Downtown Bus Rapid Transit Project Moving Forward

[dlemore]

Problems JTA has is that they haven't found a way to decrease the size of their buses at certain times of the day and at the same time improve the time one has to wait for that bus(right now JTA pulls its buses after morning and evening drive time which also adds to the time one has to wait for a bus.. 30 min to an hour on line...offline wait is 1 hour or longer). Other problems is the expense of manning those buses, trying to get off of diesel fuel and on to electric, putting in overhead trolley lines and at the same time obtaining right of ways for those lines of the most utilized routes. As JTA's drivers continue to retire, a replacement system for those drivers, that would require driverless transportation, should be fully realized whenever possible. Is BART the start of such a system? After 30 years since I last took public transportation...I'd give our current system a 50 to 50 in its present form. One of the things that would vastly improve ridership would be for Mr Miller to come up with some type of air filtration system for his NEW buses(the perfume, and afterwork afternoon odor was terrible, please do something about the air one must breathe on these buses) 2. if possible, extend the time these buses run at night(no one wants to be stranded at his location after work) The JTA has done a lot of talking about what it is doing or about what it is about to do in the area of improving our transportation needs in Jacksonville but so do our ego striken politicians. The question one must ask is whether or not this talk is going to materialize or is it just a lot of hot air just before an election....only time will tell. Let's hope it's for the better!!

[tufsu1]

the system has been dubbed BRT because that opens the door for Federal funding under the New Starts/Small Starts program...and since FTA has allocated funds for the downtown portion, they must be convinced that it qualifies as BRT.

[AaroniusLives]

To be fair to JTA, this is what they originally had planned and we blew this concept right out of the water because it would have cost us more than building rail.

Well, looking through the plans for that concept of BRT, of course it would have cost zillions to build, and while it's technically rapid transit using buses, it's really a form of commuter rail using buses. My favorite, insane part of those plans are the "where we'll put the buses on the highway." Uh, really? Has anyone ever wanted to go and get off a bus, and tour the scenic highway?

If I were going to design an affordable, effective BRT system in Jacksonville, I'd appropriate a north-south road and an east-west road that already exists and dedicate it to BRT use only. I'd spend money to grade-separate the two corridors as much as possible from the surrounding auto traffic, from train gates at the low end to small bridges at the high end (overpasses? Is that a highway term?) Then again, if I were going to do that, I might as well go whole hog into rail, eh?

the system has been dubbed BRT because that opens the door for Federal funding under the New Starts/Small tarts program...and since FTA has allocated funds for the downtown portion, they must be convinced that it qualifies as BRT.

That's just stupid.

[simms3]

Well I currently live in Midtown across from Art Center Station and I use MARTA when I can, but I agree with Aaronius that it does not go near enough places.  Almost half a million people ride MARTA a day (which is closer to 10% of metro population), though those figures also represent busses I think.  The Beltline has been making faster progress than anyone though and big players like Jamestown (they just bought City Hall East across from the new 4th Ward park as part of the beltline) are getting involved and making plays because the idea and the plan are really great and making significant progress.

Part of the problem of MARTA trains is that there are really 2 lines (though both branch off at some point).  The E-W line goes from Bankhead to just past Decatur (so basically a rough hood to a rough hood).  The N-S line goes from the airport to Perimeter and half of it also goes through the hood, so it is just another service line for people who cannot afford to have a car to go work low paying jobs or city government jobs.  It also acts as a feeder for certain seedier elements into nicer areas.  This of course would happen with any system, but literally only 25% of MARTA train lines pass through dense business districts and nice residential areas.  MARTA needs to go more places, and the Beltline will help significantly, I think.  DC metro has plenty of criminal elements riding it (More prevalent on some lines over others), but because it goes EVERYWHERE, everyone rides it and the  seedy elements become less noticeable.

The thing that has changed about MARTA is that there actually ARE more people riding it nowadays, and a more diverse group.  The population ITP has boomed providing more of a ridership base, but I still would not ride it at night alone or ride on the E-W line period.  (PS I had my ass handed to me at Art Center Station at 11:00 p.m. last summer for an unknown reason, not theft, and at the time I was the only white person in the whole station and the only one dressed in decent clothes, so that could have something to do with it, thus MARTA still has some issues).

[TheProfessor]

Please someone confirm that the BRT does not plan on building elevated platforms??  Might as well do rail if this were the case.

[AaroniusLives]

Well I currently live in Midtown across from Art Center Station and I use MARTA when I can, but I agree with Aaronius that it does not go near enough places.  Almost half a million people ride MARTA a day (which is closer to 10% of metro population), though those figures also represent busses I think.  The Beltline has been making faster progress than anyone though and big players like Jamestown (they just bought City Hall East across from the new 4th Ward park as part of the beltline) are getting involved and making plays because the idea and the plan are really great and making significant progress.

The combined total of MARTA's buses, paratransit services and heavy rail equals out to 461,800 daily trips, or 8.4% of the metropolitan population. (If we assume that each trip is part of a "round trip" of two, then only 4.2% of the population is using MARTA.)

MARTA's heavy rail system had 242,700 daily trips, or 4.4% of the metropolitan population.

The thing that has changed about MARTA is that there actually ARE more people riding it nowadays, and a more diverse group.

I'm pleased with the diversity shift, but actually, less people are riding MARTA: down 5.7% for all modes and 4.77% for heavy rail. That's within a metropolitan statistical area that grew in population by nearly 30% over the last decade. More people are living there and yet less people are using its transit.

http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2010_q1_ridership_APTA.pdf

Part of the problem of MARTA trains is that there are really 2 lines (though both branch off at some point).  The E-W line goes from Bankhead to just past Decatur (so basically a rough hood to a rough hood).  The N-S line goes from the airport to Perimeter and half of it also goes through the hood, so it is just another service line for people who cannot afford to have a car to go work low paying jobs or city government jobs.  It also acts as a feeder for certain seedier elements into nicer areas.  This of course would happen with any system, but literally only 25% of MARTA train lines pass through dense business districts and nice residential areas.  MARTA needs to go more places, and the Beltline will help significantly, I think. 

I lived in Buckhead and worked in Perimeter Center (in the "King" building.) I could walk to the Buckhead Station, brave the elements and breathe in the perfume of the highway surrounding me...only to wind up quite far from where I needed to be for work. Or, I could go to the Midtown station and walk a mile and a half to Atlantic Station, for example. Hence, why people choose to drive.

DC metro has plenty of criminal elements riding it (More prevalent on some lines over others), but because it goes EVERYWHERE, everyone rides it and the  seedy elements become less noticeable.

DC's Metro, in general, is well-policed and quite safe. You still notice the seedy elements, but having transit cops strictly enforcing everything helps. And it totally does not go everywhere. There are holes in the Metro system that are served by buses, Circulators and shuttles...specifically because it DOESN'T go everywhere. however, it sure as hell goes to a lot of "somewheres."

[simms3]

Aaronius you and I are actually agreeing on pretty much every point, semantics aside.

I am fortunate in that I live right across the street from Art Center Station (which is only .5 miles from AS and there is a bus that loops from Art Center to AS avery 5 minutes), and I work in Northpark Center, which is connected underground to a MARTA station.  I have about 100 total feet of walking "outside."  King is pretty far out of the way from both Dunwoody and Sandy Springs Stations, though, so I would not ride MARTA there either and Perimeter is the most pedestrian unfriendly environment I have ever been in bar none.

Maybe less people are riding MARTA than a decade ago (though 4.4% less is not significantly less, but it is odd since the ITP population has grown by over 50-60%).  There is more diversity according to everyone I speak to, though, so maybe there are less criminals and more workers riding.  That makes a very large difference to me.  And lastly no system takes you everywhere, I was just emphasizing a point because DC's system does take you everywhere in relation to Atlanta's system which was designed literally to haul people into downtown and then haul them back out into the burbs and not to go anywhere else.  Lindbergh and Buckhead are very similar to stations like Rockville and Silver Springs in the DC metro, and Peachtree Center downtown actually looks like a DC metro station with its depth in the ground and curved rock design.  The rest of Atlanta's system is piss poor in design, but can only get better as long as they don't forego their security.

On the security, I agree with you that there is not enough.  I literally get attacked by Atlanta people on other boards (City-Data and Skyscraperpage) for making that claim and for stating hard truths about certain aspects of MARTA (like don't ride the E-W line, literally at all).  I quit one of the boards over the matter because people are so up in arms in Atlanta over race relations and nothing heats it up like a good old MARTA talk.  I just tell people that hey, I don't have to ride MARTA because I have a nice German car that can take me more places in comfortable leather seating and a great sound system, etc, but I still choose to ride MARTA when I can, so I am obviously not a racist, but there are some definite problems and safety is one.  The MARTA cops suck, I know from experience.

After I got beat up (this was a non-diversity moment if you know what I mean...I was the only one that brought "diversity" at 11 p.m. at Art Center and I'm  white), I thought that 2 MARTA cops walking out of the coffee shop way in the back of the station nowhere near the platform were "security."  I was literally spraying blood everywhere (broken nose and cheekbone, bashed eye that needed stitches) and I just happened to see them when I was fleeing and I yelled "Security!" and they were offended and practically wouldn't help me at first because they were actually "cops".  One said before muttering anything else or helping, "Does it look like we are security to you?" and then he flashed his badge.

Just an example of crazy crap that goes on in Atlanta, but we should probably avoid further MARTA talk and focus on this other mess that is the Jax BRT system.

Jax should learn from Atlanta that it is hard enough to get suburbanites to ride a train, let alone a bus.  Jax should also learn that a system cannot be designed just to get people from points A to point B and then back.  It must go to many points.

[Ocklawaha]

THIS is real BRT!


This is insane BRT!


THIS IS ALSO BRT!


BRT? YES!


Surely this isn't BRT? Frankly this IS BRT (and don't call me Shirley)


Everybody's favorite part of BRT? YUP!

No elevated platforms Prof.

...and YES DOC, rail and streetcar are WAY CLOSER then anyone suspects, including Amtrak Downtown! Trust me!

Quote
BRT is not a "thing", rather it IS a vague system of doing things, as "track and field" describe an Olympic type sport, any combination of events might describe the actual article. This is why I call BRT a cafe, it is a true smorgasbord of bus theory, and bus concepts, with some imitation LRT/Streetcar idea's added for spice.

To be fair to Bus Rapid Transit, it is a "thing" when applied correctly. Like any other mass transit method, give the buses their own lanes, or grade separate them from traffic, and BRT can effectively move people from Point A to Point B. Build the stations a reasonable distance apart, and the bus can build up speed on their dedicated right of way and rapidly go from station to station.

As for BRT being a cafe rather then a certain thing? No cigar here, not even the national transit agencies can decide what BRT really is. I'll agree that the description given by Aaronius most certainly IS BRT, likewise a project like Jacksonville's is also considered BRT. Los Angeles' Metro-Rapid is also called BRT and while part of it is on grade separated right of way, a good deal of it is in mixed traffic. The BRT title has also been endowed on the Las Vegas system which uses HOV and mixed lanes with fancy bus stops. Eugene has BRT with complete grade separation and even built drive lanes that look like concrete train track but it's speeds and frequent stops make it just another bus, albeit a "BRT BUS".

I think the guy/gal that thought up this expensive cockeyed scheme probably had the system Aaronius described in mind, but give the government some time and they have royally screwed it up.  GW's orgasmic rhapsody over anything oil powered is "Why" BRT suddenly became the new savior of all things transit. In other words, if you loved GW, BP, Mobil or Standard Oil, you'll probably love BRT.

The description of BRT or lack thereof is important because in the absence of GW and the pro-highway gas addicts, it has suddenly fell out of "favorite son" status in Washington. Add the demotion of BRT to the ignorance of the JTA board or most Jacksonville Citizens, and the fact that this city hasn't seen real transit since 1936 and we're in deep trouble. Our own transit agency couldn't pour water out of this boot with instructions written on the heel. So they produced the slick BRT dog and pony show's led by a "transit expert" (a former DJ from an Orlando radio station) to dazzle the public.

Metro Jacksonville called them on the carpet for this, produced a professional video about REAL BRT, and totally embarrassed the JTA in front of the City Council a year or so ago. We will continue to stand up and shout whenever waste is stealing true improvement from our transportation system. The fact is since 1932 when General Motors entered town under a corporate cover and wiped out the streetcar system, our city HAS been pissing on our legs and telling us it's raining, a behavior that is going to cease.  


OCKLAWAHA

[AaroniusLives]

I was just emphasizing a point because DC's system does take you everywhere in relation to Atlanta's system which was designed literally to haul people into downtown and then haul them back out into the burbs and not to go anywhere else.  Lindbergh and Buckhead are very similar to stations like Rockville and Silver Springs in the DC metro, and Peachtree Center downtown actually looks like a DC metro station with its depth in the ground and curved rock design.

DC's Metro system is designed the exact same way: to take people from the 'burbs into the central city and out again. It is one of the central flaws of the system as it is used today: to get around the city one frequently has to take a trip into downtown and switch to another line, where a more direct route would be quicker and easier. The same is true for Atlanta: nobody anticipated that commerce would follow residents into the 'burbs.

One of the key, essential differences between DC and Atlanta (and many other cities across the country, including Miami, Jacksonville, Detroit...) is that most of DC wasn't torn up and destroyed in order to lay down a highway system. Most of DC has retained it's grid of streets. There is no massive, 16-lane ditch full of cars smack-dab in the middle of the city to overcome.

Another key difference is that DC's Metro was built in lieu of highways and highway expansion. MARTA, and life in Metro Atlanta is defined by the highway. The "Freeing the Freeways" program doubled Atlanta's interstate lane miles from 900 to 1851. More than doubled. And cost more than 1.5 billion dollars. 

Jax should learn from Atlanta that it is hard enough to get suburbanites to ride a train, let alone a bus.  Jax should also learn that a system cannot be designed just to get people from points A to point B and then back.  It must go to many points.

In addition, those points must be "somewhere." Dropping off a bunch of people in a parking deck a couple of miles from where you want to be is not "somewhere."

And it's not just suburbanites you have to convince. People who live in cities that have been re-purposed for the car have to be convinced as well. You have to deliberately reverse policy to make streets for people again. To use Atlanta as an example, you can't make it uber-convenient for me to use my car to drive to Atlantic Station, park in the parking deck built below it, and then walk around. You can't have a MARTA station in Buckhead empty out into a morass of mall parking lots, filled with cars, or cars looking for spots (I lived in the Paramount.) As much as the traffic sucked in Atlanta, it was frequently more pleasant to drive than to walk. As much as the traffic in DC sucks, and waiting for a bus sucks, and being trapped underground in a non-air conditioned Metro car sucks, I sold my car because it's much, MUCH more pleasant to walk or take transit.

As for BRT being a cafe rather then a certain thing? No cigar here, not even the national transit agencies can decide what BRT really is. I'll agree that the description given by Aaronius most certainly IS BRT, likewise a project like Jacksonville's is also considered BRT. Los Angeles' Metro-Rapid is also called BRT and while part of it is on grade separated right of way, a good deal of it is in mixed traffic. The BRT title has also been endowed on the Las Vegas system which uses HOV and mixed lanes with fancy bus stops. Eugene has BRT with complete grade separation and even built drive lanes that look like concrete train track but it's speeds and frequent stops make it just another bus, albeit a "BRT BUS".

Again, a failure on the part of the bureaucrats to explain BRT does not negate the basic definition of BRT. A bus in mixed traffic without a dedicated right of way is not BRT. It's a fancy bus line.

I think the guy/gal that thought up this expensive cockeyed scheme probably had the system Aaronius described in mind...

Actually, no. The entire point of implementing BRT over LRT or HRT (at least before the 'Mericans went a screwed up the language,) was to save money by reserving existing streets and their rights of way for buses only, while combining that with expanded avenues that incorporate exclusive right of way for the BRT system. It was a way to consolidate road/transit spending. Moreover, it's supposed to go "somewhere." Jacksonville's BRT plan looks like a commuter rail system. People drive to a parking lot off the highway and then board a bus. Hysterically, it actually builds wacky elevated BRT structures in the highway, instead of reserving existing lanes.

To put this another way, if the point of BRT is to duplicate the effects of LRT or HRT, the reason to pursue it is because it's cost-effective to do so. Jacksonville's vanity BRT plan most certainly is not the latter. And this line system through the central city is not the former.

In other words, if you loved GW, BP, Mobil or Standard Oil, you'll probably love BRT.

That is vastly oversimplifying the argument, but I did find it funny as hell, so I'm callin' it out, yo.

Is the "track" BRT picture from the O-Bahn busway in Australia?
 

[CS Foltz]

Therein lies part of the problem with me! If JTA is going to tell me that BRT versus Rail in any form is more efficient, I will look them right in the eye and tell them to go F*** themselves! I know the difference between a bus and any form of rail, one aspect of which is more go for the same amount of fuel, if your discussing diesel power! Diesel/Electric is even more efficient when you compare a tonnage moved per mile......hell if JTA can make up fancy words, so can I If your looking for efficiency per ridership mile, rail knocks any sort of glamour bus/trolley (if its on wheels!) into the weeds! The current proposal is going to be bus's, whether they are new or whatever, running on streets modified (more tax dollars down the tubes) with new Historical Bus Shelters (probably overpriced and JTA has said nothing about maintaining them other then they can be retrofitted for advertisements......whopee!) I guess the next question should be......why does BRT get new shelters when the other 1800 some odd bus stops don't have squat other than a sign? Why have we got bus's stopping in one side of a two lane road, blocking traffic from proceding around? I think we need to fine tune what we have before we start getting fancy.....maybe fix the issues with low ridership and the like before we start something that has no guarantee of success..............kinda like the $kyway......whose route is being duplicated! Where is the savings in time, taxpayer money and maybe the downtown infill we don't have!

[Ocklawaha]

Hey Aaronius, I like your presentation and suspect we agree at about 95%, Professional background perhaps?

I was just emphasizing a point because DC's system does take you everywhere in relation to Atlanta's system which was designed literally to haul people into downtown and then haul them back out into the burbs and not to go anywhere else.  Lindbergh and Buckhead are very similar to stations like Rockville and Silver Springs in the DC metro, and Peachtree Center downtown actually looks like a DC metro station with its depth in the ground and curved rock design.

Another key difference is that DC's Metro was built in lieu of highways and highway expansion. MARTA, and life in Metro Atlanta is defined by the highway. The "Freeing the Freeways" program doubled Atlanta's interstate lane miles from 900 to 1851. More than doubled. And cost more than 1.5 billion dollars. 

Jax should learn from Atlanta that it is hard enough to get suburbanites to ride a train, let alone a bus.  Jax should also learn that a system cannot be designed just to get people from points A to point B and then back.  It must go to many points.

In addition, those points must be "somewhere." Dropping off a bunch of people in a parking deck a couple of miles from where you want to be is not "somewhere."

And it's not just suburbanites you have to convince. People who live in cities that have been re-purposed for the car have to be convinced as well. You have to deliberately reverse policy to make streets for people again. To use Atlanta as an example, you can't make it uber-convenient for me to use my car to drive to Atlantic Station, park in the parking deck built below it, and then walk around. You can't have a MARTA station in Buckhead empty out into a morass of mall parking lots, filled with cars, or cars looking for spots (I lived in the Paramount.) As much as the traffic sucked in Atlanta, it was frequently more pleasant to drive than to walk. As much as the traffic in DC sucks, and waiting for a bus sucks, and being trapped underground in a non-air conditioned Metro car sucks, I sold my car because it's much, MUCH more pleasant to walk or take transit.

The only flaw in this simple explanation is LOS ANGELES. The city most known for it's love affair with the automobile is busting the seams of record after record in mass transit ridership. But typical of California, once they decided to go with it, (helped along by the mother of earthquakes which closed mountain passes) they went all out, BRT, LRT, Commuter Rail and Heavy Rail.  Los Angeles? Who would of thunk it?

The City of Angels is also one of my "homes" and you can't imagine my joy during the last visits at not having to drive ANYWHERE I wanted to go. All this and it's getting bigger and better every day.

Los Angeles' Metro subway, one section of which topped 2020 ridership projections in its first year of operation, saw ridership grow by nearly 6 percent during the first nine months of 2009.
http://la.streetsblog.org/2010/01/04/apta-economic-slump-hitting-transit-ridership-but-not-in-l-a/

As for BRT being a cafe rather then a certain thing? No cigar here, not even the national transit agencies can decide what BRT really is. I'll agree that the description given by Aaronius most certainly IS BRT, likewise a project like Jacksonville's is also considered BRT. Los Angeles' Metro-Rapid is also called BRT and while part of it is on grade separated right of way, a good deal of it is in mixed traffic. The BRT title has also been endowed on the Las Vegas system which uses HOV and mixed lanes with fancy bus stops. Eugene has BRT with complete grade separation and even built drive lanes that look like concrete train track but it's speeds and frequent stops make it just another bus, albeit a "BRT BUS".

Again, a failure on the part of the bureaucrats to explain BRT does not negate the basic definition of BRT. A bus in mixed traffic without a dedicated right of way is not BRT. It's a fancy bus line.

Maybe so, but if the industry itself cannot decide what the hell it is then it remains a system of things, or cafe of bus toys. Here is what the various industry sites have to say about it:

Definitions

    * The Federal Transit Administration broadly defines BRT as “combining the quality of rail transit and the flexibility of buses. It can operate on exclusive transitways, HOV lanes, expressways, or ordinary streets. A BRT system combines intelligent transportation systems technology, priority for transit, cleaner and quieter vehicles, rapid and convenient fare collection, and integration with land use policy.”
    * Lloyd Wright at the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy defines BRT as “high-quality, customer-oriented transit that delivers fast, comfortable and low-cost urban mobility.”
    * Professor Vukan Vuchic at the University of Pennsylvania challenges the word “Rapid” in the name Bus Rapid Transit, instead offering the term “Bus Semi-Rapid Transit” and arguing that “Rapid” should only be used when referring to exclusive-right-of-way rail transit.
    * Michael Baltes and Steven Polzin at the University of South Florida’s Center for Urban Transportation Research conclude the debate on defining BRT by saying that “regardless of what it’s called and how it’s defined, the underlying essence of the current interest in BRT is to use the best globally available technology to meaningfully improve overall transit service quality in the most effective manner possible. Heck, call it progress!”  http://www.cfte.org/trends/brt.asp

I think the guy/gal that thought up this expensive cockeyed scheme probably had the system Aaronius described in mind...

Actually, no. The entire point of implementing BRT over LRT or HRT (at least before the 'Mericans went a screwed up the language,) was to save money by reserving existing streets and their rights of way for buses only, while combining that with expanded avenues that incorporate exclusive right of way for the BRT system. It was a way to consolidate road/transit spending. Moreover, it's supposed to go "somewhere." Jacksonville's BRT plan looks like a commuter rail system. People drive to a parking lot off the highway and then board a bus. Hysterically, it actually builds wacky elevated BRT structures in the highway, instead of reserving existing lanes.

To put this another way, if the point of BRT is to duplicate the effects of LRT or HRT, the reason to pursue it is because it's cost-effective to do so. Jacksonville's vanity BRT plan most certainly is not the latter. And this line system through the central city is not the former.

More BRT Information from Seattle:

The idea that arose most prominently, in a November 13 op-ed in the Seattle Times, was a "solution" that has long been a dream of road supporters: A 150-mile network of so-called "bus rapid transit" lanes that would "cover the entire metro Puget Sound region at 60 mph, 24/7"; "support 'walkable' mixed-use neighborhoods"; carry far more riders than light rail or monorail; and include "clean... comfortable stops" that are "the equivalent of rail stations"â€"all at a tenth of the cost of a fixed-guideway system like the monorail.

Promises like these have been alluring cities since at least the 1960s, when bus manufacturer General Motors began aggressively pushing BRT as an alternative to rail. And, despite lingering concerns that buses don't offer the same stability and psychological appeal as trains, BRT's popularity has endured... But the realities of BRT have rarely lived up to its promises. In city after cityâ€"despite assurances that BRT would offer cheap, flexible, speedy transit serviceâ€"the technology has proven costly, inflexible, and anything but rapid....One problem in addressing the drawbacks of BRT is that no one, including its backers, seems able to agree on a single definition of the term. Some apply it only to grade-separated roadways (like the downtown Seattle bus tunnel, or Sound Transit's elevated "E3 Busway") that are reserved exclusively for buses. Others use it to describe a broad range of services that includes enhanced express bus service on HOV lanes, buses that move from dedicated bus lanes to mixed traffic, and express buses between the suburbs and the inner city... On the first two questions, the data is clear: BRT draws far fewer transit ridersâ€"and, importantly, far fewer new transit ridersâ€"than light rail or other fixed-rail systems... Because of the higher ridership, the cost per passenger mileâ€"a common measure of cost-effectivenessâ€"is actually lower in many cities, including Portland, for rail than it is for "affordable" BRT....
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=25353

In other words, if you loved GW, BP, Mobil or Standard Oil, you'll probably love BRT.

That is vastly oversimplifying the argument, but I did find it funny as hell, so I'm callin' it out, yo

.

Glad you enjoyed it, if you haven't noticed sarcasm is my "Spiritual Gift!"

Is the "track" BRT picture from the O-Bahn busway in Australia?

YUP!
 
Old transportation planner's never die, they just lose track!

OCKLAWAHA

[johnny_simpatico]

The photos with different characterizations of BRT make a good point.  The example that was captioned "This is real BRT" is from Bogota's Trans-Milenio.  I was there last year and found it to be great once it got out of downtown and on it's own right of way.  Downtown, where the beautiful articulated buses intermingled with pedestrians and cars, it was a total disaster.  Walking was faster.

The MetroBus system in Mexico City is viewed as a higher quality service than DF's heavy rail system, and it commands a higher fare.  http://www.metrobus.df.gob.mx/que_es_mb.html

I'd be delighted if something like this came to Jacksonville, but recent evidence suggests they are either being incredibly stupid about it or are setting it up to fail.  It needs to be presented as a stand-alone and superior transit alternative, not just a minor enhancement of JTA's present mediocre product.  Instead of rolling it out piecemeal, JTA needs to start out with one complete route.  (One from the Airport to downtown to UNF, with a station at St. Johns Town Center, would be intelligent.)

The proposed system highlighted in an earlier posting gives me heartburn.  The system won't be able to compete with the automobile if routes are riddled with deviations, such as into the FSCJ Kent Campus.

[AaroniusLives]

The only flaw in this simple explanation is LOS ANGELES. The city most known for it's love affair with the automobile is busting the seams of record after record in mass transit ridership. But typical of California, once they decided to go with it, (helped along by the mother of earthquakes which closed mountain passes) they went all out, BRT, LRT, Commuter Rail and Heavy Rail.  Los Angeles? Who would of thunk it?

The City of Angels is also one of my "homes" and you can't imagine my joy during the last visits at not having to drive ANYWHERE I wanted to go. All this and it's getting bigger and better every day.

It's not a flawed argument. LA basically ran out of choices to do the wrong thing instead of doing the right thing. I'm quite impressed with their transit growth, but remember, they waited until there weren't any more options but mass transit. They can't really build any more freeways (seriously.) Atlanta, by contrast, has an absurdly low density rate. If the region keeps growing like it has been, the Day of Reckoning for Atlanta will be here soon enough, but it ain't here yet.

And as for LA, they're in a period of transition, because while HRT and LRT use is up 2.49 and 5.12% respectively, bus use is down 4.18%, and overall ridership has actually dropped 2.53%. I suspect it's a temporary drop, however.

http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2010_q1_ridership_APTA.pdf

(Oh, and I'm not above critiquing DC: our overall ridership is down 10% this year.)

Hey Aaronius, I like your presentation and suspect we agree at about 95%, Professional background perhaps?

Urban Planning lover, but advertising copywriter and brand developer by trade and cynicism.

Maybe so, but if the industry itself cannot decide what the hell it is then it remains a system of things, or cafe of bus toys.

That totally angers me. It's like "BRT" is purposefully made vague in definition just so any bus service can claim BRT status.

The photos with different characterizations of BRT make a good point.  The example that was captioned "This is real BRT" is from Bogota's Trans-Milenio.  I was there last year and found it to be great once it got out of downtown and on it's own right of way.  Downtown, where the beautiful articulated buses intermingled with pedestrians and cars, it was a total disaster.  Walking was faster.

Well, in theory, you wouldn't need BRT downtown since you already have the SkyWay (like, it's already there JTA.) In practice, considering the state of downtown, there won't be any pedestrians to inconvenience anyway!

Is the "track" BRT picture from the O-Bahn busway in Australia?


YUP!

That may be the most insane thing ever thought up. Like, build a train, guys! You have the track!

[dcandeto]

many cities are adding BRT....even NYC is proposing it right through manhattan

That project is less about BRT and more about changing the fact that taking a bus along 34th is slower than walking.  This is not a problem anywhere in Jacksonville.

[thelakelander]

^Except in downtown.  You can walk between Springfield and several downtown destinations faster than taking most of the buses because of the insane loop system they are forced to run.