Modern Streetcars: Waste of Money or City-Building Miracle?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 май 2023
- Riding the legacy tram network in Lisbon, Portugal got me thinking: as inefficient as they are, as little ridership bang as they give you for your buck, are there circumstances where urban streetcars make sense?
Book recommendation! The Image of the City by Kevin Lynch, available here: amzn.to/3LM9YSy
This is an affiliate link where I make a small commission from your purchase, which helps support this channel. There is no extra cost to you.
Or...buy it at your local independent bookseller!
----------
CityNerd is now available on Nebula -- streaming ad-free, along with lots of other great creators! Discount for signing up at my channel:
go.nebula.tv/citynerd
----------
Patreon - a way to directly support continuing CityNerd output! Thanks to all who have signed up so far.
/ citynerd
----------
Instagram: @nerd4cities
Mastodon: @nerd4cities@mstdn.social
Twitter: @nerd4cities
----------
Previous CityNerd Videos Referenced:
- Tourism in Porto: • Are Amazing Cities Bei...
----------
Resources:
- www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/natio...
- web.archive.org/web/201208110...
----------
Images
- KC Streetcar By Michael Barera, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Detroit Q Line By Michael Barera, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Tacoma Link (T Line) By Robert Scheuerman - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar on Broadway Bridge By Steve Morgan, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar at PSU By Cacophony - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Powell's Books By Michael Barera, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Jamison Square Park By Ian Poellet - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- I-405 By Oregon Department of Transportation - I-405 interchange with U.S. 30 in northwest Portland, CC BY 2.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar stop By Steve Morgan - Own work, CC0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar interior By Cacophony - Own work, CC BY 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Made In USA Streetcar By Steve Morgan - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar on Broadway Bridge By Steve Morgan, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar on 19th Ave By Steve Morgan, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar at aerial tram By Cacophony - Own work, CC BY 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar on Tilikum Crossing By Steve Morgan, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Portland Streetcar on Lovejoy Ramp By Sam Beebe - Flickr: Portland Streetcar "Central Loop" first run, CC BY 2.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Cincinnati Streetcar By RickDikeman - Own work, CC0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Oklahoma City Streetcar By Steve Morgan, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Dallas Streetcar By Michael Barera, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Oklahoma City Streetcar (Thumbnail) By Kool Cats Photography over 9 Million Views from Edmond, OK, USA - OKC Streetcar, CC BY 2.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
----------
Music:
CityNerd background: Caipirinha in Hawaii by Carmen María and Edu Espinal (RUclips music library)
----------
Business Inquiries: thecitynerd@nebula.tv
I live in Nottingham (England) which has a modern 'second generation' tram system. There is absolutely no doubt that there is a quite significant section of the public who will ride on trams, but will not ride on buses. This is something which is certainly Europe-wide, and perhaps worldwide.
Do you think it’s because of the actual experience of riding a tram? Are they more comfortable or efficient than buses? Or is it classism?
It's even more true in the United States
I can see the NET tracks from my window as i write this and I've rarely seen a tram get stuck in traffic, there's enough signal priority, traffic alleviation measures and dedicated rights of way that it makes the service quite reliable. That being said i rarely find a bus stuck in traffic in nottingham either. The framing of this video did kinda confuse me, obviously no one would build a tram like they did back then, there's too many cars on the road for that now
@Benjamin Leinbach what I know is that rails are considered to be a strong indicator of reasonable quality. G-forces are generally lower except for some rambeling which adds some comfort, but besides that... they have been electric for 100something years so less engine noise?
@@happyfriendshippal It is a bit of both!
You aren't stuck in tourism, Ray, you are tourism!
For anyone who had the closest bus stop taken away because their local transit agency “reconfigured routes to better server riders” I would say the inflexibility of trams looks like a big pro instead of a con.
I heard one person said that if there's a pro car politician getting in power, they can just scale down bus services, end services to certain lines and whatnot, and most people will hardly notice.
But if they want to scale down tram lines, they will have to rip out the rails, which will undoubtedly be met with controversy, so yeah, the inflexibility is a huge plus in this regard.
And also, business can open up near rail lines. They increase in value.
That's actually such a good point
I once read in a transit paper that the biggest strength of street cars was that people appear to like them and prefer to ride on them over stuff like buses. Problem is that the question of what we ride on can get in the way of getting our cities to implement the best strategies for good transit and urban development
Trams are better than buses for development because of the permanence. If trams are given exclusive access to the track (no other traffic), it makes it very efficient and easily scalable in a way that a bus is not.
Yeah, I find rail snobbery somewhat unhelpful. What's funny is the articulated buses that are designed to look like trains as much as possible, like you're going to fool someone. Welcome to the US, where buses are for the poors
My city has lots of buses in addition to lots of trams, and I'll certainly take the tram whenever possible. It's just a lot more comfortable than the bus. Smoother ride without bouncing suspension or sharp turns, so I can read without getting car-sick, quieter, less cramped layout, and the trams are more punctual because they run on separated tracks or medians for a lot of the distance, so they rarely get stuck in traffic.
In San Francisco we also have buses and light rail but light rail is just so unbelievable slow on surface streets that it's better to take buses than light rail if you want to get to your destination on time.
It helps that San Francisco has low-floor trolleybuses, which are much more tolerable than regular diesel buses.
As someone who lives in Kansas City, seeing them actually invest in multiple trams is such a good sight.
Yeah it seems like the city understands it more as a billion dollar tax break to spur re-development with the added bonus of improving transit a bit and not the other way around.
I was surprised the KC streetcar had such high ridership, I guess making it free really does help those numbers.
@@TheKeksadler KCMO if they expand the street car across the city
KCMO may become more like a European city rather then a fucking Sunbelt city
Hey I live in KC also! I live downtown and I love the street car.
@@VegitoBlue202
As someone who lives in KC, I completely agree. We almost had the street car go north to the airport. But of course backwards thinking fools voted it down 😠. Hopefully we can vote again and get it
That moment when you realize that your small city with 134k inhabitants (Bern, CH (yes, the one with tram to Wankdorf)) and a tram/streetcar system with only 4.5 lines boasts almost the same ridership (47,903,000) as the US top 10 combined (48,223,000) in 2019. That's bonkers! Thanks for the video.
Well, to be fair, tourist trap T28 by itself carries more passengers than all but the 3 "legacy" systems, so for a Swiss tram system competing with these is like Lebron James playing with 10 kids.
I'm a bit less cynical about streetcars. They aren't just a less flexible bus: They exchange that flexibility for ease of electrification and the improved rolling efficiency that comes with steel wheels on steel rails. If you can build separated light rail, it's an objective improvement compared to streetcars, but with streetcar vs bus there are pros and cons to both.
Also a street car is more comfortable to ride. The routes are well known and visible. It's easy to figure out the network versus bus systems which are need more research and experience to become familiar with.
Also, streetcars better at taking corners compared to an articulated bus since the rear end of a bus or an attached trailed has to be dragged along (limiting the turn radius) while these of streetcars follow the tracks like the rest of the vehicle.
And you can always expand a streetcar network with separate tracks later and still have one connected network, you can even add underground sections if you need to. That's how a lot of European cities ended up with their Stadbahn/premetro systems of today.
also who wants to take a bus
Also, street cars are way more predictable than busses and therefore have a higher safety rating AND a higher rating in safety feeling of pedestrians and bikes around them. This is why trams are no problem in pedestrian zones, but busses are not welcome.
Spoken like a true American, my friend. The tram is SO MUCH more than just a less flexible bus. They are faster, can be higher capacity, need less space (especially in tight corners and at stations), are more energy efficient regardless of energy source, are safer when operated in the same manner as a bus, are more predictable, are better scalable when expansion in the network and/or ridership numbers change demand and not least of all the operating cost per passenger-mile is way less than for busses (usually reimbursing the higher head cost after 5 to 7 years.
Such a longer lifespan too. Buses need to keep being replaced. Most buses are
I was talking about streetcars (single cars), not light rail. (Multiple-car trains that run mostly in dedicated rights-of-way was not what this video was about, which I thought I made explicit early in the video!) Would you rather have a streetcar that operates in mixed traffic, or a triple-articulated bus that runs in dedicated lanes at 1-2 minute headways and has platform-level loading? I guess Mexico City is doing it all wrong and they should be spending hundreds of millions building streetcars that run in mixed traffic instead of new Metrobus lines!
@@CityNerd streetcars are wider, able to hold many more wheelchair users than busses, the same size streetcar holds 2-3x more people than a bus. It's also smooth and level boarding is significantly better because of set tracks. I could go on. There are many benefits not seen with busses
@@jaredsussman8112 This depends on implementation of the streetcar and the bus.
I always wonder why the Metrobus isint a trolleybus, does anyone happen to know? In any event, it doesn't appear to me that the base comment is based on comparing trams to BRT, but standard buses/trolleybuses to trams.
The Portland Streetcar also has very good destinations. It goes from the relatively "inexpensive" alphabet district through Portland State University, with it's 30,000 students, and connects to the Aerial Tram to OHSU, the state's largest employer. The presence of higher density origins and destinations in the same line, helps a ton.
Edited to fix the names.
I would take the Portland Streetcar a lot more seriously if it could do better frequency than 3 trains per hour.
Biggest problem is the lack of security and getting assaulted by homeless tweakers
And if the streetcar had transit signal priority moved faster than a bicycle, then I would use it every day
its 30,000 students not it's
If Portland Streetcar has signal priority and dedicated lanes, it would be grow astronomically in usage
One thing to think about, especially in the US, is the perception of the different modes (streetcar vs. bus). I've been carless in Seattle for 6 years now and with the exception of the height of the pandemic, I ride public transit for 90% of trips (friends and Ubers the rest of the time). The streetcar isn't nearly as convenient, but I prefer it to a bus... based on the ride, the stops, and the "clientele" on each. The streetcars feel more modern and cleaner and smoother. And if you take someone who doesn't always ride transit, there is definitely a stigma to riding a bus. Tourists are more likely to ride a streetcar than a bus (routes are usually easier to figure out and the tracks alert you to their presence if you're not from the city)... and locals who might not ride a bus would be more likely to ride a streetcar. Your mileage may vary, as they say. I wish ours was more like Portland's, but at least we have a decent lightrail (getting moreso every month).
I’ve used trams my whole life living in Helsinki Finland, love them quite a bit, easier to use than buses when carrying a lot of stuff for example (thanks to a tram going to the harbor I’ve never taken a car to cruise ship parking)
I was in helsinki last summer, got to say that the trams were amazing for exploring the city.
Helenkin trams designed are S their
@@williamerazo3921 "Helsinki tram designs are S-tier" ?
Trams work well in car free inner cities. The mix of trams with bikes, pedestrians and the occasional delivery van is a very well functioning traffic system that makes a city really attractive. For pedestrians and cyclists, trams are more predictable than buses, and these modes of transport complement each other very well. Think of cities like Augsburg, Erfurt, Bern, Zürich, Basel, Dresden, Bordeaux, Strassbourg...
I think you're right, that seems to be the only situation where they are clearly advantageous and practical.
I can think of some other situations, such as a hypothetical system that requires inordinate quantities of tunnels/bridges for some reason, as the tram would not need nearly the same size structure as a bus/trolleybus. The same can also be said about the ease of level boarding, but we have those automatic gangways to help with that problem.
@@DADeathinacan I think there are more advantages. In my city buses are often late because they get stuck in traffic. If you make seperate lanes then the tram is better because you don't need as much space for it. It is also more aesthetically pleasing as you can grow grass there. And they can be longer than buses. And regarding accessibility, the gap between the stop and the tram can be much smaller than between the bus and the stop because the tracks mean you can not accidentally hit the curb like a bus can. The stops just need to be raised to the level of the tram (like a curb) and you can get in.
Edit: maybe what I am describing would be considered light rail though. I don't really get the difference...
@@j.a.1721For the most part, there isint much of a difference past the whole "mainly separate" vs "mainly street running" when it comes to streetcars/trams and light rail, even the vehicles are often the same.
I live in the city with the biggest tram network in the world and most tram routes in Melbourne are shared with cars. That doesn't stop the trams being successful and popular.
I think another issue with modern streetcars in the US is that they are often plopped down in a downtown that already has poor transit and doesn't connect people to any of the points of interest (*cough* Detroit Q-Line *cough*). Once you add in being stuck in traffic and being slower than a bus, it makes sense why no one wants to take it. I took the Q Line once and there were buses going around us because it kept getting stuck in traffic, and we only used it because my spouse worked near a station and we were going to a game at Comerica. And of course, the line stops short of most homes along Woodward, and the Amtrak station along the line only sees 6 trains a day, so it really doesn't connect people to points of interest.
But if it gets built as a last-mile option to support other transit lines, connect people to points of interest, and make fewer stops than a bus with signal prioritization, then it can be a good option. I think that streetcars aren't meant to be somewhere in between a bus a dedicated light rail/heavy metro line. But too often they are poorly planned and then used as examples as to why cities/states shouldn't invest in transit.
I think it's really important to note in this video that Seattle Streetcar has the 6th most ridership of any tram line, despite not connecting to downtown, mostly (imo) because the bus network is a fantastic support and it connects to light rail. Once the central city connector (connects the one streetcar line to the other through downtown) is built, I wouldn't be surprised if we move up a few spaces!
As an American who was fortunate enough to live in Melbourne for a couple years, I can say their tram network was an eye opening experience for me. We were able to live car free and enjoyed it because of their dense network and high frequency. It totally spoiled me though, I'm always comparing the cities I live in to Melb and I'm always left wanting. Hope to get back one day.
That's just one of the many positive differences between a Privately run transit system (Melbourne) & Publicly run ones (Blue States). No wonder the BrightLine in Florida has been so successful, its privately run so there is incentive & profit to improve services!
@@adellis24 Sorry, but the reason why Melbourne has the biggest streetcar or tram network in the world is because local public officials there decided to keep rather than abandon streetcars in favor of buses as was done
in other Australian cities and nearly all U.S. cities. The fact that the Melbourne network is now privately operated has nothing to do with its continued existence.
@@713davidh42 The fact that the network still exists has everything to do with it being privately operated as the government in the 90s was struggling to keep the system afloat due to its financial struggles, lack of expansion & aging infrastructure. No one is worse at running a business than the government, teenage drug dealers are more effective & efficient than government serfs.
The Weekly Planet approves
@@adellis24 I'm not that familiar with what brought about privatization of the tram network in Melbourne to comment further. What I do know is that while Melbourne kept and even expanded their tram system, the tram network in Sydney which was run by the state government was completely dismantled by 1961 and now they are having to rebuild it back again as light rail.
I only want to live in cities that resemble Studio Ghibli movie locations and I don't care how impractical that may be
You live in a super flat world, Impracticality won't stop you
Well Vienna is dominated by tramways. Also in parts where its not so flat like grietzing😊😅
@@CUBETechie I recently rode trams in graz, and I noticed the much smoother ride in those stadlers. to a certain extent, the tracks are better because they don't have the ULF, which is infamous for ruining the rails. so glad, that vienna switched away from the ULFs.
oh, and trams can go steep uphil. I once rode with the triest opicina line. that one is fairly steep :-D
by the way, I was pretty surprised when I saw an old map of viennas tram lines. there was one right in front of my house. sadly, as so many other lines, they are gone :/
@@robertheinrich2994 especially line 6 shorten 🫠😔
@@robertheinrich2994
The flexity has this waving ground. For normal people its not comfortable not to mention Handicap people and elders if it where Designed like the ULF it would be better and also the place's should be similar, and its not wide enough
I take the Lisbon old school trams all the time. Barring the times when they are packed with tourists, they are great!
Well, trams also have upsides: you can make them longer on high demand lines, where a double bendy bus (25m) just doesn’t cut it anymore, you might wanna upgrade to a double + bendy tram with 30, 40 or even 60m of passenger room
In germany the legal limit is 75m I believe so higher capacity is a thing. Also streetcars can turn into light/somewhat heavy rail if the system is designed to do so, giving excellent access to downtown to rural towns and villages. See the german karlsruhe system for reference.
@@Jacksparrow4986 Systems like that are quite common in Europe. They are called Stadtbahn or premetro. Karlsruhe is a bit weird though, as the use the S-Bahn logo which usually means heavy rail in most places in Germany.
@@SomePotato I think karlruhe is somewhat exceptional as it's not a fancy light rail system ("stadtbahn"), but the trams take over regional train function outside of the city with 1435 gauge rails (refered to as "karlsruher modell" in germany).
Checking Wikipedia it says it's the first of its kind. Also called tram-train system, top speed 100km/h of some trains.
@@SomePotato I wouldn't call Stadtbahn and premetro as synonyms. For one, some pre-WWII trams were called "Stadtbahn" and for the other, it's also used to for a separate system, the tram-trains like that of Karlsruhe (closest example of premetro being the tunneling of the tracks in the pedestrian zones, though many S-Bahns also were tunneled).
I think we gotta differentiate between streetcars, that primarily serve the down town, like in Lisbon, or most modern american streetcar systems.
And the streetcar or tram systems, that really are the backbone of a city's transit, as it is common in most big cities in Central or Eastern Europe.
These streetcars don't necessarily run entirely on their own tracks, and have some street running. So they aren't light rail.
But they still have a higher role than busses.
Yeah, I'm surprised that he focused on such a touristy tram when there are tons of examples of much more practical trams throughout Europe.
I like the video because it points out some of the delusions city planners get themselves into, but I don't think it did a great job truly explaining the versatility of streetcars when they're properly networked.
Yeah, in Prague for example the tram system is fantastic and helps fill in the areas the metro can’t go.
Swiss cities by large depend on trams for inner city transit. They often operate on streets that are open to bikes and pedestrians, but no to cars, which is a very well functioning traffic mix. Cars and trucks don't mix that well with trams.
They are often called premetro or Stadtbahn and started out as regular streetcar networks before being expanded with new lines with their own right of way. Plus, putting them underground is a lot cheaper than "full" metro systems.
True. I took the Oklahoma one and found it really dumb or it just looped downtown. On the other side in Québec City we are building a Light Rail network as a backbone to replace our current major bur routes. Grade separated for most of it, underground section downtown and all. With the same budget for metro we couldn't have covered the same area as the bus routes so that would have required a lot of transfers on existing routes.
The main issue with busses is that there is a maximum number of them you can have on a route before they start being traffic to each other. I don't think that's an issue in a lot of the US though.
I’ve ridden a streetcar when I was visiting my sister in Toronto back in 2015. It was awesome.
One advantage of both trams and light rail for tourists and less regular public transport users over buses is that they tend to have much better route signage than buses do, and that because of the rails, they don't get rerouted, as buses can during building works and other changes. This should be less of an issue in the era of Google Maps and other transport apps, but the clear routing still does help. Knowing exactly where the route is going to take you, and being sure you'll be able to clearly tell where to get off makes it MUCH easier to use public transport, especially when new to an area and/or not speaking the local languages. Even the newest buses aren't always great at route and stop transparency.
there's some research that suggests the presence of fixed infrastructure increases how reliable people view a service as well
I generally agree with you on this take, though I think it's worth noting that the issues with bus signage is a solvable problem. CBC Vancouver has a really great video by Uytae Lee where he creates a better bus stop sign which more closely matches what you see with train maps. Look up "How to Fix Bus Stop Signs: Uytae Lee's Stories About Here".
As someone who lives in Toronto, I find the idea that "streetcars don't get re-routed during construction works" to be very funny because here we have a massive legacy system which allows routes to easily divert if the tracks are blocked. Right now all the Queen St. Streetcars have been rerouted to Dundas because of subway line construction.
@@LimitedWard Thanks for sharing that video! Super good
Trams are awesome!
Sincerely, a viewer from Prague
But the trams need to have floors close to street level. That makes ingress and egress much easier, not to mention better accommodation for disabled riders.
Prague is Europe's most beautiful city.
I thought we'd get a somewhat in-depth dissection of the difference between legacy trams and modern trams and what drives their usefulness and ridership and how it's different than the rest of the world builds them, perhaps a blueprint of what kinds of modern trams would work best in US cities. Cities like Paris are building large tram networks as transportation whereas most US cities that have newer trams have built them either to rehabilitate a downtown-adjacent area (private real estate development aid), such as Portland, or to try to revitalize their downtowns (Kansas City) as opposed to solving a significant transportation problem or challenge facing segments of its population (such as overcrowded and slow bus lines).
I like streetcars. They're charming. I like the sound of rails instead of roaring bus engines. I like the dedicated lane they usually get, like on Spadina in Toronto. My city would be unrecognizable to me without streetcars.
Toronto was actually one of the few cities in North America that didn't rip up all its streetcar lines and replaced with a bus line. Toronto did remove some lines, such as the Bloor streetcar line being replaced with a Subway line, as well as the Yonge Streetcar line replaced with a Subway line, however many other lines remain to this very day making it the largest Streetcar system in North America, and the most daily riders by far.
However being a old system, i don't think it's very efficient. While I prefer streetcars in Toronto compared to the ugly looking TTC busses, but I find the streetcars just being too slow. Sharing the road with car traffic just makes it slow. I also find they have to many stops, some stops are ridiculously close to eachother slowing the whole ride down. They should have stops more like a Subway, every 1km or so, not every 200 feet. I also think at least one of the other lines on King, or Queen or Dundas should have been replaced with a Subway line about 40 years ago.
While the streetcar has history in Toronto and is visually better then the TTC bus but a Subway is way quicker, & a streetcar really needs its own separate track from car traffic to be more efficient, much of Toronto's streetcar lines share the road.
@@jameschampken2660 yeah it's interesting right, TO doesn't have many streetcar lines yet each one is its own experience. I love Spadina, dedicated lanes, makes the street look like a boulevard. King - with my untrained eye - looks pretty ok, modern vibes, boarding and usage look efficient. Dundas and Queen just break me. I'd rather walk. Cars can't even pass when they stop.
Frequency of the stops, I guess it depends, dedicated lanes make it make it a non factor I think. Wish they were zippier though, the operators always seem to go intentionally slow.
I still like them,, the more we move towards a mindset of walkability, the more efficient they *should* become. I'm a subway rat but why confine all the cool transpo tech underground.
Thanks for this detailed examination of the issue.
In San Francisco, the Muni light rail has at least a few advantages over Muni buses (both coaches and "trolleys" powered by overhead wires).
1. Drivers are more deferential to the light rail cars than they are to the buses. I imagine this is because the tracks remind drivers that they're sharing the road with transit and the rail cars tend to be bigger and heavier than buses.
2. Most light rail stops are more identifiable (by the tracks plus raised platforms) and offer better rider protection than bus stops (which sometimes are just a small rectangle of yellow paint on the asphalt with the number of the bus line) so riders can find them more easily.
3. Light rail routes don't change nearly as often, so locals get used to knowing where they are.
4. In one long stretch down Market Street, light rail cars get a tunnel. For years, Muni somehow created its own horrible traffic jams there, but since the pandemic, trains have been running much better through the tunnel.
Any system that at grade level with cars is usually useless.
Personal rapid transit is the way
Your Point #1 is something that is often overlooked and I totally agree with. Buses are perceived to share the road with more 'ease' than cars, therefore if your choice is to drive or get the bus, most people will still just drive. Trams are seen as more of a disruption to traffic, therefore if your choice is to drive or get the tram, there's more discouragement to drive and more incentive to get the tram.
I live in a part of Melbourne called St Kilda in the inner south. In the inner north there are two suburbs next to each other - Collingwood and Richmond - around the same distance from me. For me to get to Collingwood, there is a direct bus up Punt Road. For me to get to Richmond, there is a tram up Chapel St. I have never once got that bus before, and often drive (or Uber) to Collingwood. I have never driven to Richmond, and used to get that Chapel St tram every day when I worked in Richmond. The main reason? Buses have no impact on Punt Road traffic, but Chapel St traffic crawls behind trams.
Which in my opinion is a good thing because it encourages people to take the tram rather than drive.
@@JesusManera That's an interesting observation, and different from the way I was looking at it. In SF, it's much more common to get stuck behind a slow bus. Most buses run in the outside lane and make stops at the curb. Then they need to merge back into traffic -- when a driver is willing to let them in. The light rail trains use the center lane, so they don't have that problem.
I believe Muni is currently addressing your second point with the L Taraval Line upgrades, but in general, most Muni Metro surface stops, simply have "CAR STOP" painted on a yellow background on a post. In fact, Muni only recently replaced the signs in the Muni Metro Subway directing riders to the "Streetcars". They now say "Muni Metro". That would've been around 2016. Unlike modern light rails systems, Muni still runs like a streetcar above ground on the legacy lines. The unique hybrid (streetcar/light rail) system does give it some charm.
I’m glad to read someone else noticing how much better Muni Metro has been running in the tunnel since the pandemic. Maybe it’s a function of taking out just one streetcar line (the L). Maybe it’s a combo of running new vehicles on subway/tunnel tracks whose repairs have finally been completed. Maybe it’s because the lines still aren’t as jam-packed as they were in 2019. In any case, I ride it home every day from the Embarcadero to Church and I never seem to have to wait more than 5 minutes and my ride always seems to take between 10-12 1minutes. It’s too good a thing to take for granted.
In Zürich trams are by far the most popular way of moving around. I'd say most of the way they are on dedicated lanes, but sometimes they aren't and it's fine. In a year here I was delayed a couple minutes a handful of times and there was a serious delay once or twice.
However compared to buses it's much more chill, with trams accelerating much more smoothly, and, most importantly, not moving side to side.
The buses in Zürich are also really reliable but I still 100% prefer the trams. Much more comfortable to ride and somehow have better space utilization than a bus. I feel like a bus of a certain size has half as many seats as an equivalent tram.
I will only say one bad thing about Zürich trams. The new Flexidy trams are a big downgrade.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I am under the impression that drivers are much more considerate in Switzerland than in Portugal, Spain, Italy, etc.
I think Portland did things a bit differently than other mid-2000's streetcar systems that popped up across the country, which is okay, but...
Fundamenttally, tram systems are a method of transit that is good for short, frequent stops, and in some cases longer distances because they are much more efficient at accelerating than a bus, and consequently cheaper to operate (and more efficient) because they can carry much larger numbers of people with the same amount of manpower. In most European cities with tram systems, which is more than you would think, they're used basically as high capacity buses because they're just... well, very large! Most of the municipal transit companies that run tram routes in europe actually turn a profit year over year on the routes!
In the US they've mostly been used as some sort of pseudo-development attractor, rather than as a means of transit that actually connects all of the pieces you mentioned early on, points of interest, density, etc. Portland is a bit of the exception because their route was very well-targeted and did end up actually serving as a means of transit, but for most other cities, like Milwaukee and Cincinnati, they were just kind of silly.
Cincinnati's streetcar continues to break ridership numbers as a circulator route, but it's also fare-free and doesn't really connect you all that well downtown. It misses the only grocery store by a block, it doesn't go uptown to the university and the zoo (the original plan wanted this) and unless you're like barhopping downtown (which don't get me wrong, it's a valid use case) there just isn't really much use for it.
Suffice it tot say I just dislike that so many transit agencies don't seem to want to use streetcars for what they are. A means of transit! Just have it go places people want to visit! It's not complicated.
Very good summary.
Absolutely, I think it would really help, to make this distinction. Because most tram systems aren't like Lisbon or modern American streetcars, in that they primarily serve the historic old town, or the city center. And they also aren't light rail.
They are something in between. And they are great still.
The Cincinnati streetcar was also mired in a lot of political debate, with many local and state politicians not wanting it. It would be better if it connected to the zoo and university, or went across the river into covington and newport
@@tonywalters7298 That's the case with any transit project, though, including bike lanes. Politicians only seem to want to expand roads and highways, rather than build actually efficient transit.
The bus part is a very important one because actual (i.e. road) buses in many countries are legally limited to 18.75 metres in Europe (give or take a couple inches to get the American length limit) and on top of that, articulated buses can't take corners very well because the bus is essentially a separate carriage and gets dragged along while on a tram, all parts literally stay on track so the curve radius is constant which in turn allows for longer vehicles to be used.
Perhaps give Melbourne a look sometime. It’s the largest tram network in the world by track mileage (kilometreage?), and also quite old, completely resisting the bus mania of the 50s and 60s. It’s a weird cross between streetcar and light rail, with lines often switching between mixed traffic, dedicated lanes and completely off street running.
Typically all CBD and most inner city sections receive dedicated lanes before fanning out into medium density inner suburbs on mixed traffic. The frequency and ride quality of the tram lines are many steps above what we typically see on buses here - I’m fairly certain most prefer the tram over the bus. Rolling stock consists of domestically produced single and dual car articulated units from the 80s, as well as modern vehicles from Siemens, Bombardier/Alstom. Frequencies are very high in the inner core, especially so in peak times.
A bit disappointed that you kept this one to the US only. I was curious as to how Toronto's compared.
Of course I could probably look that up myself instead of bugging you.
The TTC streetcar has about 3x the service of the Philly one. 190k a day.
Toronto Streetcar systems is the largest in North America. It also has the highest daily riders. While some lines were replaced, such as Toronto Yonge Streetcar line & the Bloor Streetcar line were replaced with Subway lines, however most of the Toronto system still operates today. Many other cities across USA & even Canada were completely removed and replaced with busses, while some other cities do still have streetcars today however are only 1/4 the size they use to be.
Glad you briefly mentioned light-rail because there are definitely some great light-rail systems like the Newark Light Rail and HBLR which both use already existing rights-of-way for the most part. In Newark it's more like a subway (besides Broad Street extension) and they just replaced their PCCs with LRV in 2001 while the HBLR uses rights-of-way that were formerly used by Conrail's River Line and New Jersey Junction Railroad (for the portion between 2nd Street and Tonnelle Ave), the West Shore Railroad/NY Central (which used the Weehawken Tunnel for trains terminating at Weehawken), and the CNJ (for both the West Side Branch and the 8th Street Branch). They built a new right-of-way for the Downtown JC portion, as well as a new 8th street viaduct.
But Hudson County also once had streetcars! These streetcars actually didn't just serve the areas by the river, but also the areas on the cliffs like The Heights and Journal Square of JC. Today, those in The Heights who'd like to take the HBLR must take an elevator down to 9th Street, but back then, the STREETCARS were the ones that took elevators! With everything from a huge and long elevated trestle, funicular wagon lifts, and an elevator, they were able to climb the Palisades! Tackling the cliffs this way was an engineering feat, especially for the time. Sadly abandoned by the 1940s, but you can see streetcar buildings still standing in The Heights!
One thing I've occasionally seen German transportation agencies claim with streetcars/trams is that supposedly a higher number of people will use them compared to busses. The idea is that you can have a bus route and a tram route that's materially the same; same distance, same speed, same vehicle capacity, same ticket system, whatever. But a portion of people will not ride the bus for comfort reasons, for social-prestige reasons, for just whoknowswhatever other reasons. That's maybe not a big deal if instead they ride a bike, but it is a problem if they ride a car instead, and that's specifically something you don't want. So, yes, a tram can have a practical advantage over a bus even in circumstances where the only difference is that it is indeed a tram.
ie, MVV: "Diverse Untersuchungen der Verkehrsforschung sind darüber hinaus zu dem Ergebnis gekommen, dass schienengebundene Verkehrsmittel wie die Trambahn aus Fahrgastsicht attraktiver sind als beispielsweise Busse."
Can't judge how true that is, but subjectively I wouldn't be surprised if it were some factor.
Maybe that is just how my city handles it, but the buses are certainly less reliable here. They tend to get stuck in traffic unlike the tram. Also the tram goes right through the pedestrian zone in the city center, so I am right where I want to be when I get off. I always saw it as the faster option. but maybe you could achieve something similar with buses....
Trams are just a lot more comfortable than buses! I can't read on the bus for any length of time because I'll get car-sick from the sharp turns, sharp acceleration/deceleration, and bouncing suspension. Trams are much smoother.
The best part about light rail streetcar, is that it can actually act as an underground metro in the areas where it’s needed (downtown) yet still run alongside traffic at lower density areas for the sake of cost effectiveness.
If you want a prime example of this, look up Tel Aviv light rail line one.
The TTC has a “hybrid” streetcar system because some streetcars run in mixed traffic (particularly the older lines), while the new builds focus on dedicated right of way. Plus, while the streetcar system is still a fraction of its largest size, with buses and the subway replacing decommissioned streetcar lines, it is being built out in places that make sense, like the waterfront east to Cherry beach.
TTC's separated lines like 510 and 512 honestly are the shittiest form of ROW due to lack of simple infrastructure improvements. But honestly, TTC streetcars could easily have been used instead of Lisboa to support Ray's thesis.
It’s also being built in places that make zero sense like Line 5 along Eglinton which should have always been a subway like Rob Ford said. Another L for the Ontario Wynne leftards who were truly useless when it came to completing anything of use. At least Doug has been getting mass transit infrastructure projects going & completed.
@@adellis24 That's a bit embarrassing that you're blaming Line 5 Eglinton on the liberals. Also the ableism but you don't seem to care that much anyway. Toronto had begun constructing a subway on Eglinton, when Mike Harris, former conservative premier, decided to cancel the subway, and fill in the tunnels that had been bored. But sure, this is the liberal government's fault :/ And what mass transit infrastructure projects has Doug Ford completed? He takes credit for transit projects that have been worked on for decades and pretends he did everything himself.
@@adellis24 lmao line 5 is already bringing so much development along the stations. As someone who has to deal with the shitty Councillors and NIMBY's in DVW and DVE I'm happy that they now have to stfu and let towers and other high density buildings get built close to line 5.
I have to disagree with you here. Streetcars have several advantages over busses. They're higher capacity, more comfortable, more accessible, electrified, and people in American cities will actually ride them. It can absolutely be real transportation for both locals and visitors. Based on ridership, development, and tax receipts one could argue the KC streetcar has been arguably the most impactful development in the city in decades (I would argue even including the new airport). Its current and future expansions will include more and (hopefully, eventually) exclusively grade separated routes as well.
I don't know that we're disagreeing! I spent several minutes in the video making the development/additional tax revenues argument, which I think is the main argument for streetcars. If you've had the chance to ride true BRT in a Latin American country, most of the modal advantages you mention disappear, and well-designed BRT has massive travel time and reliability advantages. I acknowledge Americans have some very unhelpful preconceived ideas about buses, but I don't think that's the fault of buses themselves.
@@CityNerd Appreciate the thoughts. I don't disagree with any of that. I do still think streetcars have advantages over even the best BRT, such as comfort, electrification (usually), etc. They also have more intangible benefits like the perceived long term investment and permanence of rail, general coolness, etc. Agree it's dumb most of them share grade and right of way in the US and cost is prohibitive. I'll have to get myself to Mexico City one of these days.
Trams seemed very functional and well utilized in Nagasaki/ Hiroshima/ Kumamoto when I visited in Japan. Probably because they serve high density/ have frequent headway and often have their own lanes. As a tourist, with their fixed routes, they are a lot easier than trying to figure out where a Japanese bus might take me.
Showing the statistic that Portland's tram was partly paid for by raising parking fees reminded me once again that Chicago sold off their parking meters to some Arab Emirate for $1 billion for a period of 75 years about 15 years ago. Which brings me to my topic suggestion: top-10 terrible mistakes in city governance, or even just a close look at Chicago's parking meter fiasco.
I think trams have three main advantages over buses: 1) they're really suitable for pedestrian streets because they're much more predictable in their movement; 2) they're more permanent, meaning they'll probably spur more development than a similar capacity bus line will; and 3) people just like them more and are more willing to ride them than buses, so if you want to get more people on transit, and thus also voting in favor of even more transit later, trams might be a good way to go.
Being permanent seems as much as a disadvantage as it is an advantage. I suspect that a bus lane takes (slightly) more space than a tram lane and is also more expensive to build and maintain, is that right?
I live in Detroit. I've used it once in 5 years when I had out of town company for tourist reasons. As someone who lives here and even worked where it serves, it serves no purpose related to actual transportation. If they extend it up the Woodward corridor to the suburbs, I would definitely use it to go to Midtown or Downtown Detroit!
Prague has an excellent tram system that was generally the most useful form of transit when I lived there for short to medium distance trips. It helped supplement the metro system that didn’t serve all areas equally.
Growing up in a Lisbon suburb in the 80's I used the 28 tram ("elétrico 28") and other routes, mainly 15 and 25, quite often. For us, it was just public transport, they were already old back then, and most people loved them. With the explosion of tourism in the early 2000's it became almost impossible for locals to use the old trams. I don't think I've been inside one of those in the last 15 years. And I come to work in Lisbon every day. I agree with you on tuck tucks. They're a plague, too many, very expensive, and cause a lot of traffic problems. They're not even a Portuguese thing, so there's no reason to waste your money as a tourist on one of those things.
Glad to see Tucson AZ finally make a City Nerd top 10 list!
I love the Tucson streetcar, I’ll go out of my way to avoid certain bus routes if I can ride the streetcar to my destination instead. From what I hear, Tucson is the biggest city in the US to have free public transit, and I hope this city gets more coverage from urbanists in the future!
Street cars also invite a different type of rider, since streetcars dont have the same bad rep, in certain circles, as say buses. And this can lead to more general support for public transportation in total.
Gotta love that Portuguese pavement style at 8:29. Paving in general originated in Mesopotamia which was then brought to Greece and Rome, and although the art of paving existed in Portugal during the Roman area, the pavement style that they're known for today didn't become a thing until the 19th century. In 1842 the São Jorge Castle in Lisbon served as a military base under the command of Lieutenant general Eusébio Cândido Cordeiro Pinheiro Furtado. He ordered part of the stronghold to be paved with a zigzag design of black basalt and white limestone that came from the Lisbon region. This is no longer there, but this pavement style caught on. Unfortunately the art is at risk due to lack of calceteiros and spending so much to protect them.
And I can confirm trams built right can lead to a city-building miracle as this was the case when the tram system in Pyongyang was rebuilt. 53.5 km/33 miles of track and the system is always busy. The city's trolleybus system is always busy too
Are you? Is this? You know, real?
lol lay off the moldy Emmental
I'm a retired streetcar motorman in Pittsburgh, PA. At it's peak, Pittsburgh Railways Company had over 600 miles of track just in the city! Most did not need an automobile to get around. Today, one of our "Light Rail Vehicles" (trolleys) can carry four bus loads of passengers! The rails in the pavement speak to the dependability of service. Even if a trolley breaks down, which is rare, it's going to come through being pulled or pushed by annother one. The low friction coeficient of wheel to rail adds to their efficiency. Can't say that about buses. Pittsburgh is a very hilly city. There were four locations in Pittsburgh where the streetcars set world records for wheel to rail adhesion without geared track! And, they never shut down for the winter! Whereas, if you're driving a bus, there's no such thing as, "I think I can." If in doubt, the bus pulls over or is detoured. In Pittsburgh, all trolleys are equipped with a snow plow under each end. We ran continuously during the blizzard of '93! Ice on the overhead wire can be a problem. But cars can be equipped with an extra sleet cutter pantograph. Modern trolleys can have regenerative braking which puts power back into the overhead wire fo other cars to use. Three cars braking downhill can generate enough power for one car to climb that same hill.
I'm also a member and instructor at the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum where we restore and operate antique streetcars for the public and share the history of streetcars in Pittsburgh and elsewhere. (www.patrolley.org)
It is kind of a shame they mostly ripped out the old Pittsburgh streetcars. But the city started contracting in population during the 60s, cars and suburbanization were taking off, and globally tram systems were being killed off in favor of buses or... nothing. They could have at least kept a few other routes besides the ones to the South Hills. And don't get me started on Skybus.
In Australia, trams are applied 2 ways. There is the traditional way you see in most of Melbourne's network that shares with cars, including being stuck in traffic jams or when a car decide to do a parallel park or double park in front of it. And then there's the more modern method seen in part of Melbourne and most of the other networks within Australia where the tram gets full right of way, with some even getting prioritised signalling when it crosses main roads (like in the Gold Coast) and these ones work well and has a much higher average speed.
Tram drivers here in the Netherlands have a reputation for dinging cars that are double parked. I’m not sure if they actually do, but the rumour is enough to make drivers take care about how they park. Trams getting blocked by parked cars is a rare occurrence. And thankfully most routes are laid out well so they don’t get stuck in traffic either. They are fast and usually manage to make their run according to the time table; they are far more predictable than buses.
Light rail that has its own dedicated lanes but isn’t grade-separated still has some of the same issues streetcars have. In Phoenix, the tracks still occasionally get blocked due to a collision, an idiot beaching their car on the tracks, or otherwise. Idiots in downtown Phoenix beaching their cars on the tracks isn’t as common as it was a year ago, though track blockages are still an occasional issue.
"Cow catchers" on the front would solve that problem.
Got something for you to consider: Fast Tram Systems with tracks separated from car traffic and priority on traffic lights. IMO it's good enough to be "poor man's subway" for cities not big/dense enough to justify digging metro tunnels.
And 'Proof of Payment' fare collection to allow all-door boarding and briefer stops.
I live in Europe, we call them Trams and here in Tallinn it's really good, reliable and better than in city buses. Also they're extending it to the seaport so you can go from seaport to airport, it's good here at least. Maybe a top 10 Europe trams, probably not because it's a US city channel.
This is essentially the same as SF's cable cars. They're really fun, but only occasionally useful as a method of transportation. Mostly they're just there for the tourists.
I was just in San Fransisco and tram 28 reminds me of San Francisco’s cable cars - historic significance, limited capacity, set routes in mixed traffic, tourist attraction, mostly non-locals. Of course they also have historic streetcars combined with a few modern streetcars. Love your videos!
SF cable car also has the "long lines at the start but in theory you can easily jump on later". Though I don't know if there's room for that.
Lived there 4 years, have visited, can't remember if I've ever taken a cable car. F-Market, yes.
Boston's MBTA green line also has streetcar aspects to it. The E line also merges in with car traffic towards the end of the line.
There's a particular and interesting use case for modern streetcar that we're going to (fingers crossed) build in Atlanta: for a transit option in car-free routes. The Atlanta Beltline, for those who don't know, is a car free multi-use trail that is being built out along old, unused rail corridors that surround the central city. It's been a huge catalyst for development and sees tons of use already giving miles of places to walk/bike/scooter completely separated from cars but next to housing, businesses, and parks. The initial plan always called for a light rail line to go along it as well.
Now, some folks ask "why do rail when you can do a BRT route instead?" I've got a few reasons. 1) The rails don't require adding extra impervious surfaces and extra asphalt worsening urban heat island and runoff. 2) The city can't easily change its mind and start allowing cars along the route. 3) Less contribution to air pollution and will be electrified without large batteries.
The modern downtown streetcar in Atlanta has been a largely useless failure, but that can be chalked up to both the traffic it gets stuck in and lack of investment along a lot of its route. But Beltline rail offers a much better use case that enhances an already wildly successful project (successful except for the affordable housing component that of course has been lower priority but that's a different discussion so I'll stop here).
The key to the KC streetcar's success is that it is a straight shot mostly on one street aside from the one pinched loop at North of the alignment. It doesn't try to be circulator or hit the front door of every destination which is a trap some other modern streetcars have fallen to, looking a you Cincinnati. Our ridership per mile here is very high and it will be interesting to see how the extension due to open in 2025 will affect that. A cross town route is also being explored.
Swear I had the same thought about Lisbon when I went there back in February. Haven't seen a city so congested with traffic ever (only moved around Europe), I could literally see the layer of pollution while landing at the airport. Even the narrowest streets allowed traffic through. And yes, thank God for the metro indeed.
NET (Nottingham Express Transit) trams are pretty good. There are some basic issues: sections shared with busy roads, drivers crashing and blocking them, floods in transformers shutting down sections, drivers getting stranded on clearly signposted "TRAMS ONLY" sections where the asphalt drops away completely and the tracks are exposed, leaving a beached car with wheels dangling (this happens all the time), the occasional winter storm knocking out power lines, but for the most part they work really well and are well used. Roughly 50% of the network is off road so they are much quicker than any equivalent bus. Park and ride is always full. For a city in England they are a decent option, because we mostly live in neighbourhoods less dense than Portugal or Spain, but a lot more dense then most of the US or Canada, so there are enough people in walking distance of stops for it to work.
A full underground system would only work in the inner city areas that are dense enough, and the lines would only be a few miles at most, probably nowhere near being economically viable.
It works, but I get why it wouldn't work in much of North America. Buses probably better option 90% of the time over there.
Japan has a super-modern public transport network, but some cities still have old-school trolley-buses (Hiroshima for one - and I think Kochi, on Shikoku). They are great! They clatter along with bells ringing, and the drivers wear white gloves and smartly pressed uniforms. They are bumpy and sway around, but they are cheap, and I love them!.
You often provide such beautiful audio that captures the essence of a city. Sound is such an underrated part of cities. We often think of quiet and noise with no in between for pleasant sounds which add to the texture and quality of a city.
Look into "Bondinho de Santa Teresa" from Rio de Janeiro. Its the equivalent of Tram 28 but with OPEN SIDES. There is no corridor in the Tram. Only benches that span from one site to the other. You "jump" into the tram from either sides. And until about 10 years ago you where able to ride "hanging" on its side. This practice was abolished due to saeft concerns (although it was way more fun)
Similar to Portland I think the Tucson Streetcar really succeeded as a development project. The streetcar corridor is by far the densest part of the city, to the point that it makes living in Tucson (as a college student at least) easy without a car!
Here in Poland people are fighting to have a tram lane built.
It's second only to subway when it comes to just how good form of a city transport it is.
It's bypassing car traffic, has an extremely frequent departures, aircon, and overall it's just... great. Crazy to think people in US complain about trams or find them to be a waste of money.
The following is a relevant comment by a German on another channel:
“I think it's also notable that Hamburg doesn't have trams, wich is very unique for a city in Germany of its size. They were demolished after WW2 but are really needed because the busses are really crowded :/“
Lisbon did recently announce a 3 month trial car free zone in the center, with more restrictions in Baixa. Tram 28 only passes through Baixa briefly, but hopefully it will help a bit. I doubt the tuktuks are affected though unfortunately.
My skepticism toward streetcars was further fueled when the city of Seattle closed the waterfront streetcar line because the site of the maintenance shed was wanted for a sculpture garden. This was at a time when Sound Transit was trumpeting the success of the Tacoma Link streetcar despite meager ridership despite it being fare free and connecting to a free parking garage. At the same time, money was being dumped into the South Lake Union Streetcar and First Hill Streetcar. The former was openly acknowledged to be a gift to real estate developers. The later was a band aid to fill a gap where a station had to be deleted from the Central Link light rail line because the depth of the tunnel made the planned station too costly.
In my city, trams only share space with cars when it would be too disruptive to build separated tracks or give them their own median. They're much more comfortable than buses (no sharp turns, no bouncing suspension, smoother acceleration/deceleration, less engine noise and rattling...), don't pollute, are more accessible, and more reliable too.
I guess you might call that "light rail" from an Anglo perspective, but in Germany we don't have a distinction between "street car" and "light rail". A typical tram here runs on separated tracks where it can and in the road where it can't.
I live in Bochum (Germany) and I love our Stadt-bahn system.
Our trams are comfortable, you know the routes and they don't really get stuck in Traffic because they put parts of it Underground.
Buses on the other hand are horrible. They always get stuck in Traffic during rush-hour, have confusing schedules and are unpleasent to ride.
I have never experienced a Bus comparibaly pleasent as a Tram.
I live in a city, Vilnius (Lithuania) where we just have buses. Well, their capacity limits and the rather high number of bus drivers required don’t make it work, and besides that, the comfort of trams is so much higher. Trams in Europe generally form a perfect middle ground between lower density routes for buses and high density routes for metros. This is also why new systems keep appearing and existing systems get expanded. The best systems in Europe, like Prague and Vienna tend to have frequent stops and mixed-zone running in the center, with lots of pedestrian traffic. Outside of this, they tend to shift to their own right-of-way and provide more speed on longer distances.
It seems everyone in the world hates buses. They're simply not a good mode of transport.
LR/tram line in my city is on the median with signal priority at intersections. It’s 50% faster than the previous bus service. Being a relatively new city the arterials all have medians.
It was bitterly attacked by the instant BRT set as over-investment for our population size (half a million but growing at 15% per decade).
If the initial line is completed it will run the full length of the long axis of the city.
If i had to choose, I'd take railed transit over busses any day.
The great thing about trams is that trams that were built 100 years ago, still are rolling. You don't have to get new vehicle fleet every 10 to 20 years.
Yup that's pretty much my thoughts as well! Glad to have a nice resource to link everyone to😊
Unfortunately, busses in most US cities have a stigma. People will use streetcars and investing in that infrastructure is just easier than trying to get people to even consider the bus system.
The KC one having such high ridership is kind of funny as it's usually faster to just walk wherever you're trying to go than it is to wait for the streetcar. Some people will do anything to not walk. But the expansion down through midtown is almost done and that should have a huge positive impact on the development of some of the more rundown areas along Main Street.
Main Street and Riverfront extensions should be done in about 2 years from now. Also excited about other potential lines.
Yeah, but the SEPTA/Philadelphia Subway-Surface and intercity 101-102 and Norristown HSL are for real. I believe Philadephia plans to redevelop the Subway-Surface with more dedicated ROW when they replace the 1980s era Kawasaki trolley vehicles.
The Kawasaki trolleys are so bad for physically disabled people and wheelchair users, or even infants in strollers.
well i live in san diego, and like many other places, we had our streetcar system torn out to be replaced by "sleek, modern busses". this happened a while ago but i think we would have been better off if we had just kept it. it was such an extensive system and you can definitely tell SD used to be a streetcar city.
In a Spanish novel on the development of Barcelona, E. Mendoza’s “Ciudad de los prodigios” (1986), the author describes a old-time scheme to sell urban plots of land at a better price: Lay down streetcar tracks, sell the land, then remove the tracks again. After the fall of the Wall, something of that sort may have happened in Potsdamer Straße. Just thought I’d throw that out there. Greetings from Berlin.
I like to think of light rail as more of a umbrella term that refers to the technology being used and the more specific definitions refer how that technology is implemented. Many modern LRT and Streetcar systems in the US have interchangeable rolling stock because they use similar or the exact same technology. The Siemens S70 is a good example of this as it is used on the LRT system of the San Diego Trolley and the modern Atlanta Streetcar. Basically LRT can be thought of as "Streetcar Rapid Transit" similar to how there is usually little difference between regular busses and busses used on a BRT system.
Clarifying insight.
Utrecht even has a light rail line they locally call "sneltram" which is Dutch for "fast streetcar"
Same here. LRT primarily refers to railways which are lighter on regulations, lighter on costs but also typically have a ligher capacity. Street-running and mixing with traffic is the biggest one (normally, trains never drive with street traffic together, and this also saves on costs on acquiring ROW and grade crossings also are simpler), though vehicle standards also play a role (rolling stocks like the Desiro or FLIRT, heavy rail trains in Europe, have to be downgraded as light rail vehicles in America because of different crash standards on both continents). Capacity is mostly used as a distinction between light and heavy metros (though the former can use rolling stock on a tram-like system or be a legal LRT), though many streetcars have a limited on capacity as well compared to full-sized trains due to smaller loading gauges.
I disagree with the idea of "streetcar rapid transit" because while some of them are essentially trams with various degrees of street separation (e.g. Boston's Green Line which is part subway, part streetcars on exclusive ROW) if not being a proper metro on its own (the DLR as it's light rail in comparison to the London Underground), there also are fairly distinct modes of LRT. Aside from the aforementioned downgraded heavy rail vehicles, it's also referred to trams which reuse old railways (e.g. London and Rhine-Neckar's trams) when they aren't actively running with full-sized trains (e.g. Sheffield, Karlsruhe) and it also includes half-metros which still await proper grade separation but share not much characteristic of trams (e.g. the U-Bahn in Frankfurt and U35 in Bochum are closer to the DLR than their tramways).
The Confederation Line of Ottawa's O-Train is a good example of an LRT which is only called this way for the use of the rolling stock (low-floor trams). It's actually a light metro like the DLR because the system is entirely grade separated. Similarly, the Trillium Line is an example of downgraded heavy rail rolling stock because the first trains used there (the aforemention Desiro) were directly imported from Germany.
@@MarioFanGamer659 We call them premetro or Stadtbahn.
A couple of points in street car's favor:
AI for a street car is pretty easy. You can use the gas, brake, or neither. You can honk your horn or not. There is a lot less to consider, so it is easier to train a model.
You can route over areas where you don't have to pave. While it can go in mixed traffic, it can also take some corridors that aren't paved roads.
Self-driving cars is an idiotic pipe dream. Intellectuals are waiting for self-driving trains and trams.
Love hearing your viewpoint on this!
The line of people waiting to board Tram 28 in Lisbon looks similar to those who wait in line to board the cable cars in San Francisco.
The Portland streetcar is so ridiculously slow that once I saw the same pedestrian walking a dog catch up with us every time we stopped
Hahaha! Speed should definitely be a consideration.
On some of the Melbourne suburban tram routes, I discovered that if I just miss the tram, I can walk 4 stops before the next one arrives. They need to reduce cars on these tram routes to speed them up.
You should try the Basel, Zürich and Vienna tram networks.
Your tram ASMR transported me back to my 20s in Philly riding the Girard ave trolley from Fishtown to Fairmount drunk. Love that sound.
Amazing that Tucson is #10. The streetcar line is only 4.5 miles long. Some of us in Tucson would really like to see it expanded and that number would give justification for it.
Do you think one of the advantages of trams in the US would be perception? Rail of all forms makes itself known when it arrives, while buses just disappear into the background as a form of transportation used by people who had no other options. Rail cars also tend to be cleaner and quieter, whereas buses have large loud engines. Just the psychological impact of having a quick, frequent, clean, quiet train car to ride in may be enough to improve an area's transit ridership, even if it otherwise provides the same capacity as an equivalent bus line.
I assume that's the reason (well, one of the reasons) why BRTs are so popular in Anglo-America (compared to Europe outside of France and UK for various reasons) as they give buses the respectible infrastructure even if it's fairly low quality compared to an actual BRT system like one can see in Latin America.
In the US at least, the issue is that a lot of the streetcar systems were built to spur development in (what were then) suburbs or outer sections of the city. Maintenance was deferred because they were built to entice middle- and upper-class people to buy homes outside the cities they worked in; they were a loss-leader for residential development. Their abandonment or dismantling and replacement with buses was seen as a cost saving measure and progress.
Modern streetcars fall into a couple traps CN brought up. Either they're seen as almost a theme park attraction to get people to ride and then spend money in their area. Or when they're truly looked at as a mass transit solution, they're put down as a cheaper alternative to where heavy rail capacity should be used or a band-aid where perhaps BRT would be more fitting. Although I agree LRT is better (maintenance, longterm cost, electrification) than buses, some cities might be better served by getting a LOT of mediocre transit rather than a little of great transit in a single streetcar line that doesn't provide the coverage of a network. The argument I'm making being that once you have a mediocre network and the ridership, you can incrementally put in work to upgrade your most used corridors to streetcars/LRT rather than blowing all your budget and praying for an expansion in ten years.
This is of course complicated by other things: do you have space for the LRT right of way vs a buslane vs street running? In most of the US and Canada, even cities, people will balk at a bus as lower class but ride trains because they're cool. How fast will the ride be with how many stops? People aren't going to take mass transit unless other modes (driving) are slower. A lot of LRT projects (like the MD Purple Line I'm familiar with) seem loath to take any vehicle lanes away as they add LRT tracks.
I took the street car all the time when I lived in Tenerife! It ran parallel to the road and was a lot less dizzying on the hills than the bus! If you ever get the chance to visit, I highly recommend! The Canary Islands, or one of the few places in the world that I’ve been to where you can get basically everywhere on public transportation
Good video as always, i would love to listen a podcast with you, your humor+real analysis make those 15min videos seems like 3
I think you're a bit US-centric on this which you kinda acknowledge but still. I know that you guys often build streetcar networks in cities with a giant populations that could easily support a metro, but here in Europe they are often built in smaller cities where they can actually work. My city (freiburg im Breisgau) has a population of 250k people and the pretty extensive streetcar network with exclusive right of way is absolutely vital for transportation (especially for students). The Portland metro area has a population of 2.2 million people and a subway would be way more efficient. But I think for smaller cities,
There are many factors that can make subways impractical in many US metros. Consider how much lower the percentage of a metro who work in the central core of the city is today than it was 50-100 years ago. Legacy cities like NY, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, and Philadelphia had subways built before cities here were ringed by a beltway or two with lots of office buildings. Retrofitting subways into non-legacy cities is expensive for all the obvious reasons, but also because now they would have to not just go into the center and back to be useful for commuting. Because of this, light rail and even street cars are the most pragmatic way to initiate a transit system for cities that did not need a subway before WW2.
The correct term is "exclusive rights-of-way" or "exclusive trackbed". Grade separation means the tracks do not cross any street which is true of a metro and not really for a tram.
@@MarioFanGamer659 thanks
The thumbnail annoys me a bit haha. Of course trams are good! I wish we had more in the uk. they’re all over mainland Europe and are great
Maybe I’m confused because to me a tram does have right of way and it’s own lane in the middle of a road I think
Thats on some lines here in britain.
Though good chunk do end up being separated from road for majority of their route.
Though nothing beats blackpool's heritage fleet.
As a resident of the number one city on that list, I couldn't agree more with the last couple minutes of this video. I'm still not happy that they're pulling out our tracks though because what we SHOULD be doing is upgrading Philly's streetcars to full trams with exclusive right-of-way wherever we can :(
Thanks for covering my country once again ♥️
I like trams..They can run in all types of environments streets underground mixed traffic dedicated lines ..trams also go to the front of the line at stop 🛑 lights busses don't.
It's odd. Cities will take away car lanes for the tiny percentage of people who bike, but they won't do the same for the larger number of people who ride trolleys.
Two differences: (1) bike lanes don't take as much space -- one car lane is wide enough for two bike lanes and (2) a much higher percentage of people could bike if it's safe to do so, so projects are aiming at future bikers not current ones. Though painted bike lanes aren't a great safety improvement, especially if to the left of parked cars.
In Melbourne, we have a mixed implementation of trams. In some areas in the CBD, there are tram exclusive tracks which are very efficient, and very popular. It helps that there is no fee for using trams inside CBD limits. But once you get into the suburbs, trams occupy the same street as cars. The worst is when there are 2 lanes in each direction, but the outer lanes have parked cars. This means that all traffic must use the inner lane. Traffic is catastrophic in peak time when this happens. Melbourne can do so much more to become the best public transport city in the world. It wouldn't be hard. They just have to commit.
I work for UTA and can confirm the S-line’s 2 miles has led to $2b in TOD. Granted, it does connect into a much larger system with over 130 miles of rail spanning 3 UZAs of nearly 3m people in all. When built as a feeder line into a wider system within a dense area, they can certainly be useful.
I wouldn't take a bus on a daily basis, but I would take a tram every day.
I tend to prefer tram over busses. I think in part because it's a lot more obvious where the tram wil go.
Obviously both are inferior to a good subway network, but that's also a lot more expensive.
I'm not sure if this is a hot take, but Modern street cars are in my opinion something of a missing middle between regular old busses and proper light rail/metro/subway systems. More visible/accessible and "prestigious" than a bus but cheaper to build and operate than a line of light rails. Especially in a country where transit project seem to quickly spiral out of control in terms of costs and come often years late.
Brooklyn/Queens rejected an east river street car which disappointed me as that area needs more cross borough connections and personally a Street car network that connects the main suburban towns in Baltimore county loosely shadowing I-695, I-83 and I-795 would be awesome. Even a more modest system with Towson acting as a hub going in 4 directions would be just a major economic booster for the region.
love the videos great discussions
Agreed on the "less flexible bus" angle.
There are efficiency gains (from an energy perspective) to using rails, and likely also operational (cost) efficiencies too with steel wheels. But what about the venerable trolley bus?
Back in Vancouver, they crisscross the city and are a huge portion of the busses that run. They're fully electric and pick it up from overhead wires, so no need for enormous batteries. But, if there's a blockage or detour, they can (and do) stop briefly, drop the booms, drive a short distance, and put them back up. Of course they can also change lanes for minor situations, something a streetcar can't do.
Maybe a follow-up video on these, your thoughts on them, and some light analysis on why a streetcar would be picked over a trolley bus route?
From flexibility point of view, bus > trolleybus > tram.
From energy efficiency point of view, tram > trolleybus > bus.
With battery EV, I think the line between trolleybus and bus will blur. Just like that of light rail vs tram/streetcar.
@@billyswong An EV bus is very heavy and will cause a lot of wear and tear on the road and vibrations. In my region most busses as fully EV and there was a street where the houses suffered from vibrations from the bus..
@@lws7394 I am talking about potential future generation of trolleybuses that rely on EV battery instead of backup diesel engine. Such trolleybuses don't need batttery as heavy as in pure battery EV buses.
There is also the possibility of hybrid technology, where the battery acts like a flywheel and stores enough so the trolley can go short distances between overhead lines to get around blockages or traverse routes where there are short sections without overhead lines.
@@stevengordon3271 that's literally the Vancouver system. All trolley busses have a short range battery on board to navigate around line outages or diversions.
While trams are less flexible than buses (especially when they're not in their own dedicated lanes), one thing I think you've missed is that they're more energy efficient which makes a difference if you want to electrify your public transit.
I was also expecting some acknowledgement of their impact on air quality vs. buses. Streetcars have no emissions from the vehicles and no tire particulates. As an added bonus, I would think that being electrified with no need for batteries means an extremely long vehicle lifespan and potentially far cheaper energy, depending on the municipality's power source.
@@jonathankittrell170 trolleybuses are middle ground between those
@@Monoryable Trams basically become trolleybusses that have higher capacity.
In Melbourne, I love the trams, living within the tram network is like a goal for me. Everything is so interconnected.
My wife and I actually took Tram 28 a couple of times in the evening after dinner in Lisbon because our Airbnb was near a stop, and it was only half-full with at least a few locals. It was nice.