Bus flexibility = urban legend?

Anyone who is a transportation and transit geek has likely heard arguments about the superiority of buses over rail. Usually the argument is based on a notion known as “bus flexibility,” the idea being that buses can reroute to meet changing market demands.

At least in the case of Portland, however, this idea may need revising. Many present day TriMet bus routes can directly trace their heritage to the transit lines of predecessor Portland Traction, a point I have made before. Thirteen PTC non-interurban routes continue to exist today as TriMet bus or light rail routes, and of these nine — two thirds — are frequent service lines.

A great example of this is the PTC FR Foster Road trolley coach route. Originally a streetcar line, by the 1940s the route was operated using trolley coaches, electrically propelled buses. Over time, the service evolved into TriMet’s 14 Hawthorne bus. TriMet’s bus duplicates the old Foster Road bus heavily.

It can be strongly argued that a significant portion of the core Portland routes of TriMet’s system can not only trace their heritage to old PTC bus, trolley coach, and streetcar lines, but largely duplicate their alignments. This is most true of the low number core routes such as the 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, and the 19 buses. (Maps of each of the thirteen surviving PTC routes can be seen in this set on Flickr.)

In addition to these, numerous lines can claim continued existence via two or more buses. Routes on Killingsworth, Alberta, 39th Avenue, Lombard, Willamette Boulevard, Highway 30, Milwaukie, and other lines all live on today, if a rider doesn’t mind a transfer.

What needs to be remembered is that large portions of Portland developed around the original Portland Traction streetcar routes in the late 19th and early 20th century. Portland first generation subrurbs such as Irvington, Hollywood, Belmont, Hawthorne, and even Foster developed around the streetcar and remain healthy, populated regions of the city. As time and transportation modes passed by, these locations remained strong, viable markets for transit, and will likely continue to do so. There was no need for buses — or any other mode really — to be “flexible;” the transportation patterns of 1943 (or 1912 for that matter) remain relevant today.

Does this mean systemic flexibility is irrelevant? No, not at all. For areas where development patterns are yet unset, or are changing, the ability to alter transit routings is an asset. Newer suburbs, exurban fringe communities, and transitioning neighborhoods all benefit from low infrastructure, flexible transit tools such as buses. For the core inner suburban and urban routes of TriMet’s system, however, “bus flexibility” is an overrated value that should not constrain meaningful investment in fixed guideway transit systems.