Pittsburgh(recycled railroad right of ways),Cleveland-Dedicated lanes that took 3 years to build and 200 million dollers.,Los Angleos-Orange Line. Oh wait----Toledo- a 1/2ile loop downtown and NYC- has bus lanes but everyone ignores them
Charlotte began building dedicated lanes for BRT, but the project has been slowed by the economy and the completed lanes are not being used for anything. The people who will eventually be served are still saying they don’t want BRT, they want light rail.
Who are the people? How was the population of potential users determined? Were their opinions determined by a robust, statistically valid sample or was it an informal, non-statistical sample?
If people don’t fully understand the cost structure of goods and services, they tend to over use those services that are priced below their actual cost. Driving is a prime example in the U.S. Because motorists don’t see the full cost of driving at the price points (pump), they tend to drive large vehicles more miles than might otherwise be the case. The same idea applies to all mode of transport. Therefore, do the respondents understand the cost structure of BRT vs. light rail? And how did the survey determine that?
SAM.: I believe Phoebe is closer to the information. People who have to ride a bus are considered to be riding a lower class service. Charlotte is a very upscale city and BRT rankels those who might have to take it and will eliminate some perentage of potential riders. According to an article in Railwy Age the costs of BRT are very much the same as light rail for the same level of grade separated service…
-
ROW
-
Bridge and tunnel weight structure
-
Track costs vs pavement costs nearly same
-
Light rail CAT costs more even if electric buses are used for BRT although electric buses would seem to mitigate some dislikes of diesel buses.
-
Operating costs both direct and operator costs much less especially when several LRT units used as train. Opeerating costs are a continuing item for many years where as construction costs are immediate. Maintenance costs about the same
-
Any grade crossings of LRT will be blocked less often for same number of passengers.
-
Will be less complaints about priority signaling for LRT because of its higher capacity.
-
Much easier for low floor LRT cars . Other posters have noted low floor buses decrease capacity.
A 4TH CITY IS SEATTLE WITH ITS bUS tUNNEL WITH STATIONS
NOW ALSO USED BY LIGHT RAIL SHARED
Phoebe,
i don,t think we are getting BRT or LRT on the southeast line out here to Matthews. The current plan is to convert the Independence busway into tolled HOT lanes, extending them to Wallace lane in the project that started this month. These will ultimately be extended through Matthews and I-485 to tie into the Monroe by- pass, if we can ever get that project out of the courts. The HOT lanes will also offer “enhanced express bus service”. We are looking at a longer term plan for street car (now named CityLYNX) out Monroe Rd. I think longer term is very long term, unless new finance plan we published last week works and is supported, but I have my doubts with our current G.A. PM me at office if you won’t more details.
The “people” are the people who attend the public planning meetings. They are mostly people who live near the end point of the proposed line and who work in city center. The road they have to drive now is severely clogged during rush hour. That road is being upgraded and during the upgrade two lanes are being built in the middle, separated by concrete barriers, to be used by BRT. The people who will be served can see how well the light rail is working for their neighbors to the west. CATS says if the money becomes available they can lay rail in the busway, but that the current plan is BRT.
Matthewsaggie is the person with the best information on all of these CATS projects.
In Minneapolis and St. Paul there is about a one mile section of dedicated busway used to connect the Minneapolis and St. Paul Campuses of the UofM.
People who attend public meetings are expressing the views of “people who attend public meetings” They are usually different than the people. More often than not they represent a tiny minority of the population. Their views usually do not represent those of the population as a whole.
Determining what the people think (their views) about any subject requires a sophisticated statistical sample that can be projected to the population. Obtaining the sample, as well as the views, without unduly biasing the outcomes, is a challenging exercise. It is so challenging that very few people engage in it.
As of 2010, according to the American Public Transit Fact Book, there were 1,206 public transit agencies in the U.S. that relied primarily on buses, 28 commuter rail systems, and 35 light rail systems. In most areas of the country, especially outside of the Northeast, buses are a better option than rail.
If one defines Rapid Bus Technology as running on a dedicated right-of-way, similar to the system they have in Adelaide, South Australia, the cost would be as great as or nearly as great as the cost of light rail. But most of the proposals for
I was in Manhattan two weeks ago, Bonas, and rode the M4 bus from Penn Station (34th St.) to 82nd St. The auto traffic stayed out of my bus lane except at intersections where people were turning right. In New York the right turners are a lot of people and that delayed things. Buses are much slower than subways but they are not impossible. My wife and I often take buses in Manhattan because the subways can have a lot of steps that buses don’t have.
One thing about BRT is that can use existing equipement and some line paint and your ready to go…In theory. …Rochester had a bus lane on the outbound charlotte line for 20 years and then they forgot about it. I figure if you start with BRT and do it on the cheap if it fails then theres no big loss. But Gov. never seems to do things on the cheap. Anyway many of the plans comming to frution now where done during the Bush Jr Adminstation when the FTA had high hurdles for new rail of any kind outside the Mega Big Citys like Chicago,New York, LA, Houston.
[quote user=“Sam1”]
As of 2010, according to the American Public Transit Fact Book, there were 1,206 public transit agencies in the U.S. that relied primarily on buses, 28 commuter rail systems, and 35 light rail systems. In most areas of the country, especially outside of the Northeast, buses are a better option than rail.
If one defines Rapid Bus Technology as running on a dedicated right-of-way, similar to the system they have in Adelaide, South Australia, the cost would be as great as or nearly as great as the cost of ligh
Interesting question, Bonas. In both Paris and Montreal subways run on rubber tires. The do run in trains just line any other subways so there must be some sort of guide on the “track” they run on but I don’t know exactly how it is done. But certainly the same thing could be done in other places with bus rapid transit.
John
Ottawa has been building dedicated fully separated bus rapid transit for 30 years and has some 30 miles in operation. Downtown, Albert and Slater Streets have dedicated bus lanes with right turn restrictions. The core is at capacity and for $2 billion a tunnel is being dug through the core and medium LRT will replace BRT east and west. It will rise to the surface, and at great expense, 10 miles of the BRT and will be stations converted to LRT. In spite of the high cst of conversion, BRT is still being further expanded to the suburbs. In addition to 40’ buses, there are 60’ articulated buses and 40’ double deckers that offer more seating for longer runs. All city buses in Ontario are now low floor for ease of entry and include wheelchair ramps for accessibility.
In addition to Ottawa, across the river Gatineau is adding dedicated bus rapid transit ((Rapibus) for over 10 miles alongside an unused rail line. It narrows to one lane over the shared railway bridge.
Both Montreal and Toronto have extensive dedicated bus lanes. Of course Toronto still also has an extensive streetcar network, partially on dedicated medians.
Lane Transit District (Eugene / Springfield Oregon) has significant mileage of dedicated BRT lanes. Some completely separate from regular traffic lanes.
Metro et al. did guidance with horizontal rubber-tired wheels acting on ‘walls’ in the guideway. I’d think comparatively expensive retrofitting would be necessary to provide this on modern buses. More modern approaches are available, both for guiding and for headway control.
The principal advantage here is not exactly “MU” (in the sense of eliminating the need for bus drivers on all units); it’s providing essentially zero headway between multiple buses. There are a number of technological solutions that would permit this, but ‘safety’ might require a physical connection between the buses, and not just run them in close proximity or in contact.
I would not think physically MUing buses (to make the equivalent of long artics) would make much sense, as you’d need all sorts of servo controls, etc. On the flip side, you might be able to implement some kind of ‘positive bus control’ with that stuff (pity it isn’t provided on, say, Dumpster trucks!)
I wasn’t suggesting this as retrofitting, Bob. Almost all modern buses run on a regular roadway with other traffic so I don’t think it would be possible.
However, were we building a true bus rapid transit system on a dedicated roadway we might want to consider it.
John