpose, whether for urban mobility or economic development, and align all decisions accordingly.
Accessibility: Modern low-floor designs facilitate easy and level boarding for all users, including those with mobility issues, enhancing the overall user experience.
These examples show that while not a universal solution for all transit needs, modern streetcars can be highly effective in specific contexts, particularly in fostering dense, walkable urban environments and providing efficient, pleasant, short-distance mobility.
Portland, OR Streetcar
So, What did Portland do to make it work?
Portland implemented a coordinated set of development policies alongside its streetcar system, primarily focused on encouraging high-density, mixed-use, and pedestrian-oriented development through specific land-use changes, public-private partnerships, and financial tools.
Key policies included:
Zoning Changes: The city adopted specific land use plans, such as the Montgomery Park Area Plan (MPAP), that changed zoning designations in areas around the streetcar lines to allow for a mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses. These changes promoted high-density development, often exceeding 100 units per acre in designated zones. The zoning code for areas within a certain distance (e.g., 200 feet) of the streetcar alignment includes requirements for active ground-floor uses and prohibitions on drive-through facilities to foster walkable environments.
Public Benefits Agreements (PBAs): Portland negotiated agreements with private developers that tied increased development densities to the provision of specific public benefits, such as affordable housing, middle-wage jobs, and public open spaces. This ensured that the public investment in transit resulted in tangible community benefits.
Reduced Parking Requirements: Recognizing that the streetcar provided high-quality transit access, the city and developers agreed to lower minimum parking requirements for new developments along the line. This made projects more financially feasible by reducing the need to build expensive parking structures, while also promoting a less car-dependent lifestyle.
Local Improvement Districts (LIDs): An innovative funding mechanism, the streetcar Local Improvement District, was used to help fund the system's construction. Property owners who stood to benefit most financially from their proximity to the streetcar contributed to the infrastructure costs, creating a direct link between the public investment and private gain.
Master Development Agreements: The Portland Development Commission (PDC) negotiated agreements with major landowners (e.g., Hoyt Street Properties in the River District) that incrementally increased required housing densities as public improvements, like the streetcar, were completed. This phased approach provided a reliable framework for both the public and private sectors.
Brownfield Redevelopment: The streetcar was strategically routed through areas of former industrial land and brownfields, such as the Pearl District's railyard. The combination of environmental cleanup efforts and the promise of high-quality transit catalyzed the transformation of these underutilized sites into vibrant new neighborhoods.
Integration with Regional Transit: The streetcar was designed to integrate with the larger TriMet bus and MAX light rail system, enhancing its effectiveness as a viable transportation option and supporting overall urban planning goals.
These coordinated efforts created a predictable and supportive environment for private investment, leading to billions of dollars in new development and the creation of dense, mixed-use neighborhoods along the streetcar corridor.
So we, as a community need to decide between various options and learn from the successes and challenges of other cities in improving the ability to move through our neighborhoods as they continue to grow.
