Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The BRT line in minneapolis will go down the middle of the freeway with extra lanes being built just for the bus, and the bridges that cross over 35w have elevators that bring people down to the middle of the freeway where the stations are. so much money being spent for an express bus lane that will need to be repaired from lakeville to downtown minneapolis every year, thats a lot of pot holes.
Being a railfan, I'm not too keen on the idea (LOL). I guess the advantage touted is the bus can exit the lane at the end and use the local streets to get to the final destinations. But it would seem more susceptible to snow and rain problems. On high-ridership corridors it would take too many buses to do the job. But one idea I do favor is traffic light pre-emption for buses.
The South Dade Busway in Miami is the longest in the nation at 20 miles in length. It connect at the southernmost terminal of the Metrorail system in Kendall and continous southward until it reaches the city of Homestead, FL. which is the last city before you enter the Florida Keys. It is one of the most sucessful systems in the nation and has grade seperated dedicated lanes and yes it does have traffic light pre-emption for buses.
There are plans to replace the busway eventually and extend Metrorail all the way to Homestead in the future.
Other cities in the US with BRT include LA, Pittsburgh and DC.
NJ Transit has been experimenting with BRT. They operate the "Go Bus" in Newark which has limited stops and traffic signal priority. It operates on city streets and not a separated busway though.
lol @ brt and street cars/trollies. playing catch up to the rest of the world is not going to be solved by brt.
why the u.s. (excluding the usual cities) doesn't believe in rail i'll never know.
The U.S. needs to more firmly embrace rail, but there is really quite a bit of rail development going on at the moment. Dozens of cities have added light rail in the past 20 years or will in the next 10. BRT is an acceptable alternative for some situations, but it definitely does not move as many people as efficiently and comfortably. And the operating costs are higher, which means that saving money on infrastructure leads to financial hardship later.
yes (silverline) and i f'ing hate it, as do most people in Boston. As soon as you hit a redlight, stop sign, pedestrians or street traffic, the bus loses its rapidness.... And in Boston's case you have to switch from diesel to electric sometimes. It does get you to the airport though.
The US can barely repair it's own existing infrastructure. How in the world is there any expectation of high-tech rail systems here? BRT is a viable solution with relatively low start-up cost. It sure beats the heck out of the national pastime of sitting on our hands and hoping for something better.
Cleveland has it along Euclid Ave from downtown to University Circle, about 5 miles I believe.
I would recommend using it, it's very nice and state of the art.
Five miles? That is barely a test track. How can you say it saves you time when the distance is so short? Perhaps traffic only moves at 20 mph during rush hour so it might save you ten minutes! I think you need a line at least 10 or 20 miles to produce a serious time savings.
Yes but only 1 route. The MTA (NYC) move's at a snail's pace, like how is there only one route so far. Plus it serves somewhere that already has subway access I believe. Smh.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.