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.
But if this is the case, why could BRT with stretch buses do the job?
Before the Green Line there were already stretch buses running on the route every five minutes during rush hour and they couldn't handle the volume. The original justification to build this line was to increase capacity that was already running at 100%. The line runs three car trains every five minutes during rush hour and they are full. You can't move that many people with buses. Beyond that, there is a rail bias in commuter decisions. There are tons of people who will take the train who won't take the bus. Because the Green Line can capture those commuters it has created a feedback loop where it is attracting tons of development which then should drive ridership higher. Bus lines don't drive neighborhood densification, rail lines do.
Before the Green Line there were already stretch buses running on the route every five minutes during rush hour and they couldn't handle the volume. The original justification to build this line was to increase capacity that was already running at 100%. The line runs three car trains every five minutes during rush hour and they are full. You can't move that many people with buses. Beyond that, there is a rail bias in commuter decisions. There are tons of people who will take the train who won't take the bus. Because the Green Line can capture those commuters it has created a feedback loop where it is attracting tons of development which then should drive ridership higher. Bus lines don't drive neighborhood densification, rail lines do.
My question was, in part, rhetorical because we have a similar situation in Cleveland. My longstanding regret is when Cleveland officials fumbled the ball in the early 1990s when the new, progressive RTA CEO was pushing for a subway and/or light rail down Cleveland's core Euclid Ave between Downtown and University Circle, which are 2 of the top 4 employment hubs in the entire state: hence the project's title: Dual Hub. And the beauty of Dual Hub, even if it were LRT and on the surface down the center of Euclid most of the route, it would connect to the main Rapid Transit system through a subway and preexisting tunnel connection to Tower City downtown, and some form of grade-separated connection at University Circle. Unlike the Minnesota Green Line, Dual Hub is shorter and potentially denser...
... BRT advocates (many of whom are anti-rail) like to tout the "billions of dollars" BRT has attracted to the corridor. I say bunk for 2 reasons. First, the corridor had already bottomed out and was repurposing itself around the time BRT was being built. Secondly as you alluded to, and we transit folks all know, rail transit attracts many more people and higher density growth in its path than do buses -- and although, yes, RTA's Health Line BRT is a bit faster and easier to use than the buses it replaced -- it's still a bus and NOT rapid transit. The name is a bastardization of what true rapid transit was meant to be....
... again, as I noted several posts up, I sincerely hope that someday Cleveland officials will (finally) come to their senses and convert the Health Line to LRT -- it's doable and would be more efficient, create more and denser residential and commercial growth and enhance the entire rail system as it would tie into it.
I don’t agree that St. Louis is behind Cleveland in transit. I think the two are about equal. As far as which Midwestern city has the worst transportation, Id put Detroit as number 1. For such a big city they have no rail transit whatsoever.
My question was, in part, rhetorical because we have a similar situation in Cleveland. My longstanding regret is when Cleveland officials fumbled the ball in the early 1990s when the new, progressive RTA CEO was pushing for a subway and/or light rail down Cleveland's core Euclid Ave between Downtown and University Circle, which are 2 of the top 4 employment hubs in the entire state: hence the project's title: Dual Hub. And the beauty of Dual Hub, even if it were LRT and on the surface down the center of Euclid most of the route, it would connect to the main Rapid Transit system through a subway and preexisting tunnel connection to Tower City downtown, and some form of grade-separated connection at University Circle. Unlike the Minnesota Green Line, Dual Hub is shorter and potentially denser...
... BRT advocates (many of whom are anti-rail) like to tout the "billions of dollars" BRT has attracted to the corridor. I say bunk for 2 reasons. First, the corridor had already bottomed out and was repurposing itself around the time BRT was being built. Secondly as you alluded to, and we transit folks all know, rail transit attracts many more people and higher density growth in its path than do buses -- and although, yes, RTA's Health Line BRT is a bit faster and easier to use than the buses it replaced -- it's still a bus and NOT rapid transit. The name is a bastardization of what true rapid transit was meant to be....
... again, as I noted several posts up, I sincerely hope that someday Cleveland officials will (finally) come to their senses and convert the Health Line to LRT -- it's doable and would be more efficient, create more and denser residential and commercial growth and enhance the entire rail system as it would tie into it.
Pittsburgh has true BRT I would bet the Busways are probably as good as most Trains even something like the Orange Line in Boston (barring capacity limitations which aren’t really an issue in Pitt)
But other than that I’d agree.
But every major bus route should look like the Health Line. That’s the biggest issue with US Transit systems is the fact Busses which are universally the Workhorse of transit that reach every corner of their cities (even in Chicago) are basically neglected
I don’t agree that St. Louis is behind Cleveland in transit. I think the two are about equal. As far as which Midwestern city has the worst transportation, Id put Detroit as number 1. For such a big city they have no rail transit whatsoever.
You don't think Ford and GM have anything to do with that, do you?....
Pittsburgh has true BRT I would bet the Busways are probably as good as most Trains even something like the Orange Line in Boston (barring capacity limitations which aren’t really an issue in Pitt)
But other than that I’d agree.
But every major bus route should look like the Health Line. That’s the biggest issue with US Transit systems is the fact Busses which are universally the Workhorse of transit that reach every corner of their cities (even in Chicago) are basically neglected
For sure. Personally I like the health line. Would it be better as rail? I guess. But I do think it meets the need. Something being a bus isnt bad. We need to work to overcome this bus stigma I guess.
That being said I do think euclid of any street in Cleveland would be best fit for a permanent rail presence. University circle and downtown are not going anywhere and are huge economic engines for the state. It would be a pretty safe bet, and much more useful than, say, the green line.
For sure. Personally I like the health line. Would it be better as rail? I guess. But I do think it meets the need. Something being a bus isnt bad. We need to work to overcome this bus stigma I guess.
That being said I do think euclid of any street in Cleveland would be best fit for a permanent rail presence. University circle and downtown are not going anywhere and are huge economic engines for the state. It would be a pretty safe bet, and much more useful than, say, the green line.
The Health line currently is better than the E Line it any of those 2.5 mile botique streetcars popping up around.
I also think generally the whole “Rail has higher capacity” is largely a technicality (especially with light vs heavy rail) because you need to be getting nearly order of magnitude more riders for capacity to be an issue
The city has an extensive bus system which is now reliable, clean, safe, and efficient. It has a fleet of over 300 buses. Also it has a daily ridership of almost 92,000 people.
DDOT primarily serves the city of Detroit, but offers service connecting to neighboring cities including Dearborn, Hamtramck, Highland Park, Harper Woods, Livonia, Redford Township, River Rouge and Southfield.
DDOT has 48 fixed bus routes including eleven 24-hour routes and six express routes, connecting neighborhoods across the city to major job centers in Downtown and Midtown.
It has a bus route which connects the airport to Downtown and a route which goes to Windsor, Canada.
Then there is SMART which feeds buses throughout Oakland County with 49 routes with a fleet of almost 150 buses.
So the region does have mass transit.
Now voters will be voting in 2020 for a metro system connecting Ann Arbor to Detroit and an extension of the Q line going down the Woodward Corridor passing through hot spots such as Ferndale, Royal Oak, Birmingham, and Pontiac.
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.
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.
