Re: Those pushing lane takings for BRT can't show any benefit from it....
I don't think it is a question of mode capacity or BRT station location, I think it is
will it work. Seattle is known to have the most aggressive implementation of buses in the nation and has a population of which most use public transportation. But even Seattle realizes BRT's limitations(Seattle is only implementing it on the fringes of King County). "Despite massive job growth, just 25 percent of workers drove themselves in 2017." according to the results of the latest annual commuter survey by the Seattle Department of Transportation.
It isn't converting lanes to BRT that is driving Seattle's success, but it more has to do with bus frequency and convenience of access. Sure, some BRT features don't hurt such as pre-board paying, level boarding and multiple boarding points. But BRT in its purest form is an unnecessary evil.
You still have 35% in cars which makes it impossible to take their lanes away. (35% of 1-2 million is still a lot of people)
david vartanoff Wrote:
> @ Bob2, while I can't contradict your actual
> experience on a given bus, the geometry of bus v
> car v bike is pretty clear--single driver cars
> take up more space per traveling human unless the
> bus is nearly empty.
> pictures worth many words. Basic principles for
> speeding up ANY form of mass transit, dedicated
> ROW which includes "traffic signals" or in the
> rail case "block signals" (whether wayside or cab
> display), off vehicle fare control, level and all
> door boarding are proven. For how far apart the
> stops should be, check out this recent research
> from an Illinois Institute of Technology student,
> and CTA planner.
> The paranoid "those socialist planners want to
> confiscate my car" agit prop in the comments says
> it all.