Comments on: BRT vs. Light Rail for the Purple Line http://dc.thecityfix.com/brt-vs-light-rail-for-the-purple-line/ Sustainable Mobility in the District Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:56:57 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2 hourly 1 By: TheCityFix.com: Exploring Sustainable Solutions to the Problems of Urban Mobility » Blog Archive » What’s New at TheCityFix DC http://dc.thecityfix.com/brt-vs-light-rail-for-the-purple-line/comment-page-1/#comment-388 TheCityFix.com: Exploring Sustainable Solutions to the Problems of Urban Mobility » Blog Archive » What’s New at TheCityFix DC Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:14:41 +0000 http://dc.thecityfix.com/?p=1341#comment-388 [...] BRT vs. Light Rail for the Purple Line and Purple Line BRT vs. LRT, Round 2: A more local story about a proposed circumferential transit line around the city and whether light rail or bus rapid transit makes more sense for the route. [...] [...] BRT vs. Light Rail for the Purple Line and Purple Line BRT vs. LRT, Round 2: A more local story about a proposed circumferential transit line around the city and whether light rail or bus rapid transit makes more sense for the route. [...]

]]> By: Derek Chisholm http://dc.thecityfix.com/brt-vs-light-rail-for-the-purple-line/comment-page-1/#comment-86 Derek Chisholm Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:44:25 +0000 http://dc.thecityfix.com/?p=1341#comment-86 I have had the recent pleasure of completing a comparative analysis of LRT and BRT for an EIS. The project considered two transit mode options in the DEIS, later selecting LRT as the Locally Preferred Alternative. We compared the two in each of the major discipline reports (Economics, Land use, energy, etc). I completed a lengthy land use/ TOD analysis which can be found in the appendix to the land use report. These reports are available online. http://www.columbiarivercrossing.com/Library/Type.aspx?CategoryID=27 Derek Chisholm 971-322-7942 I have had the recent pleasure of completing a comparative analysis of LRT and BRT for an EIS. The project considered two transit mode options in the DEIS, later selecting LRT as the Locally Preferred Alternative. We compared the two in each of the major discipline reports (Economics, Land use, energy, etc). I completed a lengthy land use/ TOD analysis which can be found in the appendix to the land use report. These reports are available online. http://www.columbiarivercrossing.com/Library/Type.aspx?CategoryID=27

Derek Chisholm
971-322-7942

]]> By: BeyondDC http://dc.thecityfix.com/brt-vs-light-rail-for-the-purple-line/comment-page-1/#comment-84 BeyondDC Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:40:56 +0000 http://dc.thecityfix.com/?p=1341#comment-84 There are several reasons LRT is superior that you're not taking into consideration. Here are five: 1. FTA's narrow cost effectiveness formula notwithstanding, the more highly a line is ridden the more it saves money to use rail rather than bus. You can match rail's capacity with buses (up to a point), but since buses can't be coupled into consists, in order to do it you have to run buses much more frequently. That means more drivers, more union benefits, and more fuel per passenger. You also have to replace your bus vehicles much more frequently, which also adds tremendously to the cost in the long term. The whole idea that BRT is cheaper than LRT is false the more riders you have and the more years your line is in operation. 2. The silly notion that BRT pollutes less than LRT is based on the assumption that LRT always gets its energy from dirty coal plants. That's not going to be the case for too many more years. 3. BRT is extremely tempting to convert into auto lanes. It has happened in Washington in the past (I-395 was at one time America's premier BRT line). It gets built as transit infrastructure and then gets turned over to cars. 4. BRT has never been shown to have the effect on land use that rail has been clearly shown to have, especially in the DC area. 5. Trains are more comfortable than buses. It is simply a fact that gliding along a rail under electric power is noticeably smoother than rumbling along on big tires over rough streets via gas power. This isn’t frequently brought up, but it’s a big reason why people have such negative opinions about buses, and no amount of dressing-up the bus can change it. There are several reasons LRT is superior that you’re not taking into consideration. Here are five:

1. FTA’s narrow cost effectiveness formula notwithstanding, the more highly a line is ridden the more it saves money to use rail rather than bus. You can match rail’s capacity with buses (up to a point), but since buses can’t be coupled into consists, in order to do it you have to run buses much more frequently. That means more drivers, more union benefits, and more fuel per passenger. You also have to replace your bus vehicles much more frequently, which also adds tremendously to the cost in the long term. The whole idea that BRT is cheaper than LRT is false the more riders you have and the more years your line is in operation.

2. The silly notion that BRT pollutes less than LRT is based on the assumption that LRT always gets its energy from dirty coal plants. That’s not going to be the case for too many more years.

3. BRT is extremely tempting to convert into auto lanes. It has happened in Washington in the past (I-395 was at one time America’s premier BRT line). It gets built as transit infrastructure and then gets turned over to cars.

4. BRT has never been shown to have the effect on land use that rail has been clearly shown to have, especially in the DC area.

5. Trains are more comfortable than buses. It is simply a fact that gliding along a rail under electric power is noticeably smoother than rumbling along on big tires over rough streets via gas power. This isn’t frequently brought up, but it’s a big reason why people have such negative opinions about buses, and no amount of dressing-up the bus can change it.

]]>