Portland Streetcar News

[urbanlife]

plus during rush hour the streetcar is pretty packed. I have remembered many times when I was parking in the NW and commuting via streetcar to PSU, that I would decide to walk back to my car because the train was packed full.

I think streetcars should be placed on high frequency routes throughout the city to add another layer of permanent public transportation. Alot of this debate over which is a better system, bus or streetcar, isnt really that important because who said the city cant service an area with both. At Marshall and 23rd, you can catch either bus or streetcar to take you downtown.

Streetcars also help out with tourism, it is much easier to talk a tourist into riding our streetcar than it is talking them into riding a bus.

It also would be nice to see Portland go the way of Seattle with using electric lines to power the buses throughout the urban parts of the city. Of course the trade off would be those annoying power lines overhead that seem to get into every shot like in Seattle.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by ForAteOh

I'm reasonably certain that streetcars can accelerate faster than buses. I agree with you about a bus's ability to maneuver in traffic, though.

I'm positive that your statement that a Portland bus can carry more people than a streetcar is false.

The maintenance cost comparison per rider is actually slightly in favor of streetcars, though per vehichle buses do cost less to maintain, and the capital cost is lower.

Portland streetcars... I'm fairly certain. They certainly aren't as long as all but the oldest busses here in Portland, and their seating configuration is extremely odd.

Perhaps it's all a perception thing though. And I guarantee that the busses accelerate faster. The busses run on hybrid, biodiesel or diesel engines. The biggest advantage in a motor vehicle, currently, of a fuel engine over an electric engine is that it accelerates much faster.

Anyone who's been on both the bus and the streetcar in Portland can tell you that. (And some of it is of course due to the driver and not the vehicle.) The drivers in busses feel more free, and always will, to driver faster and/or accelerate faster because they can move around traffic. It's a psychological factor for the opporators that I don't think training can overcome.

[anp]

I'm not sure where to go to find specific info on Portland bus models, but the Mineta Transportation Institute website indicates that standard buses range from 35-41 feet in length and that articulated buses are generally 55 feet or longer. www.lightrailnow.org indicates that the Portland streetcars are about 66 feet long, so they are likely substantially longer than Portland buses. The Portland Streetcar website says that the streetcars have a standing-room capacity of 140 people, which sounds at least competitive with bus capacity.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by anp

I'm not sure where to go to find specific info on Portland bus models, but the Mineta Transportation Institute website indicates that standard buses range from 35-41 feet in length and that articulated buses are generally 55 feet or longer. www.lightrailnow.org indicates that the Portland streetcars are about 66 feet long, so they are likely substantially longer than Portland buses. The Portland Streetcar website says that the streetcars have a standing-room capacity of 140 people, which sounds at least competitive with bus capacity.

But they're not designed to be ridden SRO. Busses are.

The streetcar has very poor ventilation and windows. It gets stifling in a streetcar with less than 100 people on, let alone 140. I guarantee people would never pile in to capacity in a streetcar like they do a bus.

Busses are a lot less tourist friendly though. In that sense, streetcars make sense if they are part of a comprehensive tourism network, with accesibility and pricing geared towards tourists and the places they want to go. For that, a streetcar down Hawthorne might make sense, but Portland doesn't generate enough tourism for that the make sense to me yet.

Looks like I was wrong about bus size versus streetcar though. Tri-Met claims that they operate 30ft and 40ft bus models.

[anp]

Originally Posted by JordanL

But they're not designed to be ridden SRO. Busses are.

The streetcar has very poor ventilation and windows. It gets stifling in a streetcar with less than 100 people on, let alone 140. I guarantee people would never pile in to capacity in a streetcar like they do a bus.

I haven't ridden the streetcar enough to know what the ventilation is like (I mostly have ridden it as a tourist before I moved here!), but poor ventilation sounds more like a particular problem with the design of the particular streetcar, rather than an inherent limitation of streetcar in comparison to bus transit. I can't think of any other reason why a streetcar couldn't be designed for standing-room-only occupancy with good ventilation, and my recollection of the Portland streetcar is that it has handholds and places to stand that are at least as conducive to standing as on a bus. Plus there wasn't as much sway as on a bus. Even without being packed, it sounds like streetcars could hold more people than a standard bus due to being substantially longer than a bus. This has been an interesting discussion, and I'm eager to try the streetcar again to see for myself whether these criticisms ring true.

[Sekkle]

Originally Posted by JordanL

And I guarantee that the busses accelerate faster. The busses run on hybrid, biodiesel or diesel engines. The biggest advantage in a motor vehicle, currently, of a fuel engine over an electric engine is that it accelerates much faster.

a couple of these are from websites advocating streetcars, so I'm not sure they can be considered impartial...

Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar

Multiple entrances allow trams to load faster than suburban coaches, which tend to have a single entrance. This, combined with swifter acceleration and braking, lets trams maintain higher overall speeds than buses, if congestion allows.

Originally Posted by http://www.hawthornestreetcar.org/apm/article.php?id=21

An electric streetcar can (and does) out-accelerate a diesel bus.

Originally Posted by http://www.jgpotter.com/html/position.html

A streetcar accelerates faster than a bus, thus allowing for more rapid takeoff at each stop. The trolley's combination of increased capacity and more rapid rate of acceleration means that fewer vehicles are needed to serve a given transit route.

Here's an interesting article from Light Rail Now (again, admitedly not unbiased) comparing operating and maintenance costs of buses and streetcars...
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_n...m#LRT_20061112

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by anp

I haven't ridden the streetcar enough to know what the ventilation is like (I mostly have ridden it as a tourist before I moved here!), but poor ventilation sounds more like a particular problem with the design of the particular streetcar, rather than an inherent limitation of streetcar in comparison to bus transit. I can't think of any other reason why a streetcar couldn't be designed for standing-room-only occupancy with good ventilation, and my recollection of the Portland streetcar is that it has handholds and places to stand that are at least as conducive to standing as on a bus. Plus there wasn't as much sway as on a bus. Even without being packed, it sounds like streetcars could hold more people than a standard bus due to being substantially longer than a bus. This has been an interesting discussion, and I'm eager to try the streetcar again to see for myself whether these criticisms ring true.

Again, I want to be clear that these are all constructive criticisms. I have nothing against streetcar inherently, and I love the MAX line, but IMO they cut the wrong corners and effectively wasted the HUGE investment that COULD have improved other aspects of transportation.

There's no reason they can't get better car designs, for sure. And there's no reason that can't run them faster and more often. But until they do, I still view streetcar in Portland as vastly inferior to all other transportation options.

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by JordanL

But they're not designed to be ridden SRO. Busses are.

The streetcar has very poor ventilation and windows. It gets stifling in a streetcar with less than 100 people on, let alone 140. I guarantee people would never pile in to capacity in a streetcar like they do a bus.

Well, temperature would make a major difference if you were riding from NoPo to Beaverton, but that's not going to happen. Even then, most of my MAX rides in the summer have been packed and sweaty ordeals. But still better than a bus. And the streetcar keeps its cool generally.

I've seen plenty of full streetcars in my day.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by alexjon

Well, temperature would make a major difference if you were riding from NoPo to Beaverton, but that's not going to happen. Even then, most of my MAX rides in the summer have been packed and sweaty ordeals. But still better than a bus. And the streetcar keeps its cool generally.

I've seen plenty of full streetcars in my day.

Maybe it's just me. Every time I've ever been on a moderately full streetcar the air has been stagnant, the smell terrible, and the ride rediculously slow.

And I don't experience those on either the bus or the MAX.

Maybe I'm just unlucky?

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by JordanL

Maybe it's just me. Every time I've ever been on a moderately full streetcar the air has been stagnant, the smell terrible, and the ride rediculously slow.

And I don't experience those on either the bus or the MAX.

Maybe I'm just unlucky?

It's slow because boarding time is not the same as on a MAX and the air may have smelled because you are in closer proximity to people. Being taller, I generally don't get nose-level with people.

This past weekend on the MAX, I was jammed in and missed my stop. Smelled awful but it was smooth and comfy!

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by alexjon

It's slow because boarding time is not the same as on a MAX and the air may have smelled because you are in closer proximity to people. Being taller, I generally don't get nose-level with people.

This past weekend on the MAX, I was jammed in and missed my stop. Smelled awful but it was smooth and comfy!

I ride during rush hour on both MAX and Bus, and I'm 6'3".

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by JordanL

I ride during rush hour on both MAX and Bus, and I'm 6'3".

Well, considering you're saying things completely contrary to what I've experienced, I'm guessing the MAX and bus systems have changed in the past few months.

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by JordanL

I guarantee people would never pile in to capacity in a streetcar like they do a bus.

Apparently, someone doesn't ride the streetcar between 5 and 7pm weekdays.

[bvpcvm]

Originally Posted by JordanL

But they're not designed to be ridden SRO. Busses are.

that's a highly dubious claim. and whether they are "designed" that way or not, trying riding the streetcar during rush hour: it's packed.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by JordanL

The streetcar has very poor ventilation and windows. It gets stifling in a streetcar with less than 100 people on, let alone 140. I guarantee people would never pile in to capacity in a streetcar like they do a bus.

I am guessing you havent ridden the streetcar all that much then. I have seen that thing packed to the rim before, just like the light rail gets during rush hour.


I didnt see the page 6, would of probably let this comment go, but I think that is plenty of comments to know that the streetcar gets packed.

[RED_PDXer]

Originally Posted by anp

The Portland Streetcar website says that the streetcars have a standing-room capacity of 140 people, which sounds at least competitive with bus capacity.

The Portland Streetcar website is run by Portland Streetcar Inc (PSI). They got the 140 passengers/streetcar stat from the manufacturer, which they clearly developed using stick figure people (I'm joking..). I'd be surprised if a Portland Streetcar every, in it's entire service ever got to that number. If you read the manufacturer's website, they base that number on 5 persons/sq. meter. TriMet assigns an "achievable" capacity to the MAX of 133 persons per light rail vehicle and uses a 2.7 persons/sq. meter ratio to arrive at it based on average peak ridership. A MAX vehicle is close to 90 feet long. Thus, given our experience here, 140 is way off for the Streetcar (despite what the manufacturer claims). I've heard TriMet and Metro throw a achievable capacity number for the streetcar in the range of 90-100 passengers. PSI is a streetcar proponent so it's not surprising they ignore the unrealistic claims of their vehicle manufacturer. In contrast, TriMet assigns a typical 40-foot, low-floor bus an achievable capacity of 51 passengers, their average peak-period loads. That said, I'd prefer having a bus run every 6 minutes versus a streetcar running every 12 minutes to achieve the same capacity in a particular corridor. The difference in headways alone results in a significant difference in travel time experienced by most users since their average wait is reduced in half.

[RED_PDXer]

I've been told by TriMet planners that buses accelerate faster. I'll see if I get to the actual numbers someplace, unless someone finds a more credible source first.

[RED_PDXer]

Overall, buses are just as quick as a streetcar and actually faster when you take into account how they can get around traffic in one lane (the constant peak-hour backup on SW 10th in front of the library comes to mind). The issue of acceleration is probably insignificant when you have stops every two blocks and often have to wait for traffic lights. Even if streetcars have double the capacity of a bus, they run half as frequent. I'd rather wait less for a bus and get someplace sooner than wait longer for a streetcar and get someplace much later. Just my personal preference... I guess I value my time much higher.

It remains to be seen how well the Portland streetcar would perform if it were entirely outside of Fareless Square and/or fares were more strictly enforced outside of Fareless Square. While the average cost per ride is only $1.40 or so (comparable to MAX), this is based on an average fare paid of close to zero and many of those trips could've been made by walking. For example, I may be walking down SW 10th and I see the streetcar coming, I might wait a few minutes to save my legs for walking on the return trip, but I could just have easily walked both trips. If I had to pay a fare in addition to waiting for the streetcar for a trip less than a mile, I doubt I'd ever fork over the money for that..

When it comes to transportation efficiency, spending hundreds of millions initially and millions annually to operate a streetcar system to serve short <1-2 mile trips is clearly a waste of money. To think what that same money could do for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure... Overall, human-powered transportation is most appropriate for those distances on numerous fronts - a few include public health, channeling scarce transportation dollars on more effective investments with more broad range of benefits, and reduction in resource consumption (by avoiding the extraction of materials, their transportation, their manufacture into vehicles and other components, their construction on site, and finally their annual operation). TriMet and others in the region have touted the Streetcar under the headline of the "trip not taken". In other words, they believe that by attributing all high density development experienced along the streetcar to the streetcar itself, it has the ability to achieve enough density to concentrate trip ends so close together that they can be easily made by walking and thus often don't show up in travel forecasting models. This secondary effect negates the need for the streetcar in the long run. Is it needed in the short run to achieve that density? I think not. Look at the new development along Belmont, Division, and Hawthorne. New infill occurs along many corridors in our region. It might occur a little faster with the streetcar, but not without zoning for higher density. It's really market demand for that type of housing and the availability of high-density zoning that allow for that development to proceed. it's questionable how much of an impact streetcar plays in individual's roles to locate next to a streetcar alignment. Given the relatively higher parking ratios for development in the Pearl versus developments along Belmont, I'd guess more people are living car-free along bus routes than streetcar routes.

In the end, the streetcar is an urban transportation amenity.. it's nice to have, but not necessary and not nice (nor worth it) to pay for it.

[urbanlife]

after my recent trip to SF, I would think it would be a mistake to pass up on a chance to have streetcars running through our neighborhoods with buses. I think the difference with streetcars is that it would take this city to a much larger game that much of this country in not operating on.

This all seems like it is like saying it is faster and easier to drive than take the MAX, so should we not have the MAX? I think the more options for transportation, the better and much of this city was founded on rail and I think we should return to that level of thinking.

[PacificNW]

I fail to understand why people, (I know many) who are not supporters of the streetcar, or LRT, would even consider (principle??) riding the cars...BUT they do..??? Those who are against the streetcar/LRT maybe you all should use their legs, or just wait for the next bus, leaving more "seating" for those who support it. It's all good.