Until recently, there has been little interest in the in building new streetcar networks, with communities tending to focus on faster — but more expensive — light rail transit systems, which operate in their own rights-of-way.
In 2001, Portland reversed the trend, opening a downtown streetcar line with brand new rolling stock, intent on using this mode of transportation to encourage transit-oriented development. The results have been impressive: $3.5 billion in new construction, 10,000 residential units, more than 5,000,000 square feet of office and hotel space. Politicians and transportation experts have flocked to Portland to see the results, and cities across the country are now pondering systems of their own. This map provides a description of current proposals for modern streetcar networks in metropolitan areas around the country and their development status. It also indicates where historic systems, either never terminated or newly restored, operate today.
See the full-sized version of the chart after the jump.
Click map for a larger version:
Yonah Freemark is an independent researcher currently working in France on comparative urban development as part of a Gordon Grand Fellowship from Yale University, from which he graduated in May 2008 with a BA in architecture. He writes about transportation and land use issues for The Transport Politic and The Infrastructurist.
May 4th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Portland also just got federal funds to complete a streetcar loop all across inner East Portland, and eventually back into downtown over the rail/bike/ped only bridge that is starting construction in 2011.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Stamford, CT has a study underway for a line connecting a waterfront redevelopment are, to the train station, downtown, and another office/shopping area.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Here in Salt Lake they are considering streetcars for several lines, including one up North (to Bountiful) and one on the border between Salt Lake and South Salt Lake, through the Sugarhouse area.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Fort Worth has a proposed streetcar system:
http://fortworthstreetcar.org/
http://fortworthology.com/lightrail/
May 4th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
I haven’t entirely understood what the advantage of streetcars is vs. buses. It would seem that buses do more or less the same thing, but with much greater flexibility to adjust routes.
Is it just that, since they aren’t buses, a lot more people actually choose to ride them? I mean, that’s a good enough reason for me, but I was wondering if there’s some other factor I’m not noticing.
May 4th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Evan,
I’d be curious what others have to say.
But, clearly, part of it is that streetcars make people feel fancy and high status-ey, while buses, for whatever reason, do not.
In other words, there’s a pretty big coolness gap there. I tend to agree with you that one can note it as a social phenomenon and not feel obliged to judge it one way or another.
-Jebediah
May 4th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
I don’t think that streetcars will work except in a few locales with mild weather. The big advantage of traditional street cars was their open easy on, easy off design that made them practical for trips of just a few blocks. When you start having to enclose them for climate control, it really slows the system down by funneling everyone through a single door.
I do agree that there is a status factor attached to streetcars. My local transport district runs buses downtown that are done up to look like traditional streetcars even though they function as small buses.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
An often cited advantage of street cars over buses is that their guideways are more fixed. While easy route reconfiguration might seem like a plus from the transit authority point of view, it is claimed that this tends to make local investors cagey. I.e., no business owner will be too enthusiastic about the chances of a bus stop increasing business, since it may just go away a few months or years down the line. For a street car, the fixed rails represent a capital investment - local investors know that the streetcar will be there for the foreseeable future. Hence, the argument goes that street cars will produce more local development than bus services.
I’m not sure about the validity of the above, but this, along with the above mentioned “coolness” or “newness” factor, is one of the main pluses typically ascribed to street cars versus buses.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Streetcars are like buses except they don’t smell of diesel, they run quieter and more comfortably, and once purchased (albeit at high cost) they are cheaper to maintain and last way the hell longer (case in point, the PCC era streetcars discarded in the US in the 40’s, snapped up by the Yugoslavs, which are still running). The tracks are also cheaper to maintain than the roadways they displace.
And nobody runs easy on, easy off vehicles outside of San Francisco. The easy off is too often way too easy.
May 4th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Evan,
Another reason streetcars are advantageous over buses, aside from their improved ride quality, reduced noise pollution, and reduced direct pollution, is they attract economic development. This is in the form of either new or redevelopment along the route, and attracts development in a way that a regular bus line cannot. To a developer, streetcar tracks are not going to go away as easily as a bus route can change its alignment, and it is something they can market to their future tenants, shoppers, residents, etc.
- Sarah
May 4th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
The Boston marker isn’t quite correct. The MBTA has been planning an extension of its Green Line streetcar system north into Somerville and Medford:
http://www.greenlineextension.org/
Evan,
Regarding buses and streetcars, I don’t know if the Boston example is indicative of anything, but folks in this area are notably excited about the proposed extension of the streetcar system, and are expecting some revitalization of the neighborhoods around the planned stops (there’s recent memory of similar revitalization after the heavy-duty Red Line subway was extended in the early 80s). I suspect that the relative significance of introducing new track and platforms suggests to people that a transit system is serious about serving an area; maybe the impermanence of bus routes doesn’t instill analogous confidence.
May 5th, 2009 at 12:29 am
LA and providence are two cities with serious proposals
May 5th, 2009 at 9:33 am
1) Toronto has an extensive streetcar network, with easy-on easy-off stops. Additionally, there are some streetcar exclusive rights-of-way.
2) The Newark City Subway ran on PCCs until 2001.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:43 am
I’m glad to see the Fort Worth plan listed, though I’d like to make a correction on web links - the fortworthology.com/lightrail link is woefully out-of-date, due to my own sloth in updating it. I’ve been covering a lot more current news about the Fort Worth Streetcar, and the easiest way to find current coverage is this link:
http://fortworthology.com/tag/streetcar/
May 5th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Boise has a proposed streetcar system; see http://www.boisestreetcar.org
May 5th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Thanks for all the excellent suggestions.
-Jebediah
May 5th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Another note about Portland - United Streetcar, LLC (http://www.unitedstreetcar.com/), a subsidiary of Oregon Iron Works, has been contracted to build future streetcars that will be used in Portland (the currently in use cars were built by Czech company Skoda). If any of you all are involved in planning processes for your cities, and are interested in getting U.S. made streetcars, you might contact them to ask about the possibilities. They are currently the only U.S. company building streetcars.
May 5th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Toronto has been running streetcars since 1861, electric streetcars since 1892. It is now in the process of replacing its current fleet of 248 high-floor streetcars with 204 low-floor single-ended streetcars from Bombardier, which will be twice the length of its current streetcars, or 2 ½ buses. These run in the downtown area.
In addition, Toronto is planning on expanding into the suburban areas with 7 new light rapid transit lines, which would request an option for another 400 double-ended light rail vehicles.
May 5th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
In Philadelphia we have fantastic restoration of 1930’s are art deco streetcars that run along Girard Avenue. The main workhorses however are clunky, ugly, noisy 1970’s era trolleys that serve West Philadelphia as the “Green Line”. They are as cool as old buses. I wish they could be replaced with something better but they do serve a huge number of Philadelphians. It would be great if we had double length trolleys reminiscent of the old trolleys.
May 5th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
[...] Infrastructurist Maps Out the Return of the Streetcar (via Streetsblog.net) [...]
May 5th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Evan,
in my opinion - one of the greatest benefits that streetcars offer -
is significantly improved pedestrian environment that usually comes along with implementing streetcars..
Cities that offer streetcars have, no doubt, much better landscaping and walkable conditions.
This is because streetcars, as mentioned above, are way more attractive to riders than buses, which in turns prompt to more mass transit usage in general, which in turns prompts to more walking, thus creating overall better urban environment and attractive city streets.
An example that buses will NEVER create such great urban conditions is - Los Angeles. Sadly, we have no streetcars (as of yet!), and our mass transit system is mostly based on buses, you’ll notice very poor landscaping in most areas and still - only very few people on the streets, with ugly (and often damaged) sidewalks…
So, I’m all for streetcars! Better for the environment, better for mass transit, better for pedestrians, and - yes, better for the Economy!
May 5th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
You should also give credit to SF for a “finished” line - the T-Third is not a preserved historic line, but is a new line opened in 2006. It does have its own ROW for most of the route, though…
May 5th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
They can call me “Socialist” for this — and I’m surely more Socialist than Obama — but in matters of public transit I look to Europe.
Most European cities and countries kept investing in public transit during the decades when America was DISinvesting. Now I look across the pond and see dozens of European cities extending or building new rail transit systems, including many streetcar lines, and I conclude: ‘They probably know what they are doing; we should do some of that too.’
But some will insist on an argument based on factoids. Well, O.K. then. Steel wheel on steel rail is inherently more efficient than rubber tire on pavement. Electric powered railcars can accelerate more quickly than buses. Rail-based systems can run on rails in the streets and on dedicated lines, even underground for a portion of their routes. (And I’m sure I read, it was too good to dream, that Kawasaki is working on a streetcar than can run for miles on batteries, eliminating the need for overhead wires in historic districts.)
Technological advances already make the current generation definitely NOT your grandfather’s streetcar. Low floors are standard, for easy-on easy-off curbside boarding. No more waiting behind the old person with the bum knees crawling up the steps to pass the farebox, or the young parent struggling with stroller and shopping bags either. Even wheelchairs can easily board on a low ramp. Wide doors allow passengers to enter or exit quickly. So streetcar stops take less time than buses. The cars are quiet, the a/c works well, the ride is smooth.
Yet no one knows exactly why streetcars and light rail always, always, get about 10% more passengers than the bus routes they replace. But they do. Maybe it is snobbery or novelty, the sleek Euro-style of modern trams beating the tired downscale image of conventional buses. Maybe some passengers take comfort from seeing the rails stretching out far ahead of them, while ever fearing that the bus could take a wrong turn at the next corner and divert them off course. And mapmakers almost always include streetcar and light rail lines on their city maps, and almost never put any bus route in ink. This last point is related to the studies showing that transit oriented development is always great from rail than from buses. New investment follows the lines on the map.
Of course, the upfront capital costs of rail is more than buses. But that is more than made up over time in lower operating and maintenance costs. In transit you get what you pay for.
And I note the comment above that streetcar and light rail lines usually come with an upgraded street experience from better stops or “stations”, landscaping, etc. I’m sure this is true, because it is also true that the capital costs of these rail lines often include a complete reworking of the street infrastructure. I understand that in Houston, for example, the new Light Rail tracks will be put atop streets where the antique mains and sewer pipes will all be replaced, the roadbed repaired, and the surface repaved. Better sidewalks is the least of it. Of course, your federal transit dollar is paying for these modernizations, so why wouldn’t they!
May 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
El Paso, Texas, used to have a streetcar that brought passengers from Juarez, Mexico, just across the Rio Grande, to shop downtown. Yeah, it’s been a while.
Nowadays some community leaders and city planners are looking at a potential streetcar route to help revive the faded downtown. It might or might not try to collect passengers coming over the pedestrian bridge from Juarez. It would link the downtown’s many government buildings, several museums, the Amtrak station, the convention center and big hotels, the campus of the University of Texas at El Paso, the hospital-medical district, and the airport. That UTEP campus, with its basketball arena, football stadium, classrooms and dorms is just close enough to downtown to be an easy streetcar connection, but too far away for students to walk in the desert sun. If other Sunbelt cities like Albuquerque or Ft. Worth start to move ahead with streetcars, El Paso could also climb aboard.
May 5th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Shannon: have you looked at a streetcar built in the last 100 years? All modern streetcars are closed-in and have multiple doors. These things run in snow and ice and actually have heat and A/C. I ride one to work in Portland.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
One of the planned Seattle lines, the First Hill/Capitol Hill line, is funded and will be opening in 2012, in addition to the South Lake Union line that we already have. Also, the mayor has said that he wants another line, the 1st Ave line, to be under construction by 2013 (according to http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/05/05/what-the-mayor-told-us-last-night). It is definitely exciting to see that there are so many cities doing this, and even more that aren’t on the list that people talked about in the comments.
May 6th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
San Diego is currently refurbishing three ex-Muni PCC cars to operate over the existing Trolley central city loop route. Since this project is being done with volunteer labor and in-kind services and no direct funding from MTS, no exact start-up date has been announced. It is all subject to donations and funding from other sources. Work is well under way though on restoring the three cars. You can find more information at http://www.sdvintagetrolley.com.
May 6th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
[...] story in The Infrastructurist says streetcars were all but wiped out by the 1960s, but now, with a [...]
May 6th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
I found the comment on the fact that people will not ride the bus but would gladly ride a street car. I am guessing but three reasons cross my mind. I know where the street car is going (have you ever looked at a bus route map), it likely more frequent or at least on time (perceived) and it feels safer from a crime point of view. I know I have ridden street cars in Europe and Australia but cringe at the thought of a bus…
May 7th, 2009 at 12:28 am
[...] a cool map from The Infrastructurist (hat tip to The Architect’s Newspaper Blog) outlining where some of the activity is. [...]
May 7th, 2009 at 10:35 am
[...] Cities across America are rediscovering the attraction of the streetcar. [Infrastructurist] [...]
May 7th, 2009 at 11:12 am
Streetcars may be a good alternative for some urban areas, but in others they are simply silly.
They have been talking about putting in streetcars where I live (Boise ID) for the last couple of years. The proposed route is so ridiculously short that it reminds me more of an electric train set than a workable transportation solution. The infrastructure costs for a city as small as Boise will never be recovered, requiring a heavy taxpayer subsidy in perpetuity. Our proposed system is design to make a few people wealthy and not much more than that.
As for buses, natural gas powered ones are an excellent alternative to diesel. In fact, our trash collection trucks are swtching over to CNG this summer.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Evan,
Perhaps the most over looked and significant difference between street cars and busses is permanence. You’ll notice that development will follow a train station, but rarely a bus stop.
May 10th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
“what the advantage of streetcars is vs. buses. It would seem that buses do more or less the same thing, but with much greater flexibility to adjust routes.”
Simple: rails don’t pick up and move any time soon. Once a trolley system is in place, business and investors can count on them for decades. Buses come and go.
Our real big problem is that the urban demographic has changed. And what was managable in the 50’s and 60’s will need more policing to work today. (Review vid of gang assault in Paris last month). That said, the investing class will roll up those problems if the bleeding heart classes don’t get in the way. Success in light rail may depend on how far away are the projects. Too close and they just won’t work.
May 14th, 2009 at 6:29 am
Getting back to Evan:
Another advantage of light rail and/or streetcars over buses is a matter of cost.
To carry the same amount of passengers as a streetcar with one driver (current double length models), you need at least two buses. 50% less driver’s salaries you have to pay.
With light rail, it’s even less. You can carry up to six buses worth of passengers with one light rail train. 82% savings for one light rail train driver vs. 6 bus drivers.
Also, train cars are more expensive, but last much longer than buses, in general. Most city buses last only up to 15-20 years, even with rebuilding. Train cars can last easily 20 years, 30 years, up to 40 years or even longer with restoration. San Francisco is running PCC cars that are over 60 years old (granted, they are restored) and New Orleans is running some trolley cars that are 80 years old (again, restored, which costs some money, but much less money than buying new trolley cars).
Also, streetcars and light are potentially able to be 100% green. Electrically powered, and could potentially be powered by 100% solar and/or wind power. Even if they are powered with regular power plant derived power, they are still 95% cleaner than diesel buses, even including the penalty for standard power plants.
Also, with streetcars, longer vehicles can run on city streets. The current legal limit for a bus is 60 feet, but streetcars can go longer, since they are locked into the rails and won’t be swinging all around the streets, smashing into cars. Check the facts: 99% of streetcar/automobile accidents involve the driver of the private car smashing into the train, not the other way around.
May 14th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Regarding street cars etc…
In Boston I have many options to travel on transit: trolleys, regular bus lines and a new bus rapid transit line.. They are phasing out the diesel buses for natural gas.. that’s a great improvement but you’re still jostled by every pothole and sway at every bus stop.. I thought bus rapid transit would be a significant improvement - there’s still a bit of sway and they concrete was not installed as smoothly as line of steel rail.. The other downside I see in BRT is that it can be too flexible…… the transit planners are pushed by funding formulas to capture every pocket of riders thus you can get a very wiggly route..something that’s less practical on a fixed rail system…
I say push for rail and connect this with trails, bike lanes and sidewalks!!
May 15th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Street cars have a number of advantages over buses. As everyone has said, there is the issue of permanence.
1) They are more comfortable. In Philadelphia, like in most East Coast cities, streets are constantly torn up, full of potholes or rutted (actually, I think having paved streets with 6″ deep ruts is particular to Philadelphia). Tram trolleys don’t have these problems.
2) They are faster than buses or trackless trolleys (aside from 2 lines in Philly, do any other cities run trackless trolleys, or trolley buses anymore?). Often trams have dedicated lanes. Even if they don’t, if they operate on streets with multiple lanes, people stay out of the tram lane, because it’s harder to drive a car along tram tracks (the wheels pull to one side or the other as they fall into the groove). Also, unlike places where there are dedicated combo bike/bus lanes, bicyclists try to stay away from tram tracks. Having done an end-over onto cobblestones in Germany myself, I can say that trapping your bike tire in the track groove isn’t fun.
3) They are quieter. This is an advantage with trackless trolleys as well.
4) They have that air of nostalgia. This is especially true of the restored Market St. trolleys in SF, the restored PCCs on the Girard Ave. line in Philly, etc.
5) They stop less. Because of the increased infrastructure for stops, transit planners don’t place stops at EVERY BLOCK, like they do with buses (SEPTA in Philly is terrible for this). Instead, blocks are a quarter to a half mile apart, so any point is no more than an eigth to a quarter mile from a stop. Still easily walkable, but fewer stops.
6) They are scalable. Shorter trams can be run during off peak times, but additional trams (e.g. San Diego) or unpowered trailing cars (e.g. Zurich) can be be used for rush hour.
7) People will travel longer distances on them. At one point, in the 1930s, a person could travel to Boston from Washington solely on trolleys, with only two short gaps in the routes. You had to change trains alot, but it was possible.
Just some of the reasons…
May 20th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
[...] SEE ALSO: AMERICA’S STREETCAR RENAISSANCE (MAP) [...]
May 20th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
[...] SEE ALSO: AMERICA’S STREETCAR RENAISSANCE (MAP) [...]
May 25th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Up here in Toronto, Canada we have always had streetcars. They are a feature of our urban landscape and we swear by them.
http://transit.toronto.on.ca/streetcar/index.shtml
May 26th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
There should be little argument as to why most people–even transit-averse middle-class Americans–prefer streetcars over buses. The ride quality is superior in every way.
Buses are noisy. I ride them every day in Chicago, and I am constantly amazed at how loud a diesel bus engine is–even on our latest-model buses, and even at the front of the coach 40 feet away from the engine. the valve chatter is an irritant to the nervous system. By comparison, streetcars are virtually silent–so much so that they have to be equipped with loud and somewhat irritating bells to warn pedestrians they’re present. Nobody is ever surprised by the approach of a bus, but streetcars can really creep up on you.
Buses, are rough-riding, susceptible to every pothole and height irregularity in the pavement (and in Chicago we have plenty). Streetcars ride on smooth, jointless steel rails that rarely develop bumps.
Streetcars accelerate and decelerate smoothly because they’re electrically propelled. Internal-combustion engines acting through a transmission simply cannot surge with the same smoothness. The latest New Flyer buses operated by the Chicago Transit Authority have a particularly nasty “kick” that occurs just as the transmission is transitioning from first to second. I’m fit, but they’ve come close t knocking me down.
Buses lurch unpredictably from side to side as they weave in and out of traffic and as they move from the traffic lane to the curb lane to pick up passengers. Streetcars follow a fixed guideway and stop at mid-street platforms, making it uinnecessary for the car to swerve from its course. Any turns occur at the same location on every trip, so that even standees can more or less relax knowing the car is not going to perform any unpredictable lateral maneuvers. A quick glance out the window alerts the repeat rider to the approach of any curve requiring the rider to brace himself.
Most streetcar riders don’t consciously think about the differences between a bus ride and a streetcar ride. But their unconscious minds–the spinal cord, the solar plexus, the inner ear and the seat of the pants–quickly tally the differences and deliver an impressionistic conclusion: The streetcar ride is physiologically less stressful.
Several readers have commented that streetcars are a good investment because they last longer than buses and require less maintenance. That’s true, but it’s not something the passengers perceive as part of their riding experience.
But they do perceive something that’s related to the streetcar’s longer, low-maintenance life: Streetcars age better than buses. Because an internal-combustion engine is constantly engaged in hammering itself to death, buses tend to vibrate themselves into a sort of metallurgical disshevelment. All kinds of interior fittings–window frames, handrails, floor coverings, seats–tend to work loose and make the interior look frowzy and uncared-for. By age 12 the bus is a piece of junk and has to be retired. A streetcar the same age is barely into its adolescence. Running on smooth steel rails and powered by rotary electric traction motors, the streetcar experiences almost no vibration and with only minimal maintenance looks and feels tight as a drum 30, 40 even 50 years out.
This the passenger does observe. When you ride one of the remaining PCC cars in Toronto or San Francisco you can tell they’re “old” in the sense of “out of style,” but when you look around the interior everything still seems shipshape, nothing rattles, the windows open and close without binding. The rider experiences a sense of solid quality associated with Grandma’s solid-oak dining table and 1847 Rodgers Brothers silver. And that makes everybody feel good.
May 30th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
One other great advantage of streetcars is that the infrastructure serves as orienting and wayfinding device. The track alerts folks to the route and leads them to stops. Because they are a permanent feature of the streetscape, the routing is predictable and stable (unlike bus routes). So unlike a bus, a streetcar informs and helps citizens to formulate an image of their city, even if folks don’t ride it. It is a feature of their public realm. Because of this, these streets get greater public attention. The visual aspect of the route is a subtle advantage, but one Kevin Lynch would not underplay. It is no wonder that businesses thus like to locate close to the tracks (and so do residents)…One reason why the entire streetcar corridor (and not just the area around the stops) benefits from development and increased value.
A secondary point: the stops are typically given more attention than most bus routes and the information system is more advanced. In Portland, the shelters even have VMS diplays that tell you the times of the next two streetcar arrivals. This valuable information gives people the option to wait, do something else to pass the time, or walk to their destination.
June 1st, 2009 at 10:19 am
For those of you who cannot see the difference between a bus and a streetcar, I suggest riding a streetcar when you get the chance. Then, if you can locate a bus that more or less follows the same route, give that a try. Compare the two experiences.
June 3rd, 2009 at 7:39 pm
[...] transit riders overwhelming prefer streetcars. Well, overwhelmingly if the comments section from a recent story on this site can be taken as a fair sample. One reader posed the question, “buses or [...]
June 5th, 2009 at 10:14 am
Add Norfolk, VA to the list of cities with trams. They are constructing a 7 mile system that will operate in mixed traffic and on a few elevated sections. HRT’s Tide Light Rail will use the same Siemens Avanto LRV’s used in Charlotte, Houston, San Diego and others. A study to extend right of way to Virginia Beach, VA is currently underway.
http://www.ridethetide.com/
June 9th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Check out the following sites for Railway industry info:
http://www.progressiverailroading.com (has a blog site for rail-discussions with the pros)
http://www.railwayage.com (in publication since the early 1800’s !)
http://www.transalert.com (Simmons Boardman Publishing-Railway Educational Bureau-part of RailwayAge)
http://www.railpro.co.uk (UK and European rail news)
June 15th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
As a daily bus rider, I can vouch for preferring trolleys over buses. My wife and I got married on LA’s San Pedro Waterfront Red Car line. I just don’t think it would have been as romantic to have the ceremony on the Metro Local 52.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:14 am
[...] America’s streetcar renaissance continues, more and more medium-size cities are considering an investment in the mode. The latest [...]
June 23rd, 2009 at 10:42 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson-Bergen_Light_Rail
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Line_(New_Jersey_Transit)
June 23rd, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Streetcars can move more people per hour per direction than trolley buses (electric ones, not the fake buses) and buses. Light rail is a kind of streetcar too, because they can operate not only on segregate tracks - and are the modern sucesors of the interurban streetcars of the past.
To someone that asked: there are several cities that have trolleybuses in the USA, Dayton, Philadelphia, Boston, San Francisco and Seattle. There were a lot more but those were withdrawn with the same arguments that demise the streetcars: inflexible, expensive to mantain, obsolete. http://www.trolleybuses.net/index.htm
June 23rd, 2009 at 8:43 pm
How did you leave out Buffalo, NY? They have had a street car line for about 20 years now.
June 23rd, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Just for the record, electric buses/trackless trolleys run in San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver BC, Dayton OH and Boston. I was under the impression that the Philadelphia lines were not in operation, but maybe they’ve been restored since the last time I checked. Museum operations include Seashore Trolley Museum (Kennebunkport ME) and Illinois Railway Museum (Union IL).
The appeal of streetcars and light rail train to “riders by choice” (as opposed to “transit dependant” people) has been discussed many times in various websites. If there’s no electric railway available, I’ll ride a bus and not be too concerned about it, but there are some who “would rather die than take a bus to the hospital” (my ex-wife being a prime example.) As a transportation history enthusiast I even find buses interesting, especially the pre-1960 old-look models, although there may be more pre-1960 streetcars than similarly aged buses in running condition.
June 25th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
[...] Chart: America’s Streetcar Renaissance » INFRASTRUCTURIST – n 2001, Portland reversed the trend, opening a downtown streetcar line with brand new rolling stock, intent on using this mode of transportation to encourage transit-oriented development. The results have been impressive: $3.5 billion in new construction, 10,000 residential units, more than 5,000,000 square feet of office and hotel space. [...]
June 28th, 2009 at 3:14 am
It may be interesting for you that the streetcar experiences a renaissance in Europe as well. In France they are à la mode since a couple of years, here in Paris the local transport company has recently built four lines and will double them in the next years.
Passengers prefer streetcars against buses for the reasons already mentioned by other posters. One may summarize most advantages by considering that streetcars (roughly) move in one direction while buses are often forced to move quite abruptly in two.
June 28th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Hey; Lets get the facts straight “Pilgrim”.
Starting after WWII a holding company “National City Lines” started buying up streetcar and trolley operations in Cities such as L.A., Columbus, Dayton, Buffalo,
Minneapolis, and numerous cities across the U.S.
“National City Lines” was bankrolled by General Motors, Firestone Rubber, Texaco Oil,
Union Oil, and many automotive & truck vendors interested in building “busses” !!!
Get the PICTURE ??
The streetcar was “Toast” !
Cities methodically reduced schedules of service, abandoned routes, deferred
maintenance to equiptment, cryed a ” tale of Woe” about horrendous losses and no
“profit” and pleaded to shutdown their systems in the “Name of Progress”!
That was THE WORD in the 50’s and 60’s, “PROGRESS” !!!!!!!!!!!!
These events all mysteriously transpired after the cities involved had sold their
OPERATIONS to NATIONAL CITY LINES !! What a coincidence!
So here comes the stinky Busses! GM, White, Flexible, Blue Bird, Crown, you name it
they all jumped in the big Money Swimming Pool!
Some cities, San Francisco, Chicago,Dayton,had “half a brain”, like a gifted
scare crow and converted some of their Heavy Routes to “Trackless Trolleys”, with
new equiptment and infrastructure but not all that many cities cared.
Chicago had good segments on Irving Park, Diversey, Grand, and North Ave.
These intersected with the North Side “EL” trains complementing the El routes
as feeders for passenger traffic. Marmon Herrington 46 seaters where the work-
horse of the System. They did a “Hell of a Job” for 30 more years .
But for the rest of the Country the rails were “paved over” the copper was pulled
down, the substation rotarys were junked for copper and brass and the end of
a era of rational, practical, efficient transportation ended in the U.S.
“ANYBODY” would rather ride on a train or streetcar than a bus ! Ask them, they’ll
give you the “thumbs up”. Safety, Speed, Comfort, Seating, Surroundings, Thats it.
So What do you know ! The once “Largest Corporation in the World” is now in the
tank ! What do they say? “Every little Doggie has his Day”!
Too Bad, So Sad!
Maybe all the nasty, underhanded, unethical schemes they pulled years ago are
coming back to haunt. Such is the sad commentary on American Business and its
unethical practices.
Well, This is a good article about something important to our Transportation Future !
Pray for More Transportation Sanity in Congress. We’ve got good Cheerleader’s
in the Administration in Pres. O’Bama, V.P. Biden, Secr’y LaHood,Chrmn Oberstar,etc.
“Let’s get it DONE” !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
June 28th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Seattle’s system is really King, Pierce, and Snohomish county’s transit system which is made up of light and heavy rail rolling stock and bus rapid transit. The only street car is the — S.L.U.T. — trolley in the south lake union area and maybe the 99 King County Metro trolley if it comes back
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 am
“In 2001, Portland reversed the trend, opening a downtown streetcar line with brand new rolling stock, intent on using this mode of transportation to encourage transit-oriented development. The results have been impressive: $3.5 billion in new construction, 10,000 residential units, more than 5,000,000 square feet of office and hotel space. ”
What you dont mention, however, is that in 2009 most of that “development” is still unsold and empty. There are nearly 3,000 unsold condos alone right now in downtown, and this all happened before the economy went south.
All this development has buried our city, not helped it. We’re in hock to our eyeballs. (except the developers of course.) And all stuff that needed fixing in the rest of the city has been forsaken for the downtown projects, just so Portland can look “cool” to the rest of the world.
Don’t buy the hype folks.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:02 pm
“a downtown streetcar line with brand new rolling stock, intent on using this mode of transportation to encourage transit-oriented development. The results have been impressive: $3.5 billion in new construction, 10,000 residential units, more than 5,000,000 square feet of office and hotel space.”
That is a lot of post hoc ergo proptre hoc reasoning.
You falso failed to mention that Portland throws almost every development dollar they can at any bad idea wihthn a stone’s throw of the streetcar along with tax breaks for developers. In addition, now the streetcar is being used as justification for a $250M boondoggle called a convention center hotel - an idea that has failed everywhere outside of Orlando and Las Vegas. Let’s not forget that the monies that got diverted to streetcars came from pothole, police protection and schools.
THis lead to a ghost town in SoWa in Portland that only needs about another $500M to finish and gave us lovely 250ft tall condos less than 100 ft from the river bank. Great future.
July 4th, 2009 at 1:40 am
[...] developer malarkey goes nationwide In 2001, Portland reversed the trend, opening a downtown streetcar line with brand new rolling stock, intent on using this mode of [...]
July 7th, 2009 at 9:32 am
As a former resident of West Philadelphia, while the the Subway-Surface Trolleys (the green line to people not from Philly) might not be the most attractive vehicles on the planet they will last forever (intentional hyperbole). They were delivered in the early 1980s and they are holding up very well structurally, mechanically and cosmetically. As they close in on 30 years of service it is easy to see them lasting another 10-20 years with proper maintenance and overhauls, much like their cousins, the 80’s vintage Broad Street Line cars.
This speaks to the point, that streetcar and light rail vehicles (along with other electrically propelled vehicles like main line motors and emu’s, and heavy rail subway cars) tend to last significantly longer then their diesel powered counterparts. Buses vs street cars are the biggest example of this. Look at any transit organization in the country and I doubt you will find few if any buses still around from before 1990.
Living along Baltimore Ave in Philly along the Rt 34 trolley was a very enjoyable experience. That trolley brought that neighborhood together in a way that I doubt a bus ever could, at least in my experience exploring urban areas. Not that they are suitable for every situation but when planned properly can be a valuable addition to any neighborhood.
July 8th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Chicago used to have the largest street car system in the world. They were replaced by “trackless trolleys” - buses that ran off the same overhead wires but ultimately were plagued by the same problems… they were constricted to the areas where the wires went.
That is one of the advantages of buses. They can go where they need to go and a rail line doesn’t need to be laid down to get them there.
But buses are limited in the number of seats they offer, whereas trolleys could just add a car and increase capacity. The idea is moving people from point A to point B efficiently and quickly, and rail does this the best. It also adds aesthetics as opposed to taking them away.
I’m not holding my breath on this, though. Chicago government is so inept and corrupt this won’t happen… but it’s nice to imagine!
July 10th, 2009 at 2:51 am
I didn’t see a mention of the East Phoenix light rail line running thru Tempe and Mesa mostly along University Ave (in Arizona). For some reason, the locals hate it, hate the construction, hate the taxes and public funds being spent on it, and seem unable to see the potential benefits once it’s finished. Yet the same public voted to fund one of the largest water parks ever - in a desert. The public transit is insanely bad in Mesa and Phoenix - mostly ridden by non-citizens that don’t vote.
Also, the Seattle light rail thru SE Seattle (Rainier Valley) which I believe is up and running. They spent the last few weeks of the school year with presentations for the local kids in the hope that they would educate their parents. So far there are about 2 collisions a day (car vs. train).
And lastly, don’t forget the SLUT (South Lake Union Trolley - whoops - someone forgot to double check the acronym!), in operation for quite some time. It’s very popular and seems to be revitalizing that area of town.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
You would think that a trolley, which lasts much longer than a bus, would be a very cost-effective investment. The trouble is, Light Rail Vehicles are now built in very small batches, often with one-off designs. Boston’s MBTA paid $3,000,000 each for Italian custom-made Breda low-floor LRVs (Type 8), which frequently derail.
Then, the MBTA overpays it’s employees, and allows them to retire with full pension and free medical insurance after 23 years.
August 6th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
What about Oklahoma City’s preliminary streetcar system? MTPokc.com. Our mayor is to speak on it September 17th and it is an official bid in our MAPS3 program. So, I’d say it’s happening.
C’mon! Don’t leave us out in the cold!
August 12th, 2009 at 11:29 am
@Joe & Steve re: Portland -
The Portland streetcar (not its light rail) is cute, but it’s a nutty system because it GETS STUCK IN TRAFFIC. What were they thinking? I rode it during a busy shopping day before Xmas and the conductor announced, 3 blocks from a busy street-crossing, “folks it’s gonna take about 10-15 minutes to go the next 5 blocks so you may want to get out here and walk if your destination is one of the next few stops”.
And the streetcar doesn’t go anywhere that was formerly served by a busy bus line.
And each streetcar doesn’t carry any more passengers than a well-equipped accordion bus, thus there are no labor savings due to fewer drivers needed.
Streetcars are a great idea IF:
- they replace bus routes that are overcrowded
- they are installed so that they can travel faster than buses would over the same street
- they go somewhere people actually want to go, NOW, as opposed to going to new condo developments that are designed for car-culture (as they all are, with massive parking garages)
August 18th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Toronto is upgrading its stock and tracks, but on many streetcar routes they are a serious cause of traffic slowdowns and backups. Some sections have their own lanes and rights of way but if you get stuck behind one on Queen or Spadina you could double your travel time. In winter especially when the right lane is blocked with vehicles and/or snow.
I’d prefer a monorail, which worked out so well in North Haverbrook.
August 30th, 2009 at 2:55 am
Dan, Seattle has a network of trackless trolleys. About 14 Metro routes (the 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10/12, 13, 14, 36, 42, 43, 49, and 70) are powered by overhead electric wires. (Our region has a hybrid of local and regional transit; Metro is King County, Sound Transit as referenced above is regional) They seem to be popular, and there’s a languishing proposal (http://crosscut.com/2009/03/18/transportation/18902/) to electrify more routes, but in addition to high capital costs (I’m told a 60 foot articulated trolley bus costs $1.1M vs. $600,000 for standard diesel ones), it sounds like they’re having an increasingly difficult time with maintenance. As fewer and fewer cities use these, the parts and expertise are harder to find. I think streetcars are much better than either conventional or trolley buses, but from a peak oil and long term budgeting standpoint it makes sense to me to electrify more bus routes (we have quite cheap 100% green electricity in Seattle).
August 31st, 2009 at 11:59 am
FYI Minneapolis’ streetcar planning would be hard to characterize as “advanced” - there have been no studies on individual lines nor are any planned or funded as far as I know
September 1st, 2009 at 12:15 am
Amazing comments so far! I wanted to note that Los Angeles IS making headway towards developing an urban streetcar system. Check out: http://www.lastreetcar.org
I’m an associate with Los Angeles Streetcar, Inc., and we’ve been working really hard to raise funds from local, federal, and private sources. We’ve gained quite a bit of attention and made a ton of progress in a short span of time. Take a look at our website for current conceptual alignments, and be sure to let us know your opinion!
Feel free to contact me directly if you have questions or comments (emetz@lastreetcar.org).
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:41 pm
[...] is why, and here’s the good news, the streetcar is making a comeback. And Portland, Oregon is the Florence of its [...]
October 6th, 2009 at 12:42 am
For all the people saying that streetcars provide less noise pollution than a bus: I bet you never lived next to one. You can feel even a modern streetcar through the floor on the sixth floor, and you can hear them from a block away. The principal advantage of metal-on-metal rolling stock is a decreased rolling resistance, and yes, there is a coolness factor. Still, I would much rather live on a trolleybus route than a streetcar route. Trolleybusses are almost inaudible. Trams are pretty much the loudest thing that’s allowed to roll through a city.
October 10th, 2009 at 8:40 am
Actually, the Portland Pearl District development had much more to do with the heavy subsidies, tax abatements and impact fee abatements… (which the city of Portland Development Commission has refered to as “gift certificates” for developers.
See: http://www.americandreamcoalition.org/transit/ZeroSumGame.pdf
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:49 am
The advantages of streetcars/light rail is simple, even if done wrong (like here in Phoenix). Since they have their own dedicated part of the street which can’t be used by cars (dedicated bus lines are a great idea, except that there’s nothing physically stopping the cars from using and blocking them), they can move more efficiently. Problem out here is the vaunted high tech traffic lights which were supposed to give the light rail priority at intersections. Not only does that not work, a few of the intersections malfunction and can take 5+ minutes to return to normal timing (doesn’t sound like much, but try timing a traffic light, and you’ll see how bad that is), which is made worse by the frequency of trains during rush hour and special events. Still, during rush hour, the light rail moves through town faster than the bus, while only costing a small premium.
As to moving people on and off, that can be handled fairly easily, have enough stations, which reduces the number of people coming on and off, and have wide or multiple doors. Our cars have two, but based on length, give up a few seats, and you could raise that to three. Or set up a station that allows unloading from both sides.
December 1st, 2009 at 1:39 am
[...] The Infrastructurist maps America’s streetcar renaissance [...]
December 1st, 2009 at 7:04 pm
[...] Times; Infrastructurist responds, arguing that California’s high speed rail, the nation-wide revival of streetcar networks, and the “smart grid” could all be considered “superprojects”. As [...]
December 10th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Prague, Czech Republic, has the highest proportion of usage of public transport among European cities. The public transport system consists of subway, buses and trams.
There are 34 tram lines which are served by over 900 trams. The tram system is being expanded every year with plans for substantive expansion in next decade (especially in the suburbs).
During communist rule Czechoslovakia was the main supplier of trams for whole Comecon. Also the modern trams in US were built in the Czech Republic (i.e. Škoda trams for Portland, or recent shipment of Inekon trams for Washington D.C.). The Oregon Iron Works streetcar is licenced version of Škoda’s older design.
There are also other tram systems in the Czech republic, the smallest serve town of about 25k inhabitants (though it is connected with other system covering 70k town).
I guess it is quite safe to say, that tram networks really work well in the Europe, and especially in the Czech Republic.
More information about trams in CR:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_town_tramway_systems_in_the_Czech_Republic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_tram_system
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=621329
January 15th, 2010 at 11:46 am
The idea that busses have an advantage because bus routes can be easily changed seems flawed.
Freeways, one could argue, were also seen as engins of development, and in fact did determine the shape of post WWII development, and they also cannot be moved.
Unless there is some new technology out there to pick up buildings or entire business districts, or perhaps a new trend towards putting new sub-divisions, big box stores, and strip malls on wheels, the ‘flexiblity’ of changing bus routes seems to me to be an aspect of busses that is insignificant.
Too bad I did not find this page until now, I suppose this post has an audience of one.