Are Streetcars Better Than Buses?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- Reece discuss the ever important streetcar versus buses debate in today's video! Enjoy!
As always, leave a comment down below if you have ideas for our future videos. Like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon so you won't miss my next video!
=ATTRIBUTION=
Epidemic Sound (Affiliate Link): www.epidemicso...
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
=PATREON & UA-cam MEMBERSHIPS=
If you'd like to help me make more videos & get exclusive behind the scenes access and early video releases, consider supporting my Patreon or right here on UA-cam! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
UA-cam Memberships: / @rmtransit
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
(Not officially affiliated with the channel)
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: reecemartin.ca
Substack: reecemartin.su...
=ABOUT ME=
Hi, my name's Reece. I'm a passionate Creator, Transportation Planner, and Software Developer, interested in rapid transportation all around my home base of Toronto, Canada, as well as the whole world!
In Turin, Italy, there are still old trams in active use that were designed in the 1940's. I.e. some of them have been *used daily for over 70 years!*
These things are reliable and require little maintenance.
The biggest refurbishment happened when we figured out that asbestos is not great and we had to remove it from the insulation.
In Milan Peter Witt's streetcars delivered in 1928 (which also are referred as 28 for this reason) are still operational on many lines. Generally the ones with not segregated stretch in the city center and not too long. They became an emblem of the city itself
The Ashmont-Mattapan line on the MBTA uses 1940s PCC streetcars, though frankly it probably shouldn't.
@@MattMcIrvin It's too light of a line to support newer, heavier streetcars, and would require expensive and length upgrades.
Sadly, road salt makes that pretty difficult in colder climates
Hiroshima has 2 1930s streetcars still running that survived an atomic blast.
I hate the whole "we're not Europe" argument for things. The laws of physics don't change by crossing the Atlantic. Toronto was settled by Europeans FFS.
@@July1st1867 well we definetly would be better off building a city with affordable density and accessible transit
it's important to remember that for public transit, making a road less accessable to cars Is a feature not a flaw. if you take away a lane for drivers and they keep seeing a streetcar Wiz by them as they get stuck in traffic, if it's available they're gonna start to think "huh why don't I just get on that instead". the whole point is to make less people drive.
Tbh trams, buses, light rail and metros all have their own place in a comprehensive transit network. You can’t say we will only build one type to serve an entire city cause that will never work. We need buses, for example, for last mile connectivity and we need metros, for example for a city wide network that makes covering one end to another end in minutes possible.
In Italy streetcars (trams) routinely use *narrow 2-lane streets shared with other traffic* without issues.
It's not a big deal really. 🤷♀️
@@emeraldbonsai that would block the tram, so when the next one arrives the driver calls the police and they remove the car.
When it happens the tram is usually delayed by half an hour but the driver that parked illegally gets an hefty fine and they learn very quickly to not park on the tracks. Ultimately it becomes extremely rare.
I ride a tram every day that passes on such narrow streets shared with cars, I've literally not seen a parked car blocking the tram in over 10 years.
That happens in Melbourne too, but the problem it creates is some of our longer tram lines take forever to get from the outer suburbs to the CBD during peek times (sometimes over 2 hours for a 30-40KM route).
I finally got around to watching this one. As someone living in Melbourne, I know that there's a mix of trams with both right of way and sharing the street with vehicles. Yeah, buses do take up space too and at least the authorities here are quick to clear up the mess if an accident or other disruption happens on a busy tram route. Also like you said with electric power, the trams here have been pledged to be fully powered by renewable energy, so that is easier to switch from say a diesel-powered bus.
route 6 tram gang
What does renewable energy have to do with switching from diesel?
Renewable energy makes it harder to switch, not easier, because usually it's wind and solar which are generally unreliable and low energy density... not something you want for your transportation network (or society in general).
Nuclear is the only sustainable, affordable, and reliable future of energy, not hoping the wind blows, or having to have massive battery or water energy storage banks, and replacing wind turbines and solar panels every ten years.
@@AndrooUK Renewable energy with energy storage and transmission will have fine reliability (the sun doesn't shine all the time in any place, and the wind doesn't blow all the time in any place, but the sun does shine every day -- even overcast days -- and the wind is always blowing somewhere). And renewable energy doesn't make nuclear waste or have Fukushima/Chernobyl-class accidents.
Buses account for a great deal of road wear. You get "bus knuckes" where they squish out the asphalt and ruin the surface.
That's called asphalt pavement creep
Buses aren't fixed to a set track that requires maintenance and hence shut down that portion of the line requiring them to use bus replacements.
no they don't. they save far more damage that can be done if those ppl were using cars instead. stop spreading your stupidity
@@LeReVaQ You should really say who your replying to so people aren't confused. For a second I thought you were replying to me.
So true! In London, UK, bicycles often share bus lanes and it's like being on a rollercoaster sometimes.
By the way, in Tokyo there is a Yurikamome line based on Mitsubishi Crystal Motor technology and according to Wikipedia it needs 80,000 passengers per day on a Line length of 14.7 km to be profitable. So 50,000 passengers per hour in one direction is a lot!
Yes, yes, yes! Streetcars (in Europe, aka trams) should be promoted as much as possible. Here's why: the capacity of modern streetcar vehicles is much higher than that of a bus and it can run really smoothly and quietly thanking to the rubber cushion under the rails. They don't need recharging as they are constantly connected to the powerline. The railway-based rolling stock lasts longer than the rubber-wheel based vehicles. At last, but not the least, trams are simply beautiful!
and they don't ruin the road (although that barely matters since cars cause more damage) but this does matter a lot if they run on their dedicated lane!
Melbourne Australia's streetcar system- now that's a streetcar system.
Trams.......
@@lodle2919 Tram and streetcar are same thing.
@@lodle2919 What im trying to say is that the semantics don't matter, in spirit they do the same duty: move lots of people short distances very efficiently
Was surprised at how light traffic was in downtown when I visited Melbourne several years ago, even with roads being narrower (partially due to the presence of tram lines) than the city I'm from (Singapore). Thought it was because Melbourne had a smaller population, since I thought Australia with its low population density had a weaker public transport culture. Then I learnt that Melbourne's population was actually about the same as Singapore, and maybe public transport ridership there has already been induced significantly by various factors e.g commuters' habits, more expensive downtown parking
@@lodle2919 I wouldn't say Australia refers to the as trams, in Sydney we used to have one of the biggest tram networks alongside Melbourne but since getting rid of it we have made it into a light rail system
You brought up a lot of good points. I fully agree with you on the part where streetcars provide smoother rides. Dufferin St. is full of potholes and uneven surfaces. Especially on Eglinton due to the construction. I sometimes wonder if buses ended up breaking down due to constantly running over bumps. With streetcars, you don't have to worry too much about having to maintain road surfaces as they only run on rails.
I'm not sure if this kind of problem is exclusive to Toronto, but fare evasion is more likely to happen on streetcars as opposed to being on a bus. I see it way too often and it negatively impacts the operation of the TTC. Even with fare inspectors (which is already controversial to begin with), it doesn't completely solve the problem.
The difference in ride quality is even more obvious in older cities e.g. in Europe where some downtown roads are stone-paved & are thus bumpy to ride on in rubber-tyred vehicles e.g. buses
The problem of tram is too slow.
Everyone knows about Melbourne's system, but I think Sydney's system is also a very interesting case study. They're called light rail, but both lines have mixed traffic running as well as separated. The new line is extremely slow, but has high frequency and capacity, replacing many many busses, and is more comfortable. The older line also uses low-floor trams, but the majority of the line runs more like LRT - traffic separated and high speed (60-70kph, ~45mph), but individual vehicle capacity is lower and is made up by frequency. Its dedicated infrastructure was conveniently adapted from an old goods line, so extensive tunnels for a line which the government would never justify today. This is interesting as the trams running straight through the CBD in the newer line run in 2x5 (10) car configurations (as opposed to 1x5 cars), making them quite cumbersome in denser areas and intersections.
Thanks for the comment Thomas, I do think I will talk about Sydney more in the future!
One point, I think when referring to "cars" we probably should just stick to an entire LRV since the 5m modules aren't really independent vehicles.
@@MetroManMelbourne I think the model in sydney is more about high capacity corridors into the city, as you mentioned, and each line does stretch quite far into the suburbs, but is still a single line in each direction so the coverage as you mentioned is not very high. For most people it's similar to heavy rail in that you need to get to the station, by bus or otherwise, unless you are travelling to or from one of those high demand stops along the line (of which there are many). It's like spreading out the hubs, rather than literally every bus terminating at wynyard or railway square (the two bus hubs in the cbd).
6:02 In Vienna, every time a new underground line gets built, the corresponding overground tramway track gets removed instead of repurposing some portions for new routes (best example: 21 - at least the portion around Heinestraße subsists in disuse); crossing routes lose their separated right-of-ways as they are now considered less important in favor of parking lanes hindering the tram drivers view. Even just redevelopment of a shopping street - a current European fad - takes away dedicated lanes for thumbnail pub gardens, cycle racks (yet without nearby cycle ways) and mini-benches.
My hometown Ottawa really needs its own streetcar lines in several places IMHO!! thank you soooo much for the amazing content!!
gmbrusselsprout I‘ve been thinking about to build a streetcar on Bank St from Parliament towards Billings Bridge, but Bank St only has two lanes, and I don’t think Ottawa has budget to build tunnel.
@@quarringtonz231 I do think that if they do a tunnel it will be 10, 15 or even 20 plus years down the road before they even start because it would be a rather large project. the tunnel, just based on my rough Google Maps estimates, would be almost twice as long as the 2.5 km Confederation Line tunnel at 4 km. I think Ottawa would need to grow a lot and there would be a wait time based on federal and provincial economic support of a project of that scope.
gmbrusselsprout Exactly.
They used to
You said it yourself, every mode of transit has its place! Great topic to talk about!!
This is genuinely the most wholesome community I've ever seen. Excellent video too.
I think Toronto specifically can benefit from more streetcar lines like the 512 St. Clair. I think that model of streetcar/LRT can potential he work really well on bus routes like the Duffrin, Bathurst, Jane routes.
That'd be transformative on the Sufferin Dufferin
Absolutely, cramped articulated busses running every 3 minutes is not enough
I think (at least in my context) the streetcars (or trams as we call them) should be separated from other traffic with curbs, fences or a median, not just paint. If the line runs in mixed traffic (usually 2-4 lane road) there should be minimal on street parking and one must accept that occasionally the track is blocked by accident/parked car or the vehicle is stuck in traffic. Keeping trams separated from the other traffic keeps em' rolling even if there are cars (parking, accidents or just traffic) blocking the road. Anyways, separated tracks tend to result in faster travel times and fewer unexpected events, such as accidents, close calls etc. improving reliability.
For a bit of context: Helsinki announced a few days ago that they had had over 100 cases when a (incorrectly) parked car blocked the track (service stopped temporarily) in 1 week alone. Continuing the service meant that either the owner of the car (blocking the track) was found and moved their car, or the car was towed to a nearby street. The delay may be only 10-20 minutes at a time, but multiply that by 100 a week, that's a lot. There are 10-11 lines (depending on how you cont em') and a total of 38 km two-way track in Helsinki.
Trams are better than buses as long as the demand justifies their use. Trams are more permanent, their service tends to be more frequent than buses', rides are smoother and boarding times are shorter. As a bonus, the weather doesn't affect them as much (usually they don't need anyone to plow the snow, track condition is relatively stable and trams in general can't run off the road.
On the other hand trams are vulnerable to derailment (especially in accidents with heavy vehicles), they can't drive around parked cars, accidents etc and they are more costly to construct and maintain compared to rapid bus transit.
If you grade separate streetcars, then they're by definition not "streetcars." The primary difference between a streetcar and a non-streetcar light rail/urban transit is that they are traincars, which run on the street.
The best you can do while letting them stay "streetcars" is to keep the streets they run on open to noncommercial, non-automobile traffic-pedestrians, cyclists, etc.
@@RickJaeger yeah, trams/LRV can actually run (slowly) through pedestrianized streets
A future suggestion for a topic: Toronto is an outlier city when it comes to transit in North America especially surface transit. Many of the busiest surface routes (30,000+) in North America are in Toronto which gets lost when comparing subway systems alone. I don't think many Torontonians know how unusual this is when it comes to public transportation. I enjoy the channel. Keep up the good work!
I see so many Toronto residents calling the TTC bad or complaining, but they don't realize that literally every GTHA region is in the stone-age for public transit
Yeah Toronto actually has a massive transit system compared to most USA cities. However compared to many Europe cities or some Asian cities it's not that big. USA transit infrastructure is often just awful.
Yeah, in my county in Ohio (mass transit is a county based system here) the *only* mass transit we have is buses and a given route is lucky if it gets more than one every 35-45 minutes between the hours of 6 am and 8 pm. There are almost no buses in the county whatever between 8 pm and 6 am.
So yeah, Toronto natives don’t know how good they actually have it.
21:07 Meanwhile HK's trams have only 1 door for boarding & 1 for alighting, like a bus. Plus point of that is that you don't need to employ conductors/inspectors to catch fare evaders
I think busses are good for low ridership corridors but that’s about it. Streetcars are probably the way to go for ground level, street transit. Although buses are good for helping alleviate congestion if streetcars ever get overwhelmed.
An average lifespan of a TTC bus is 14 years.
The TTC is known for keeping buses alive longer than the typical North American transit agency. In some cases, buses have stayed in service beyond their 20th birthday. I actually rode a GM New Look during rush hour on the York University 196 route in 2011. I was surprised that any still existed in service. The bus was in pretty good shape too.
Back in the 1990s, TTC General Manager David Gunn spearheaded a heavy rebuild of buses in Toronto. The system was too cash-strapped to buy many new buses, so hundreds of older buses underwent rebuilds to give them another decade of useful life.
@@Nunavuter1 okay, but check out other Canadian systems. Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, Victoria, and Winnipeg all had 1990's buses in service this year. All but Vancouver, Edmonton (and possibly Calgary) still do.
Edmonton and Calgary also still have late-70s and early-80s LRVs in service
ImgursDownvote4Love Don’t forget about TTC Scarborough RT
William Johnston In Australia buses normally are given 21 year life spans.
In some territories, buses' lifespans are also limited by legislation arising from concerns over their tailpipe emissions' I think e.g. 17 years in Singapore, where I'm from, though applications can be made to extend that to 20 years. Which is a bit ironic here as the country also has a system to limit it's car population that also makes it significantly less uneconomical to own cars fore more than 10 years, also due to concerns over tailpipe emissions. So the buses sometimes are significantly older than cars & have dirtier emissions e.g. until the early-mid 2010s, we operated Volvo B10Ms (Mk IV) that 'proudly' displayed 'Euro I' badges (referring to emissions standards set all the way back in the early 1990s)
The thing I like about streetcars over buses is that they’re always fixed on a rail, which makes their movement pattern more predictable for passengers, whereas buses can move wherever they want and might not even be on the street the passenger expects.
On the flip side though, because streetcars are forced to stay on the rails, they can’t bypass road work or automobile accidents like buses can, so they have no choice but to cut off a huge chunk of the streetcar line, whereas a bus has the freedom to bypass the road closure to only cut off a few stops. I just wish my city, Baltimore, would use temporary bus stops for longer term road closures, rather than leaving a huge gap between open stops like they always do.
When Calgary opened the Blue Line West, the areas it served went from getting insanely frequent service to having incredibly shitty service, especially off-peak. Perhaps if it had been a streetcar, it would be much better service?
If HAMILTON thought like this, it would STILL have its LITERAL Street Railway, rather than ONLY be 1 by NAME ONLY since 1951!
Thanks to Doug Ford, no more LRT for Hamilton.
He's a HORSE'S ass! I NEVER voted for him!
Hamilton LRT is back on!
Watch the LRT somehow not be part of the HSR.
Praise God that LRT is back on!! I think it could be like the Eglinton Crosstown line, where it could be OWNED by Metrolinx, but OPERATED by HSR!
I think they should make streetcar routes on the Waterloo region university corridor because the bus capacity is not enough as the buses are packed constantly and ion lrt doesn’t serve this area that much except for the university of Waterloo stop
That actually makes a lot of sense. However, with all the redevelopment on the northern end of King, and the fact that the 201 is the second busiest corridor after the old 200 route (now iON), it would make sense to convert the university avenue to Conestoga mall route to LRT. University is wide enough to accommodate it. Maybe not now, but in a few years when they are well into the Cambridge extension I could see them planning for it as a stage 3. However, I would be willing to bet that they would pilot it as a iON bus route first.
I think ION has a low ridership
Zetong Z The Ion is pretty successful if you ask me for the first couple of months as it carries almost 20,000 a day in comparison the O-Train has about the same amount a day and the Ottawa Metropolitan area is double of Waterloo region’s population. Also Ottawa has way more capacity and is fully grade separated and we are doing the same as them when ion isn’t fully grade separated. So I think that it is has been a success so far
GrayCosmic you’re right, my bad.
I think they should make ION a streetcar system. It already basically is one anyways
Take a shot every time he says "to be clear"
I died.
A couple things worth mentioning in favor of buses: First, they are more bike friendly. It takes extra effort to protect bikes from surface rail, and most North American cities fail (Toronto still has issues -- it isn't Amsterdam).
Second, bus service is just more flexible. This is often seen as a negative, but I view it as a positive. Changing a bus route is trivial, which means that it can be altered for various reasons, as the city changes. It can adjust to increased development in one area, or as part of building a much better network. This can be done with streetcars, but it is far more expensive. Streetcars (like all rail) are far more of a "measure twice, cut once" proposition.
As much as getting stuck in a streetcar track does suck, as a cyclist I personally prefer the predictability of streetcars when sharing the road with them. Unlike buses which change lanes and can make sudden turns, also the exhaust fumes.
@@trevorwhitten5663 I'm used to Seattle, where so many of the buses run under wire (exhaust, what exhaust?*). But yeah, a streetcar won't change lanes. Still, I think that having a problem with either is rare, whereas having a problem with the tracks themselves (especially with cars) is not. The city can make them safer (by moving the cars around, and changing the angles) but that requires more work, and more sacrifice (for drivers) that a lot of cities aren't willing to do. In some cases the change would be dramatic (e. g. closing off a street for all cars).
* OK, we have our share of diesel buses, but most are fairly clean now (and operate as hybrids).
For reference, I think the best of these new US streetcar system is Kansas City. The branding is integrated with the rest of the transit system (not branded like some toy), it has attractive modern design and real-time information systems, it's decently frequent throughout the day, it currently is free to use so doesn't have cumbersome US fare machines, the route is a straight line (they're adding a looped section at one end now but it's small and doesn't have many stops along that section), it mostly runs in the outer lanes (where it could potentially be obstructed by parked vehicles) but also has center-running sections, it actually goes FAST! unlike any other US streetcar system, it's currently being extended. The downsides would be that the stops aren't entirely level with the vehicle (just the middle section) and it isn't largely center-running, even on the recent extension along a wide road, it barely has exclusive lanes. If they'd have proposed grassy center-running tracks for the extension they'd have made the ultimate high capacity transit line that doubles as neighbourhood redevelopment and beautifying tool.
So in North America, all post auto rail based transit is built with the goal of spuring development. This is a good thing, in order to move people,
you have to create places where people want to go and walk.
It has it good and bad points.
At the extreme, imagine building a transit station but then never having a vehicle service it. If the goal was to stimulated development, that might work, but if the goal was to move people it will definitely fail.
Stimulating development is a fine goal, but the primary goal should always be to build a system that people actually use.
Streetcars and their tracks imply a permanence to the infrastructure on a street that buses are unable to. When a city invests billions in physical infrastructure, you know it likely isn't going to change in the short to medium term and people are more likely to invest long term in that street as a result of that stability. They may not be great at mingling with cars but they are very psychologically satisfying to the human penchant for predictability.
I find the ridership experience of low floor streetcars is much better than "low floor" buses because these buses are often not truly low floor as there are things that stick up for wheels, engines, and other systems. Moreover, streetcars can be longer and have more doors. FInally much quieter (although might change with electric buses)
Love your content! Any chance you could do a future of transit in Auckland, New Zealand? There's a lot to be excited about here
@@RMTransit transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Land/Documents/7bbf7cd0db/ATAP2018.pdf this is a good starting point as it outlines the planned improvements as currently agreed with the municipal government and central government. I'll see what else i can find
@@RMTransit the Wikipedia page on public transport in Auckland also gives a good context on recent and ongoing improvements
Europe is now building metro instead or (Idk how you call it in America) S bahn/RER networks wich are heavy rail LRT basically.
It's known as Commuter Rail in the US
A very good story about Toronto, should show other cities as well. The other Canadian Cities that discontinue the Streetcars are not as good as Toronto, but will they ever bring them back? I doubt it. Vancouver does not even have enough articulated buses to serve all the busy routes. They still allow lots of parking in the West End the highest of any ridership per km. they actually discouraging passengers from the West End to take a short trip one to two km to their workplace in Downtown, more people walk to work because of bad bus service to the West End {the most densely area in Canada. ) Passengers want a fast reliable service for short trips under 4km and Streetcars are the best.
The most successful recent US "systems" treat the route like a horizontal elevator. See Milwaukee, Kansas City, and Miami's Metromover (PeopleMover, but same idea). There's free fares and frequent service, but the main point is to extend a transit hub into the CBD. Riders come in from a bus depot or intercity rail station, as well as from the various parking garages. The idea is a distributor service that makes other transit services more useful by extending the hub to doorsteps. The concept doesn't always work, such as Denver's 16th Street Mall, but it can serve a useful function within the larger system beyond economic development.
A transit loop can make sense if it's a sort of looping thing a route does at the very end and then quickly gets back to its trunk route. Like, you'll have a main corridor, but then it enters a suburb, loops around through the suburb, and then exits the suburb back onto the trunk route for the return trip. Think of a dumbell. A narrow middle part with wide parts on either end.
I live in Melbourne and honestly, the real advantage of trams in mixed traffic is just that they're so much more visible and legible than buses. This makes a HUGE difference.
But they're certainly not, objectively, a higher level of service. When a tram line's shut down for maintenance (or strikes), replacement buses are put on and they get everyone around faster, more reliably and much more frequently than the tram does.
And yet ridership on the replacement buses seems incredibly low. Because the legibility of trams makes a huge difference.
In Berlin, everyone HATES bus replacement services. The busses are usually overcrowded, slow, stand in traffic jam instead of just going on their own track, like the tramway, and as I often saw myself need 20 to 40 minutes for a 6-minute-ride with the tramway.
I find the TTC busses move faster then the Streetcars, however the busses are uglier, and much smaller, I find often more over crowded.
Also a lot of TTC bus routes I don't even know where they go, yet the streetcars I know all the routes. So it is true for me that the Streetcars visibly are easier to knowing where it will take me, I know where the tracks go.
Septa's surface trolley lines has a system similar to Toronto's.
Glad to be your newest patreon Reece. I believe that New York’s M-15 bus line, which goes down Second Avenue in the borough of Manhattan has a weekday ridership of 60,000. It will eventually be served by the long delayed completion of the Second Avenue Subway. The next extension to this will probably be under construction by next year.
I’m surprised by how many bus riders argue that rail is a waste of money and we shouldn’t invest in it until we invest more in buses. A housing advocate said it’s not worth the trade offs. But service quality is a trade off.
My home city in northern Sweden (about 90 000 residents and 7 million yearly bus riders) had a circular bus line in the early 2000's, it was dropped after three yerars of operation. But today our two main bus routes have a bit of a congestion problem. The number 1 and 8 routes are operated with articulated buses at ten minute headways off-peak, having to move to seven-minute headways during the peak. The number 1 bus is most affected since it serves the city's largest high school with around 2 000 students.
It is actually possible to build a tram-train line along the major street that runs west of downtown with two possible junctions to the raliway, depending on the desired effects as well as intermodality.
Alternative 1: Branch from the railway just after leaving the East station, follow the route of the number 1 bus, thus making the entire southwestern portion of that bus route redundant. redundant
Alternative 2: Branch off west of the Central station, begin street running through a small suburb before cnnecting to the major street that is Regional Road 632. This bypasses the high school and would only serve residnts of the western suburbs going to/from the East Station/University Hospital interchange, but might be the most effective in alleviating congestion on the trunk section where all the routes interline through East Downtown.
But this project has a slight infrastructural problem - well, actually two. Since the street is only two lanes wide, you'd have to divert traffic elsewhere while building the street tracks. You'd also have to use a ground-level power supply system in the street sections due to sidewalk limitations.
Belgrade has an intricate system of trams, busses and trolley busses. A metro was planned since the 1950's but still nothing has been done (except for two stations)
I agree with you 100% and cannot help but think of the controversies in LA regarding the proposed DTLA streetcar. It serves a loop that already has a subway/light rail on the west side, a transit dense corridor on the east, and a route on the south that has little to no transit. I've heard the argument that its a way to put a starter system down before expanding, but what I question is why not just create a system proposal and build it. We know what routes the former Yellow Cars ended with in the 60's, and for the most part those routes still are fairly dense, and currently are served poorly by buses.
Wait why does DTLA want a streetcar? Aren’t they already building a tunnel to connect the two light rail corridors? (Gold + Blue/ Expo)
@@transitvideosbayarea tbh I’ve heard everything from a revitalization (redevelopment) tool, to creating a starter network for a more walkable and transit dense downtown area.
When the street is flooded, the electric wheels can not go through.
As someone who lives in Poland, I agree, trams are better than busses
Both have their own place, but trams have better capacity and are more susteinable
Also, running a steel wheeled vehicle on steel rails costs just way less energy. Like, way more efficient per passenger.
When I think "streetcar", I think a single rail vehicle with no couplings moving extremely slowly though a heavily pedestrianized area with no doors and no stops with people just getting on and off while it's moving. Short, narrow and barely wider than the boogies, possibly on a wider than standard gauge. Possibly fully automatic. Possibly allowing people to board at the front or back. No pointy bits, and lots of pool noodles.
I think busses are designed for 13 years of service.
I think RM will like streetcars more
First of all, I love your channel and I LOVE the content in this video and everything you guys do is extremely well researched. Personally I feel that LRT has been marketed incorrectly in a lot of systems as a Streetcar masquerading as a RAPID transit solution - which has left a bad taste in everyone's mouth.
I have some suggestions for you!
Is there any chance more infographics or maps could be shown during these videos? It's awesome that you guys show face and include your own video footage of various systems but I think that to strengthen your points you could include more graphics such as including the approved Broadway extension when you were discussing the 99-B line. This also helps to keep things more visually dynamic as well. A quick screenshot of some of the systems you were talking about could go a long way :) .
Now for content:
- Vancouver's Arbutus line. Maybe a cost and effect analysis on it? I think that the Arbutus line is the most interesting LRT system being proposed in Canada because most of it is grade-separated and then it transitions into a streetcar-like system when it enters OV. This would reintroduce streetcars back into Vancouver that has an extremely far reach.
- Edmonton's LRT (or just accident-prone LRT) vs Toronto's Streetcar system. For me I find it super strange that Toronto's streetcars experience a lot less accidents than Edmonton's LRT and I want to speculate the reasons behind that as Toronto's streetcars are located in a denser city and has a lot more grade-integrated track.
Thanks again for the great video and I hope that you guys keep it up!
If you want to get really confused about transport needs on a light rail system, try to explain the Newcastle Light Rail 2.7km system
Interesting! I will take a look
In my Hometown we run the Trams or "Straßenbahn" (Streettrain) like we call it here in the side of the Street or the middle in dedicated lanes. We also use this space in which the Tram Rails lay to make green Tram-Rails with grass around the rails. It looks way better, helps the Co² and overall temperature, also it reduces the noise of the trams by ~40%.
Trams are realy a great mode of transit especially paired with good bus links to less urbanised regions. It all depends on the way transit is linked to another and not the mode itselfe.
PS: My city is also investing around 100 Million € in the next years to double its Tram Network and extend it to other comunities. This is done with the combining of the City-wide Tram and more regional Trainnetworks so trams operate on Trainines as Trains and when in a specific spot (at my city the Central Station) it switches the wiring mode and operates as Tram. And I personaly think that this is a genius way of a mixed mode of transportation.
Trolleys are not safe for everyone. It's easy for bicyclists to wipe out on the tracks, and I wish pedestrian urbanists would acknowledge this. Instead, they ignore it and advocate for no solutions to the problem.
This is definitely true. The only place that I think that streetcars are a bit of a failure is Edinburgh in Scotland. The project runs from Edinburgh Airport to downtown, the project was delayed and also constantly changing with regards to extension plans, none of which have gone ahead. The other problem is the speed and road crowding, the busier portion in the city is very slow, and buses run along that portion making it really slow and congested. It also takes almost an hour from end to end, whereas the bus from the Airport to downtown run much quicker.
Right now in Toronto near where I live some streetcar routes are having to be using shuttle busses part way of the route because of construction on the streetcar line for example currently on the 501 Queen streetcar route in Toronto at Parliament Street you have to get off the streetcar and wait for a shuttle bus if you want to continue down the 501 Queen line because for right now until further notice the Streetcar goes off route at Parliament Street because of construction on the line
For me, and in my experience, for both busses and streetcars mixed use is problematic in *most* NA cities. So many times I have seen cars in a dedicated bus lane or on team/streetcar/surface rail tracks. I love the idea of a BRT/surface rail or streetcars/local busses, but until NA drivers as a whole learn to share the road, a separate, dedicated right of way is needed. And if you are doing that, might as well install a Metro style system.
Austin, Texas has this problem. Even downtown, where there are dedicated bus lanes, there are always delays from mixed use causes.
Unsure if you’ve ever done a deep dive, but the Kansas City, Missouri Streetcar might be one of the best examples of a true streetcar system in the unites states that serves a transit function, and will serve one in the future. While development was also a main driving force, it has a straight alignment, is working on multiple extensions to population centers, as well as destinations, and serves a spine system to complement the bus system of the city. I’d be interested to hear about your thoughts on a deep dive at some point!
The previous Surrey city council wanted to build a streetcar (but they called it LRT) along Fraser Hwy and King George. Without dedicated lanes (doing so would not be accepted by constituents). The R1 RapidBus can carry as many people as their planned LRT could at a much lower cost. I would, however, like them to build full BRT stations at stops along the route.
Also, with the rest of the lower mainland getting proper SkyTrain built (Canada Line not withstanding), people felt like Surrey wasn't getting the investments it deserved.
Streetcars run like buses? In my county in Ohio that means a given route likely gets one every half hour to 45 minutes between 6 am and 8 pm and none between 8 pm and 6 am
Hi Reece, really liked this video. Would you be able to do a video talking about what improvements you would like to see in the TTC streetcar system?
5:50, i sorta made a hybrid city in cities skylines..It is more transit oriented, but still largely car friendly. So far it works fine.
Great video! You’ve changed my mind.
in hamburg, germany there are some massively overcrowded buslines that would definitly be better served by tram. some 61,000 people use line 5 of the bus network daily, for a long time double-articulated busses ran on this route every 5 minutes off-peak and every 3 minutes on peak to meet the demand. at some point busses just aren't really able to keep up with the demand
To make it even worse, the Harburg borough in the south is barely served by rail, having only one S-Bahn line and otherwise only buses. It actually is the perfect place to install a tram.
You have a very good insight into transit and part of what's missing in the equation is that people love only one system and they don't realize that public transit which the word public means for everyone is transit for everyone transit consists of cars carpool vans Van pull bicycles people and then you're left with busses trolley busses trams And then on up to light rail Subway which is heavy rail is there a place for all of it yes absolutely but it has to be integrated all together and that's part of the problem we don't Have an integrated system that we work together on. And that's what we need to do we need to have public transit work together in one system so that everyone benefits
"a new demand for streetcars"... don't you mean a new *desire* for streetcars?
Each of the vehicles has its characteristics that make it suitable to specific conditions. There are places with tight curves and steep slopes where trams are not suitable and busses or trolleys, for example, can do the job better.
Isn't it TRUE, biggest problem with Street cars or Trams is when we have to Re lay the Rds then we have to dig up Rail Tracks and re lay them ???
Have you ever thought about doing a video on the Kansas City Streetcar? It is a true streetcar with minimal infrastructure just like you talked about in this video. It runs north/south up and down Main Street.
I am feeling that is time to introduce the idea of tram and light rail to the america continent. Tram is something that mostly mixed with street traffic. Light Rail is something that mostly have it's own right of way. Using streetcars to describe those two different type of rail is just confusing.
It's not that we don't have those systems here already, it's that we tend to mix them. Norfolk, Virginia built a "light rail" route that runs in it's own right of way for several miles, about half it's distance, and then runs through downtown in the traffic lanes of city streets. Half train, half tram, one vehicle.
And the vehicle chosen isn't really good at either of the jobs that were given to it.
Buses should be paramount. BUT, if you have a densely populated city that needs something to complement its not-so comprehensive 2 line metro system. STREETCARS/TRAMS BABY.
Great video with good solid concepts and ideas for our future
Question: let's say Manhattan was a island city nation, can it run without buses?
My city has 215,000 people at around 1,700 people per square kilometre, can a street car work in my city? I think it can
24:35 Probably one of the reasons I get so frustrated when the Government & Politicians in Kolkata (I don't live there but as I'm off Indian origin, I go there a lot to see my relatives) state that trams block the roads and are an old/stupid/outdated form of public transport. Its just so obvious none of these people have ever ridden or experienced a modern, well designed tramway/streetcar system abroad and they have adopted a very car-centric mentality (the only major public transport they are trying to improve & expand is the metro while the other transport modes are neglected in favour of road/bus transport) because they use these inaccurate arguments to justify closing down tram routes every couple of years with just 2-4 routes in operation now just so that road traffic can operate better (I think the main thing which started its decline was the de-reserving of the reserved tram lines in the city from years ago so that the trams would operate in mixed conditions with cars/taxis/buses etc. - probably its biggest mistake to date) and it just doesn't help that the operators have mismanaged and neglected the system, with no serious plans to modernise it (re-reserving the lines in wider roads, bringing proper modern trams to the system and not redecorated versions of the old trams - if they can import new buses from abroad then they can surely import modern trams & making tram stops more accessible with proper stops so that people don't have to walk through the busy roads & putting the trams in places where it can serve as a feeder system to the expanding metro network, especially in suburban areas like New Town).
I do fear that unless a serious political will comes in to modernise/upgrade the system (while keeping a few old trams for tourism), the trams in Kolkata will either be completely phased out or restricted to just one tourist line (which I guess would be the Maidan line as its the only reserved line left) within 2-3 decades from now which would be a major mistake as Kolkata in my opinion has the potential to have one of the best public transport systems in India in spite of its many flaws (it already has the most varied transport modes in the country having rickshaws, buses, India's only tram system & Asia's oldest tram system, a suburban railway system, an expanding metro network and boat transport in the Hooghly River) not to mention India's now planning to bring back trams in some Indian cities (under the Metrolite name) which makes it all the more frustrating to watch.
If you do read my comment RM Transit, I really think you should do a video in the future dedicated to Kolkata's transport & what could be done to improve it, especially as Kolkata's got the first & oldest metro system in India which opened the door/road for other Indian cities to get metro systems.
Boston is an interesting case in that the MBTA mixes legacy streetcar lines with heavy metro lines as functionally part of the same network. And the streetcar lines are actually the latest ones to get expanded. Only a very tiny portion of the Boston system is still running in traffic lanes, and some parts are even grade-separated (the D line is fully grade-separated, and the downtown trunk runs through the oldest subway tunnel in North America), so the tendency seems to be to want to treat it as an LRT line. But the biggest portion of it (by number of stops at least) is running on the surface on median rights-of-way with traffic crossings.
Though I do have to say that for Bostonians, given everything that's happened, the psychological permanence of streetcar lines isn't great... Given the general political situation in the US, a new era of ripping out transit lines for ideological revenge isn't an impossibility.
Hey @Reece, totally agree with the permanence point! People (particular casual users/visitors) tend not to take buses as you don't feel like you're in control. The line doesn't seem permanent and you don't have confidence in the route. Streetcars are distinguishable from regular bus routes.
I don't think you can directly compare the 99 B-Line to the 504 though. There are some major differences (as well as similarities).
Both routes are ~13km in length.
Both routes cut across the city through a fairly dense area.
Both connect several train lines
However, the 99 B-Line is an express service. The 504 is NOT. Traveling along the busiest middle 6km takes ~20 minutes. The 504 takes 34 min to cover the same central 6km. Therefore, you really need to include the #9 if you're comparing with the 504 as the 99 shares ridership with the #9. (which is also a top-ten ridership route).
Combined, the 99+9 B-Line (57k) and (23k) gives you 80k along the Broadway corridor (arguably there is overlap with a few transferring from 99 to 9)
The 99 doesn't "really" have much prioritization.
However, you're absolutely right about the #99 being packed. That's one of the reason they brought in the #84 as a UBC relief-line. Also, I think it's true that if there was a streetcar along that route, we probably wouldn't be building the Broadway Subway as soon as we are... as there would be pressure to just "upgrade" the line... Then again, a lot of Broadway is quite a bit narrower than King, so perhaps we'd still opt to keep both.
Sometimes I wonder... if Toronto opted NOT to keep its streetcars along certain routes, if a DRL line would have been more strongly considered. The ability to just upgrade to medium capacity Flexity cars might delay projects like that. That's not good or bad per se... but something to consider.
I'd love to know your thoughts on the Ontario Line.
LA's future streetcar is going to be a poster child for all the worst design options.
I’m much more in favor of streetcar or light rail vs Bus Rapid Transit here in Oakland California. Especially since we once hadLight Rail on International Blvd (Formally E.14th). Back when we had the Key System.
Everything has its place. Streetcars can only work on roads with 4 to 6 lanes. Buses can go anywhere even in 2 lane streets. They are good in low-density areas. Like what Reece said, streetcars are better in downtown areas where the priority is to lessen the number of vehicles on the road. One streetcar can carry as many people as three buses.
Streetcars can work on a 2 lane street.
@@RMTransit but then they have to share lanes with cars, then they may get stuck in traffic jams.
@@samanli-tw3id then exclude the cars. If you're on a grid just take a pair of two lane streets and treat them like a 4 lane street with a row on buildings down the middle. Plenty of places run trams through pedestrianised areas, which is fine because the tracks show pedestrians where the vehicle is going.
I love the looks of tram but I'm not a fan of the power lines. But they are not the main issue with trams. Buses offer more flexibility for a transit company to adapt itself to a changing clientele. It is only in area that are extremely densely populated that trams make sense. Elsewhere, the change in population movement makes tram to rigid. And if there's traffic or an accident on the road, the bus can take a detour. the tram will be stuck.
The best compromise are Trolleybuses ... Something pretty common in Europe and without all the bad sides of Streetcar/Trams...
- Fully or mostly electric
- Cheaper to build
- Faster to put in service
- Are able to make more complex detours in case of accident
- Some Trolleys are double articulated (2 back modules) and therefore can carry as much as a Streetcar.
Also streetcars without any lane priority and red light priority are basically useless.
The problem is that trolleybuses are neither faster, nor carry more passengers than diesel buses, so they can’t attract car owners. We need electric-powered rail-borne transit systems to reduce car use in downtown areas. Many European cities with trams have actually haven’t removed their 1st generation tram systems.
Yeah, the 99 in Vancouver proves that Streetcars aren’t needed, because the only way to upgrade it’s capacity is full metro. Once you factor in driverless buses coming in soon, along with ever more electric buses, the operating cost gap is going to decrease. Streetcars are a step between bus and metro that isn’t needed and is just an extra expense. (Especially if you pull something closer to King Street’s transit priority for an urban bus route.)
And buses are more comfortable. Buses, when they’re shaking, shake parallel to their travel route. Trains shake perpendicular, which is so much less comfortable, even if there’s less shaking.
I don’t reallllly agree
@@RMTransitTo each their own, but... whenever I end up taking a streetcar I always feel like it’s a less pleasant experience than riding a bus. (Non-tire Metros too, whenever they have to take a turn and have that gross screeching noise.)
Yeah but buses tend to shake and move a lot more in motion imo
In my thinking, the only major problem with operating streetcars in mixed traffic is no different from the problem of operating buses in mixed traffic. And that is, the street network needs to be designed such that traffic can move freely even during the busiest time of day. And that, in my mind, is not ideal - if we want to move away from personal car transportation, we should be designing street networks to fail, at least from the perspective of privately owned personal vehicles, as often as possible. Heavy traffic and traffic jams can be an effective, behaviourist solution, to car culture. They're arguably a form of progressive taxation, because no matter how much you earn, you're stuck in the same jam (helicopter owners aside, I suppose). But, they're not much of a solution if the only alternative is taking public transit that gets stuck in the same jams as the private cars. So, whether buses or streetcars, we should be moving as quickly as possible to dedicated lane and other traffic restriction measures that privilege public over private vehicles. In Vancouver, for instance, the dedicated lane systems that prioritize bus travel over bridges and through the tunnel, are quite impressive - and a huge change (albeit made bit by bit over time) from say 20 years ago when i started riding the network. The schadenfreude of riding on a bus along a dedicated lane, bypassing maybe 30+ minutes of traffic jam - drugs can't compare to this. As they say on facebook - f***, and I can't stress this enough, them cars.
Addenum on the age of buses, these days, buses only last about 12 years before replacement, not 20. If you get 35 years out of one LRV, you end up saving around 1.5 M dollars having to buy 9 buses over buying just 1 streetcar.
There are actually some cities that do streetcar operations that rival or are even better than Toronto in their downtown cores - those being Boston, Philly, and San Francisco. Their benefit is that they have downtown tunnels so that they don't get stuck in traffic. Philly also has a surface streetcar line serving the urban core of Girard. I'd make the argument that Streetcars actually serve medium-sized city cores (like Harrisburg PA, Tulsa OK, OKC, Kansas City, etc) better than large-sized city cores (like Philadelphia, Chicago, or even cities like Toronto, Cleveland, St. Louis and Pittsburgh). In those cities, the denser neighborhoods are what need the streetcar services. That being said, I wish more cities would take part in the current Toronto streetcar model. Not every line that runs through a core has to be in a tunnel.
One of the reasons modern streetcar networks are built as loops is because a lot of urban cores in the United States (and Canada for that matter. Cities like Hamilton come to mind) have massive one-way grids. Changing these is politically infeasible and potentially confusing. These streets can definitely do without 2-4 streets for only cars, but convincing suburbanites to allow that change to happen would be almost impossible.
Singapore has many 1-way roads in downtown and inner suburban areas too but they are often arranged in alternating fashion, so bi-directional bus services (& by extension trams too, if we have them in the future) can serve these areas conveniently by travelling on a neighbouring 1-way road for the return trip
Quite the interesting debate surrounding streetcars and buses! Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I never stopped to think about how sensible streetcars could be vis-à-vis light rail transit or bus systems.
Do you think streetcar service should return to parts of cities such as Montreal? Does Montreal have the infrastructure to accommodate new streetcar routes? Where do you think these routes can be implemented? It would be nice for you to present a video on this topic.
What about trolley buses? I see Vancouver has some electric trolley buses in some sectors. I am old enough to remember the time Toronto ditched its trolley bus network. Might you think trolleys can come back to T.O., or are they forever extinct? Could a mix of trains, buses, and trolleys be possible in a city like Montreal? I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on this matter in a video. (-:
Haha lots to think about, I definitely think a city like YUL with lots of moderate density would really suit streetcars! Maybe I'll just make this video haha!
This little bit of info,should go to the heart of the problem! ITEM;THE AAR,did a note on horse power/ weight production,and friction. Simply, to move one ton(at sea level),you need 400HP,in air;40HP,on a road,and 4HP,on railroads! Guess which gets the highest subsidies! Also Toronto and Montreal systems had motor- trailer sets on their high density routes! In Toronto,that was replaced by MU,streetcars(PCC's), on the Bloor-Danforth, they were running 90 second headway in mixed traffic!! There was a book put out by the ERA, and you might see if the TTC,still has a copy! Otherwise maybe the main library might have it! The data in the book shows headways,track maps(including the subway), and other useful info! There are two books put out on the Boston system, by the Boston Street Railway Association,and they cover the 1940's,and the 1950's,which gives you an idea of an extremely old subway operation! The Park Street line was opened in 1897, and also had MU PCC's( 3 car trains), and you can't do that with busses!
And I thought they said "remove the streetcars"
Street cars are louder and completely inflexible in routing.
Plus if the idea is to promote more walking and cycling, why cut ruts into all the city streets?
Also have to disagree with on street parking being for cars, for the most part it seems to be for delivery vehicles.
Did you just say that *electric* streetcars running on *rails* are louder than *diesel* buses? What streetcars are you looking at?
When your brought up buses that are stuffed in Toronto the 7 Bathurst came to mind for me. Covid is having an effect but from Bathurst Station to typically St Claire but sometimes as far as Lawrence is at near capacity. Am I saying it needs a street car... maybe I'd like a street car between Bathurst stn and St Clair W Station with the 7 continuing from St Claire W to Steeles and Bathurst.
I haven’t watched the video yet, my opinion is not humble and I know I’m right.
Trams are better than busses.
You didn't mention that TransLink found that LRT vehicles would need to have been as long as a city block in order to serve the 99 B-Line route.
Maybe its useful to also look at the Dutch transport system, like in Amsterdam or Rotterdam. Lots of trams, sometimes every 3 minutes. Always priority. And of course we have a ton of bicycles. I'm not so sure this would work in cities build for cars like in the US, but it's a total different perspective nonetheless. In Amsterdam, I know the extra length of trams helps a lot
Oh for sure, I love Amsterdam and it’s trams, such a great system
@@RMTransit Amsterdam is one of the cities ill-suited for car use.
What if instead of having streetcars in mixed traffic just have it in hov lanes
I prefer the Toronto Streetcars compared to the ugly Toronto TTC busses, however the Streetcars can be frustratingly slow at times. Much of the systems shares with regular traffic, & it has to many stops. I really wish the stops were less frequent, maybe more like distance of Subway stops, a lot of the stops are only 200-400 feet apart, i think they should be 800 feet to 1km apart.
Yonge Streetcar line was replaced with the Yonge Subway line, and the Bloor Streetcar line was replaced with the Bloor Subway line, and either King, Queen or Dundas Streetcar lines should have also been replaced by a subway line like 40 years ago. If you travelling across the city on the streetcar line it can take a damn long time, and another subway line should have been built to travel across town other then just the Bloor Line.
If such a big accident can occur, that street is probably way too fast for a city and also for streetcars
Trams are much more comfortable for passengers
but what if all city roads are 2 lanes only
Street car is safe, reliable and energy efficient. 🚊☮️
A dedicated track help it to reach upto 60 to 70 kmph speed in heavy traffic 💨
one difference between canada and the us ...is that some of out densest areas got shoved to BRT ...They say it was cost...but in reality sadly the real reason is ...BRT = lower income communities / and streetcar & lrt for richer communities...tends to be what happens. - we saw it in boston with the orange line changes promised but never delivered
Agree with everything you say here! :)