You're overthinking my comments.
Bus & rail are not effectively the same. The differences are shrinking. Diesel not the only motive for busses. Overhead electric or 3rd rail not the only game in rail.
My main love for BRT is investment. Regardless of source, there's a limited amount of cash for investment -- in transportation. If you build BRT, you get more bang for you dollar today -- and of course an increase in operating costs in the future. A perfect trade off for a city with future hopes, but little clout today.
I'd rather see BRT on Fort, Michigan, Grand River, Woodward, Jefferson, than rail on Woodward and one other. And I'm sure you'll say how wrong I am about the relative capital costs of BRT vs. rail... but I think BRT can be done quite cheaply -- and improvements like signal control can come later. I think we need volume of routes more than we need operating efficiency.
Its an opinion. Bless you if you can find a way to fund rail and get it done. I think you'll end up with a great line on Woodward ... and nowhere else.
Meanwhile, the BRT could run all spokes, and even be expanded into the suburbs at minimal costs.
Bookmarks