Bus [[not so) Rapid transit in grand rapids, light rail the way to go?

[Honky Tonk]

Yep, it's a flashback to the first time they killed rail with buses. In Detroit, for example, they told us they'd have STOPS FOR THE BUS ON THE FREEWAY, which you'd access by taking a stairway down from an overpass. "Why do we need to build rail when you can be whizzed along the freeways by bus?" they told us.

And that helped to lower demand for rail.

Of course, once rail was pushed out of the picture, the freeway bus stops never materialized as promised. It's exceedingly rare for any bus to use the freeway.

BRT is the modern equivalent of freeway bus stops. It's a distraction intended to foil any plans for good public transit.

And, of course, the Blight Rail hasn't been sold as snake oil. All the promises surrounding it will surely come to pass. Can't wait to watch it plow through traffic jams on Woodward.

[nain rouge]

Woodward Light Rail will suck, yes.

[Wesley Mouch]

Yep, it's a flashback to the first time they killed rail with buses. In Detroit, for example, they told us they'd have STOPS FOR THE BUS ON THE FREEWAY, which you'd access by taking a stairway down from an overpass. "Why do we need to build rail when you can be whizzed along the freeways by bus?" they told us.

And that helped to lower demand for rail.

Of course, once rail was pushed out of the picture, the freeway bus stops never materialized as promised. It's exceedingly rare for any bus to use the freeway.

BRT is the modern equivalent of freeway bus stops. It's a distraction intended to foil any plans for good public transit.

The difference is that BRT is real and another tool in the toolkit that has actual installations in-service today. The 'freeway express bus' idea was never implemented beyond testing here, afaik.

[ghettopalmetto]

The difference is that BRT is real and another tool in the toolkit that has actual installations in-service today. The 'freeway express bus' idea was never implemented beyond testing here, afaik.

And if we all just *believe* hard enough, Bus Rapid Transit in Detroit will be the envy of the world, what with all those crazy futuristic buses "whizzing" around. I bet if we gave them Jetsons sound effects, that they'll go even faster!

[nain rouge]

Yes, BRT's toolkit and capabilities are real, so much so that we know it really isn't faster than a bus in meaningful terms. I hereby propose renaming BRT as BSHC - Bus of Slightly Higher Capacity.

[DetroitPlanner]

The difference is that BRT is real and another tool in the toolkit that has actual installations in-service today. The 'freeway express bus' idea was never implemented beyond testing here, afaik.

SMART runs lots of express buses on freeways. It has for decades.

However, what does a bus on a freeway have in common with the upgrade along Division in Grand Rapids?

We all there are skeptics to just about every transportation mode that there is. You folks prove this. However, what is best for one situation may not be the best for another. You need lots of different levels of transit working together in order to improve a network.

[iheartthed]

Mexico City has the fifth highest rail ridership in the world, and a huge rail system. Santiago has a huge system, and very high ridership. Sao Paulo has a decent system, and very high ridership.

All these cities also have very successful, and fast-expanding BRT systems, with massive ridership, even though they also have large, popular and successful rail systems.

The only major South American system I can think of with a big, successful BRT system and minimal or no rail is Bogota.

Mexico City and Sao Paulo are both larger than New York but their rail networks [[particularly Sao Paulo) are much less comprehensive than New York. Sao Paulo is only a tenth the size of New York's, so of course it has to be heavily reliant on buses to move people around. How else would they get around?

[Wesley Mouch]

SMART runs lots of express buses on freeways. It has for decades.

However, what does a bus on a freeway have in common with the upgrade along Division in Grand Rapids?

We all there are skeptics to just about every transportation mode that there is. You folks prove this. However, what is best for one situation may not be the best for another. You need lots of different levels of transit working together in order to improve a network.

M. Rouge was referring to the specific implementation where DSR [[as it was) created separate bus stops at freeway level -- with stairs to reach them from grade. I believe you can see the remains of the stairs at Lodge/Davison and the remains of the bus lane at Woodward/Ford, although I haven't looked lately.

I was specifically referring to that 'idea' that wasn't implemented. It was all a sideshow anyway.

[ghettopalmetto]

However, what does a bus on a freeway have in common with the upgrade along Division in Grand Rapids?

We all there are skeptics to just about every transportation mode that there is. You folks prove this. However, what is best for one situation may not be the best for another. You need lots of different levels of transit working together in order to improve a network.

Well, if you call saving a whole minute "an upgrade".

[ghettopalmetto]

Below is a link to a blog post by Dan Malouff. Mr. Malouff is a transportation planner for Arlington County, Virginia, where they know a thing our two about effective public transportation. Emphases mine.

After all, if your goal is to substitute a less expensive but less effective alternate mode, why should anyone be surprised when you make the same sort of substitution when it comes to details of running way engineering or signalization? If BRT is just a way to avoid spending a lot on transit so more can go to highways, why be surprised when BRT lanes are converted to car lanes? If decision makers were actually interested in spending the money to produce a transit line as good as rail, well, why not build rail?


I don’t mean to suggest that BRT alone suffers from these problems, or that it’s useless. Certainly rail projects can suffer from creeping cost reductions as well, and certainly good buses – including rapid ones – should be a part of every major transit system. My point is merely that as long as US planners think of BRT as a cheap replacement for rail, then the US will be very unlikely to ever produce BRT that is actually rail-like [[as much as it can be anyway), because that mindset inherently undervalues many of the specific features that are needed to produce a high-quality transit line, regardless of mode.

http://beyonddc.com/log/?p=2546


There's nothing wrong with BRT on its own merits. It's an improvement over regular bus service, especially on long, busy corridors. Just don't sell it as an equivalent to rail. It's not. Doing so could irreparably discourage the public from any desire to fund public transportation once they discover the truth behind the marketing spin.

[brizee]

There's nothing wrong with BRT on its own merits. It's an improvement over regular bus service, especially on long, busy corridors. Just don't sell it as an equivalent to rail. It's not. Doing so could irreparably discourage the public from any desire to fund public transportation once they discover the truth behind the marketing spin.

That is exactly my position on it. Just be honest and stop spitting in the public's face telling them it's rain.

Also an observation. Is it just me or has rail transportation of all types been politicized/demonized in this country?

Public transportation in general seems to be neutral, however rail REALLY gets Republicans in a frothing fit. I'm just curious when this happened. Because cities all across the country had streetcar lines until I dunno the fifties?

Even though cost is thrown out as an excuse I suspect that bias is still playing into this state's hatred of rail projects. Including the poison pill in the RTA's enrolling legislation.

[nain rouge]

People hate rail because some part of them realizes that rail will take away good money that could've went to freeways. Your average republican figures their highway was overdue for more lanes 20 years ago. The last thing they want is that money going to something else other than a freeway. They know they'll never ride rail, where they might have to brush shoulders with people that aren't exactly like them. They just want to get to work and relatives' houses faster on the freeway.

[Wesley Mouch]

That is exactly my position on it. Just be honest and stop spitting in the public's face telling them it's rain.

Also an observation. Is it just me or has rail transportation of all types been politicized/demonized in this country?

Public transportation in general seems to be neutral, however rail REALLY gets Republicans in a frothing fit. I'm just curious when this happened. Because cities all across the country had streetcar lines until I dunno the fifties?

Even though cost is thrown out as an excuse I suspect that bias is still playing into this state's hatred of rail projects. Including the poison pill in the RTA's enrolling legislation.

Might not be bias. Might just be a reaction to historic SE Michigan transit mismanagement. If there's a bias, its against the sort of skimming money from capital projects. Message being don't think about expensive projects, just get some good transit please.

[Hermod]

Fort Lauderdale is getting ready to begin building a streetcar which will run 23 city blocks. It will cost about $120 megabucks [[before the inevitable overruns) and Uncle Sugar is putting in $102 megabucks of the amount. It is essentially a shopping shuttle which will move slowly along the street stopping every two blocks. It might take few cars out of the traffic pattern [[office workers going out to lunch).

[pumphandle]

GP, thanks for mentioning Dan Malouff. Here's a bit more on BRT creep, which appears to be a term he coined, and which has caught on as a worldwide description of this trend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit_creep