MISC | Bus Rapid Transit

[Rebasepoiss]

10 to 27 buses per hour is easily enough to make a bus lane feasible.

[greg_christine]

Originally Posted by JustinB

... Why are so-called BRT systems being turned into HOV/HOT lanes? It happened in Los Angeles, and now it's happening in Miami.
They were built as busways, they should remain as busways.
...

I agree! Allowing private cars to use the busway lanes has the potential to degrade the BRT service. The BRT buses could end up like regular city buses or streetcars stuck in shared traffic lanes. The most important factor in attracting ridership is speed. If the buses are stuck in traffic, they won't attract ridership.

[LtBk]

Can mass transit really work in South Florida?

[bayviews]

Originally Posted by LtBk

Can mass transit really work in South Florida?

Now that's a very good question.

Even Dade County's metrorail system hasn't attracted hasn't attracted as many riders many as it could or should, so it's not surprising that BRT ridership hasn't met expectations.

Although the density is actually high, the car culture still seems to dominate in South Florida.

[tampasteve]

Metrorail should attract more riders than it does, but it is really not as bad as some make it out to be. We need to look at the whole transit picture, not just the pieces. The public transit network in the Miami metro area has captured 12% of the population. 12% of the population uses public transit daily - this is a big number. This is not my rambling, that is from the US census.

Taking 20,000 people using the busway a day is a pretty good number. We can assume that most of these people would be single riders if they were in automobiles. That means we are taking about 10,000 cars off the road a day (dividing the 20,000 in half assuming that most are commuters going each way once). Or even at a lower number maybe 5,000 cars off of the road, that is a good number.

Steve

[LosAngelesMetroBoy]

the problem with the busway has always been and will always be there are not enough buses on it. not to mention there is not enough of a feeder system to it. And most of all, it goes through a higher income area which lends itself to not be as transit friendly.

[thecarlost]

Originally Posted by LtBk

Can mass transit really work in South Florida?

would range from $11.25 to $12.75 for travel from one end of the Busway to the other.

I don't know if this may force drivers to leave their cars at home and encourage them to hop the busline.

Politics shall play a definite roll in this. And comissioners must have an ultimate decision made upon choice analysis. Most users whould share choosing the most attractive, economical, fast, approachable transport mode. Based on what is refflected in the article, cars definitely aren't offering such conditions today. Then, why must they keep giving priority for private transportation modes? that's not helping.

[adrimm]

While it isn't exactly new - Bogota's TransMilenio got coverage in the NYTimes recently:

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/200...0BOGOTA_5.html

[BART Rider]

AC Transit wants to have BRT, but taking out a traffic lane and making it bus-only just makes it more crowded for everyone else. There has been a proposal by Joyce Roy (who was a candidate for president of the AC Transit board in 2008) to make something like an historic streetcar using buses. Buses are in the traffic lanes and stop at stations without pulling over to the curb. And of course, cars can go around them. Much more attractive and it doesn't take a lane away from the automobiles.

[Falubaz]

Originally Posted by BART Rider

AC Transit wants to have BRT, but taking out a traffic lane and making it bus-only just makes it more crowded for everyone else. There has been a proposal by Joyce Roy (who was a candidate for president of the AC Transit board in 2008) to make something like an historic streetcar using buses. Buses are in the traffic lanes and stop at stations without pulling over to the curb. And of course, cars can go around them. Much more attractive and it doesn't take a lane away from the automobiles.

That's the point. It's proven in several cities all around the world, that taking out car lanes and dedicate them to mass transit makes the situation better. The harder to go somewhere bu privat car, the more ppl switch to public transport, the less traffic jams there are.

[Yorampjuh]

If I were in that traffic jam on the right I would immediately take the bus the next day! People are just ''forced'' to take public transport!

[TopWatch]

The Video!!

Saludos!!!

[adrimm]

This evening I was both amused and dissapointed reading about the debut of the SE "Bus Rapid Transit" line in Calgary.

BRT clearly has a serious identity problem in North America and it isn't helped by the rush of transit officials eagerly rebranding and re-introducing express bus service as "BRT".

Compare today's rollout in Calgary of the so-called SE "Bus Rapid Transit" rollout with the debut of the Rea Vaya BRT also held today in Johannesburg.

Which would you rather ride and what does this say about commitment to transit, or certain modes of transit - (Calgary also has the C Train). How about comfort? Would a Rea Vaya user consider the Calgary "BRT" to be BRT? What would the Calgary bus rider call the Rea Vaya?


Johannesburg



image posted by Pule on http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...=752738&page=3

and

[JustinB]

BRT in North America is a joke. It shouldn't even be considered a real transit option, in my opinion. With the exception of the OC Transpo's system, I have yet to see a system built that could be considered true BRT on this continent. The MBTA silver line is a 1 Billion joke, that provides no sort of rapid transit service. The Orange Line should have been built as LRT, since it has reached capacity already.
If you're going to build BRT, do it right, stop with the re-branding of express services. Too bad, if BRT is built properly in North America, the costs won't be that much less than a rail line.
BRT will never be a subsitute for rail. Never.

[Falubaz]

Look it up! Other cities,, like Bogota or Curitiba made it right. it IS an altrernative and it IS way cheaper!

[greg_christine]

I've been very impressed by the BRT Orange Line in Los Angeles. It has the essential features of BRT. Tickets are purchased at the stations and the buses operate on their own right-of-way for most of the route. By most measures, it has out-performed the light rail Gold Line. Despite what the critics say, LACMTA considers the Orange Line to have additional available capacity and is extending the line. The following are some numbers from the LACMTA website < http://www.metro.net/news_info/facts.htm >.

Date Opened
Gold Line LRT: July 26, 2003
Orange Line BRT: October 29, 2005

Construction Cost
Gold Line LRT: $859 million
Orange Line BRT: $330 million

FY09 Operating Budget
Gold Line LRT: $44 million
Orange Line BRT: $23 million

Route Length
Gold Line LRT: 13.7 miles
Orange Line BRT: 14 miles

Number of Stations
Gold Line LRT: 13
Orange Line BRT: 13

Average Weekday Boardings
Gold Line LRT: 24,219
Orange Line BRT: 21,412

FY08 Boardings
Gold Line LRT: 6.58 million
Orange Line BRT: 7.46 million

[JustinB]

The Los Angeles "BRT" line should have been built as a rail line. In fact the busway WAS a rail line. Makes you wonder why LACMTA pulled up the existing tracks to build a busway. The overcrowded buses, and extremely short-frequencies(which lead to bunching), and the rutted roadway are just a few of the problems with this line. The most significant problem is likely the buses having to slow down to 10mph at corssings due to the high number of accidents at signalized crossings. Of course that could be solved with crossing gates. The sort of crossing gates that rail systems have to employ. This is just another example of a North American agency taking the cheap way out, when rail should have been the mode built.

On the upside, this line COULD be a showcase of what true BRT could look like. THey could re-pave the busway with concrete, build high-floor stations, and ship in bi-articulated buses with level boarding. Of course, that will most likely cost significantly more, which will de-bunk BRT proponents claim of "like rail, but cheaper"

The Calgary "BRT" lines are supposed to be a precursor to building LRT in the future, so you might see better shelters. I do know the city is waiting for funds from the government to build shleters along the lines. Real time arrival information would be helpful too.

[xTeVe]

Originally Posted by Falubaz

Look it up! Other cities,, like Bogota or Curitiba made it right. it IS an altrernative and it IS way cheaper!

and has more coverage for less money.

For example, the MIO (Santiago de Cali, Colombia) will be the system with the bigger coverage in the country, with a coverage of the 95% of the city.

Some pics from the MIO...

Originally Posted by d.m.a

MIO

[greg_christine]

Originally Posted by JustinB

The Los Angeles "BRT" line should have been built as a rail line. In fact the busway WAS a rail line. Makes you wonder why LACMTA pulled up the existing tracks to build a busway. The overcrowded buses, and extremely short-frequencies(which lead to bunching), and the rutted roadway are just a few of the problems with this line. The most significant problem is likely the buses having to slow down to 10mph at corssings due to the high number of accidents at signalized crossings. Of course that could be solved with crossing gates. The sort of crossing gates that rail systems have to employ. This is just another example of a North American agency taking the cheap way out, when rail should have been the mode built.

...

The pavement problem was a one-time problem caused by a contractor not following specifications. The pavement has been repaired and the problem has not recurred.

The short headways between buses are part of the reason for the popularity of the Orange Line. Station wait times are short. Headways would be much longer if the line had been built as light rail with multi-car trains.

I agree regarding crosing gates. It is fairly common practice for light rail lines in downtown areas to be protected only by signal lights at intersections. The Blue Line in downtown Los Angeles does not have crossing gates. Crossing gates should have been required.

[JustinB]

Originally Posted by greg_christine

The pavement problem was a one-time problem caused by a contractor not following specifications. The pavement has been repaired and the problem has not recurred.

Unless they use concrete, it's not going to last long.

The short headways between buses are part of the reason for the popularity of the Orange Line. Station wait times are short. Headways would be much longer if the line had been built as light rail with multi-car trains.

I was inccorrect about the short headways. The peak headway is actually 4-5 minutes. Not that short at all, and the buses are still packed. it is interesting that on the Orange Line schedule, The peak frequency is listed as "buses arrive every 4-5 minutes" I have a feeling the schedule is not predictable, and there is inconsistencies with the actual running time. Compare that to the Gold Line schedule which prints the exact time of every train. Predictable, and not subject to gaps within the schedule. The Orange Line should have been built as rail. If it is at capacity running a 4-5 minute schedule during the PEAK hours, you know you reached the threshold of BRT capacity. The Gold Line frequency during peak hour is 7-8 minutes. Not that much longer than the Orange Line.

I agree regarding crosing gates. It is fairly common practice for light rail lines in downtown areas to be protected only by signal lights at intersections. The Blue Line in downtown Los Angeles does not have crossing gates. Crossing gates should have been required.

\

That can be applied to all transit line including BRT in the downtown core. OC transpo's bus crawl through the downtown core picking up passengers.