New Study: Most Light Rail Projects Costly and Inefficient

In many cities, extended bus networks are a better use of scarce resources

NEW YORK, NY – With the coronavirus wreaking havoc on America’s economy, state and local budgets will be tight for the foreseeable future. City planners hoping to optimize transit and attract talented workers will need to use funds shrewdly. A new Manhattan Institute issue brief by policy analyst Connor Harris evaluates light rail in the U.S. and suggests that most cities should avoid inefficient spending by forgoing light rail and opting for expanded bus service instead.

While the streetcar heyday ended in the first half of the 20th century, more than a dozen U.S. cities, from Pittsburgh to Seattle, currently operate light rail transit. But should they? Analyzing 23 light rail systems in the U.S., Harris finds that while light rail trains can accommodate higher-capacity ridership, theoretically allowing for savings on personnel, their operational and capital costs significantly exceed those of buses in practice. In fact, in the cities included in the study, hourly operational costs of light rail cars exceed those of buses typically by more than 100 percent.

Harris suggests that U.S. light rail systems are inefficient for two key reasons: overexpansion into low-density suburban areas, and avoidance of high-traffic areas for fear of political backlash during construction. By contrast, the best performing systems operate along compact, urban routes and service high-traffic areas near businesses. Outside of these areas, Harris finds that bus systems are more often the most cost-efficient option for cities looking to improve transit options for their residents. According to Harris, many expansions currently proposed in the U.S. and even some existing systems may be better off shuttered.

Click here to read the full report.