Originally Posted by
tjspiel
Yeah, the bus vs. rail debate is big and there are valid points on both sides. The history is similar here but there are a few points worth noting:
There's no doubt with the current infrastructure that buses are far more flexible as far as routing goes. But are they cheaper to operate? Again there's a huge debate. When the street car system was dismantled here many of the more modern PCC car (which were not brutal to ride at all) were sold to other cities and continued service for decades. Some until early this century. How many buses stay in service for half a century? Steel wheels and electric engines last a long long time. I'm guessing the street cars require a lot less maintenance and require replacement at a much lower rate than buses.
As for light rail, each car has more capacity than a single bus and can be linked together while still requiring only one driver.
The other advantage to electric rail is being powered by electricity which can be generated umpteen different ways. This makes them less susceptible long term to higher prices for an individual type of fuel.
I'd not disagree with anything you say here. I think there's a place for bus, streetcar, and interurban light rail. Streetcar is expanding here in Portland (though the rails are causing issues for cyclists) and we'll likely see a new rail/pedestrian/cycling bridge over the river in the near future. Light rail is well established and expanding. Buses run on biodiesel (controversy there as well) and many are hybrids, and have front-mounted bike carriers. Each mode has its role. Safety is an issue as it can be in any urban area.
The street architecture here is still car oriented and it is not as easy being a pedestrian or cyclist as it could be (Berkeley in the 70's was further ahead than Portland is today in this respect).