mook Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Perception of Planners related to land development
> (gentrification) is that Rail is Good and Buses
> are Bad for many of the reasons discussed above
> (especially: it will still be there tomorrow, and
> it's "cute"). Perception of Planners and many
> advocacy groups related to social services
> (anti-gentrification) is that Buses are Good and
> Rail is Bad because buses are much less expensive
> to buy and run so you can run more to more places
> (though not as many seats to one place).

From where do you get your perceptions?

As a transit planner, my role is to provide choices to the community

I have never thought "rail good, bus bad" or vice versa. I have and continue to be involved in both bus and rail transit planning efforts.

However, its not the planners who decided what gets built. The role of the planner is to present information to the public and decision-makers and conduct technical assessments (alternatives analyses and environmental reviews) on the alternatives. Based on the technical assessments and public/elected official preferences, an alternative is selected and advanced into engineering, design (and if there is sufficient money) construction. The decisions on bus, rail or nothing at all are typically made by top agency officials and politicians (and if there is a referendum, the public).