Do you have BRT or LRT in your city? Let us know your experience with it! Thanks for all of the support! If you are not already subscribed, considering doing so 😊
This type of comment is typically "pinned" to the top to act as an introduction to the comments section. Funny to find one buried 20 some comments down the page lol
The capacity of a BRT unit is very limited compared to an LRT unit. Therefore you need 3-5 times more drivers. The lifespan of a BRT unit is some 10-15 years with very high maintenance and energy costs compared to an LRT unit with a lifespan of 40 years.
@TracyC-nj2tq You mean for a regular bus line no extra construction is needed except for shelters. For a BRT system you need special buslanes, adaptation for 100% priority at traffic lights, special sliplanes or connections at intersections, shelters, preboard ticketing systems, etc. These are not free at all.
You mentioned the LRT, Trax, in Salt Lake. We also have 2 BRT systems in Utah. One in Ogden, the OGX, and one in Provo/Orem, the UVX. I haven't been on OGX yet, but UVX, while not gold standard is really good. It connects from the Frontrunner regional rail in Orem to Utah Valley University then on to BYU in Provo and downtown Provo before connecting back to the Frontrunner station in Provo. As of right now it's free fare, it has platforms for boarding, and it has some but not all with dedicated bus only lanes.
Ah I forgot about the BRT is Salt Lake! We didn't make it on our last trip, but we are talking about heading back! Thanks for the reminder and the comment 👍Curious to look more into it! -Louis
The San Diego Trolley is indeed light rail/tram (despite the name - ugh!) and currently uses Siemens S70s - low floor cars. I just got back from a trip to Amsterdam and Berlin and was reminded how much more accessible and how much more capacity exists when you're not navigating bogeys intruding into the interior of the car!
Light Rail is better but we don't have a good transit culture in the US. I think implementing BRT is easier and cheaper. It could be used as a stepping stone to get more people on transit and change some minds. Then longer term we can switch over to light rail. All that being said, light rail is fantastic.
Thanks for the comment! While I do think implementing BRT might be easier, I don't have a lot of faith in it being converted over time unfortunately. I could be wrong though! Appreciate you watching and leaving a comment 🙌 -Louis
@@TransitTangents It took Holland 50 years to get to where it is now so I'm optimistic for the future even if I don't get to enjoy it myself. Thanks for making this content and I'm glad to see that other parts of America are starting to think about these problems. One more thing, I could be wrong but I think self driving buses will be huge going forward. They could make it financially feasible to keep buses safer and cleaner by freeing up the driver to keep order during the ride. This is probably overly optimistic but a man can dream🙏 Anyway, keep up the good work!
But the culture is changing as the older population ages out and younger population see public transit much more favorably. I see it happening in Los Angeles. As the LA Metro continues to grow so does the the mindset of more people to decide to use the Metro. The opening of the Regional Connector in June 2023 was a game changer for Los Angeles. I'm in my 50s and started taking the metro again in June of 2023. I hadn't taken it since March 2020 due to Covid. What I'm seeing now are a lot more teens taking it with their friends along with their skateboards and bikes. That's a very good sign going forward. When I was a teen, I couldn't wait to get my driver's license. These kids don't seem in such a hurry to get their driver's license now. If this is happening in LA, it can definitely happen in other cities, but the public transit infrastructure has to be there for these teens to use on a regular basis as part of their normal routine.
@@me12722Los Angeles is at year 34 with the expansion of their Metro system. In another 16 years, they'll be second to only NYC in terms of public transit rail infrastructure
@@mrxman581 🙏 that would be amazing. Los Angeles and San Diego are beautiful places with great weather that are currently designed to keep you from being outside 😂.
Being a life long resident of the city of angels, I have a different take on the issue local density around metro stations to predict positive ridership numbers. LA is in a unique situation because of how spread out it is, and the historical dependence on the automobile and subsequent comprehensive freeway infrastructure to support it. But, at the same time it's the city that's been building the most public transit rail infrastructure in the USA and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future since two of the funding sales tax measures don't have a sunset date. My point is that LA is approaching the issue of getting increasing number of meter riders not only in the traditional way you discuss with higher local density, but also by convincing car drivers that it's not a matter of giving up your car, because in LA you will always need a personal vehicle at some point, it's about driving your car a lot less. Using the personal vehicle to help bridge the FLM gap makes a lot of sense for LA County that is 4700 square miles and LA Metro is responsible for servicing it. Imagine if within the next 10 years people regularly only drive their cars for 30 minutes a day? And not 2-3 hours a day as it stands now. I've been doing this regularly for almost a year. The closest metro station is a 15 minute car ride from my house. I drive to the LA Metro parking structure, pay $2 (for all day), and procede to use the LA Metro for the rest of the day. At the end, I come back to my car and drive 15 minutes back to my home. In about 8 years, I'll have a much closer Metro station which I could easily get to in 5-10 minutes on the bus. I will need my car even less. The unexpected side effect is that my car insurance has gone way down because now I'm on a plan that is based on the miles I drive. I'm a huge supporter of public transit, but will never give up my car as long as I want or need to drive. I'm planning a couple of road trips to Vegas and Napa. Much more enjoyable to use my car than a rental. Besides I enjoy driving. I know I must sound like contradiction, but I'm a product of my city, Los Angeles has always been a contradiction in many ways.
@@grahamturner2640yes colfax is. It used to be called the longest wickedest street in the US. It runs through Denver urban neighborhoods so it will be a great candidate for this.
Another big reason for cost being so high in the US (and English speaking countries in general) you guys didn't mention is in-house expertise to design and build the projects within transit agencies being replaced and outsourced to private companies as well as a suboptimal-bidding system for project contracts that favours the lowest bidder no matter what (which then inveatibly leads to them failing to deliver the project on budget and on time). There also aren't any consequences if contractors don't meet deadlines so they are actually incentivized to delay project in order to extract more profits (this is also why including a huge amount of "contingency" money to contracts is a bad idea because the contractor will definitely use it up), even road construction has become several times more expensive in the last decade, before the 2000s construction costs were on par or at least pretty comparable to other countries.
Thankfully Bogotá is getting a metro which will hopefully solve the problem of crowding on the TransMilenio (it's still around half a decade away though) also I would say the main distinction between light rail and metro is not whether it's underground but rather the capacity; light rail uses smaller (shorter) trains and the frequency is lower than a metro which uses longer trains which come at a very high frequency
Atlanta has really tried to shift planning from LRT to BRT. Here is the problem with BRT (at least here). I call it bus creep. The BRT starts little by little turning into just regular bus service. First they start chipping away at the percentage with it's own ROW. It's 95% then it's 80%. Next they decide to forego signal priority due to expense. Eventually you aren't saving that much time vs a car or regular bus. Flexibility isn't always a good thing. With a LRT system, you are committed to the design since you have to lay track. That leaves less room for political maneuvering, but it plagues BRT since flexibility allows negative changes as the project progresses even late into the planning and construction. Also, BRT is MORE expensive long term because the maintenance is higher when you are having to replace tires and service all the parts on the bus motors. BRT done correctly "should" be every bit as good in theory, but very rarely does it turn out that way.
Yeah Gwinnett county is trying to do a 17B yes B! Project for BRT. I hate to do it but I’m gonna vote no because that’s insane for buses and we need light rail. But the other residents here narrowly voted down LRT UGH. I need to leave this country
ART despite the name is actually not driverless. The "autonomous" part means it automatically aligns to non-rail guideways, which are either optical markings or magnetic embeddings in the road. A driver still needs to drive it, but the automatic alignment makes it similar to driving a train, because otherwise driving a 3 part bendy bus is unwieldy.
Brisbane has a gold standard BRT system. Two lines, fully grade separated, with turn-up-and-go battery-powered articulated buses about to enter service and plans to extend.
In my country (Brazil), both Light Rail and BRT are common in several cities. Rio de Janeiro's Light Rail system is impressive and efficient and connects with the metropolitan train, subway lines and BRT lines. In the city where I live (Belo Horizonte) we have BRT with exclusive roads crossing the entire city. Very efficient. If you want to see it, it's called "Move Belo Horizonte".
I used to ride the 801 regularly in Austin and when I was still learning the buses, I really liked the simplicity of the route that basically went in a roughly straight line across town and came every 15ish minutes. I also really appreciated the next bus countdown clocks and the little stations that they built for the two "BRT" lines. It really felt like a step forward from the occasionally circuitous city bus routes that often had nothing but a sign on the side of the road for their stops. It's hard to call it actual BRT but it was a step forward. It really felt like the bare minimum they should have been doing for regular buses. I also remember seeing the big articulated buses for the first time and thinking they were cool as hell, and they made me want to ride them so I gave it a shot. Having cool vehicles and nice stations does tend to work!
I personally believe ART is the future of **BRT** rather than LRT. I believe due to the ability of it being very low for cost and providing a lot of functions that BRT does, it might and possibly will be what cities go to for future **BRT** projects. This being said, I believe the current meta will stay for LRT and that ART will not be a feasible replacement for that.
I like the calm way you discuss the different topics. As for this Video, the answer is always, all legit modes are good if they're up to the task. BRT can be great in some cases but as the main transport mean it's not a good idea. In Bogotá the need for a system and the lack of funds is the reason for the system. It's understandable but, as you said yourself, it cannot work well as a city of 8 million cannot count on BRT fir the main transit system. Luckily they are now constructing the first metro (subway) line. In Guangzhou the system is in addition to a metro system, rail, regular buses and even water transit service as with 18M people you must have everything. In general, if you're building special grade separated routs, big stations and more than it's not cheap and you should build light rail. I'm from Barcelona that has it all (metro/urban buses, trams, suburban/regional/intercity and high speed rail, funiculars and even cable car and gondolas - but those are of a touristic nature and not part of the regular system) but the relatively cheap change they made in the bus system changed a lot to the point that mostly use buses. There are no big stations (it's a basic stop with a small covered area and a next buses sign but where not possible it can be only a pole, nut this is rare), the new network was a change of many of the existing routs turning them into a, mostly, grid with horizontal, vertical and 3 diagonal lines that intersect in clearly marked change points. They also added much more bus lanes, but the very basic ones by taking a lane and turning it into a bus lane. Stops are )and have been before either on the edge of the lane itself or on an island extending from the sidewalk when there is parking allowed bringing the edge to the lane so buses can sop adjacent to the sidewalk. Stops are not exclusively for those buses. There are specific location with priority if needed but in general, the lane helps the bus be faster. As for validation, you do it on the bus but you can use the back door as well and there are multiple validation devices along the bus. Lately the did another important step, they replaced all information displays, that were different on different buses and depended on the model, to a single unified clear system that were installed on all buses (older and newer, and on all the urban buses). The most important thing, which many of your systems lack, is high frequency that can get up to a bus every 3 -5 minutes on busy lines during rush hour. Light rail is good for higher loads but in the US you use it as a type of suburban regional service and keep insisting on the star format (which is the one used on regional rail). As I said, a place like Bogotá did the best it could with the funds they had but the US is suppose to be the reaches country in the world so a city like Dallas cannot be praised for building a very basic and inadequacy system for a city of this size that results a ridership on the whole system (including buses, light rail, 1 commuter rail and 1 streetcar) that is almost the same as one 7 mile light rail line in the country I'm originally from. I understand the political problems you have but, just like the rail journey youtubers, you cannot judge a rail line in a small third world country the same as you would one in a modern country like the modern location in places like Canada, the US, in Europe, Asia, Australia etc. As for why the costs in the US are so high, you've mentioned a few things that do not explain it. I've heard more than a few reasons that are the main cause but lately i watched an interesting video from the High Speed Rail Alliance with Paul Lewis with DB E.C.O. North America that has a B.S. in Civil Engineering and M.S. in Transportation that goes over the main reasons for the high costs and what can be done to change this. th-cam.com/video/WaAPl-E1_Bs/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for the comment! The vast majority comes from a Stock Video subscription we have. We are slowly building up our own library of content though! Anything from Salt Lake City, New Orleans, or Austin is likely our own (Although we do still rely on some stock footage in these places). It still takes a lot of work to track down all of that footage though haha! -Louis
Honestly, when I see a BRT I get the impression that its a cheaper version of a rail system. Which it is. Rail systems have the benefits of creating pockets of TOD around stations. BRT dont really do that. Obviously LRT is better but it costs more and cities are less likely to have that cash.
DART Light Rail as a system.....is great. But in terms of getting places, it's rough. Yes you can get to DFW Airport or American Airlines Center on light rail but for many other stations, it may get you to the neighborhood but you still need that last mile. Sound Transit (Seattle regional transit authority) has the problem of running with traffic in South Seattle (besides Mount Baker Station) but you do have multiple bus routes that do connect stations and the communities within. Mind you, King County Metro does have problems with transit going East-West in South Seattle and south King County itself. But I will say that King County Metro has done an awesome job with the RapidRide lines (as someone who rides on one daily to/from work).
We definitely want to do that soon! Shoot us an email or fill out the contact form on our website! Both links are on the main page of the channel here.
Have there been many places where bus rapid transit was later converted to light rail. Alternatively, are there any US cities where BRT is only used during rush hour? I think of Austin, and if the MetroRapid were given the ability to shut down one lane of Lamar and Burnet during rush hour times, it would make the bus much faster than driving. All people driving would be stuck in more traffic because they lost a lane and if the bus doesn’t have to compete with traffic it makes the bus much faster. Would love to see BRT implemented where light rail was originally supposed to be and maybe eventually converted to light rail.
Nice video We from South Africa Brt Bus Rapid in Johannesburg Rea Yaya not good options bus get loaded full passages stand in bus no way to come out. Where maybe light rail transit as tram is more open for space then Articulated bus. To compare Bi Articulated bus still no enough space than light rail. Some country have them with trolleybus as well, but in Mauritius In Port Louis Metro Express light rail tram good service as length long then bi Articulated bus has.
BRT is just the poor man's LRT. The money should not be a problem in such a rich country like in the US. Te problem is that the people still thinks that car is the ultimate transportation way even in cities. These transportation projects won't be successful without changing the zoning laws in the suburbs. Some transportation corridors should be assigned. The zoning should be changed along those corridors, and allow mixed used walkable neighborhoods. Outside of the corridor the single family homes can stay. The trick is that new development should be allowed only in these corridors. This way the developers will buy those houses and the required density will be reached "soon".
LAX just built its elevated people mover & LA should just follow suit and pass all lights & build elevated light rail throughout the city especially the extra 6 lane roads🚉
I know this goes against the views of many popular TH-cam urbanists (e.g, Adam Something), but Aerial tramways are a very underrated transit mode that deserve a place in the conversation, as they could bring reliable transit into smaller US and Canadian cities. While capacity is a very important metric for transit in dense European/Asian cities, as well as the downtown areas of the largest US cities, most of the US lacks the critical mass to support decent, frequent, reliable rail transit. Even in relatively transit oriented cities like Boston and Washington DC (denser than most of suburbia can aspire to be in the 21st century), subway lines run at less-than-ideal frequencies, and the cars are well below capacity. However, aerial tramways seem to have an unrealized niche, as they tend to be superior to street cars in terms of construction costs, attractiveness, and convenience. The average construction cost of an aerial tramway is about $40-60M USD in developed countries, which is similar in cost to BRT, undercuts the cheapest streetcar projects, and beats LRT by a four-fold in most cases. It also doesn't require the same amount of traffic disruption that might piss off drivers and hold projects back. Also, while the average 12mph/19kph speed of aerial tramways might seem slow, that's actually similar to the average speed of most subway systems when stops are taken into account (beats New York). Also, since gondolas have continuously flowing pods, there is no headway. In other words, regardless of the time of day, there will always be a pod ready to take you where you need to go, so long as lines aren't too long. They're also automated, grade separated, and electrified which is very expensive to achieve in metro/light metro systems (especially in the US), and like trains, they benefit from a conservation of energy, as the pods pull each other forward in a continuous loop. Going off the specifications of La Paz's Mi Teleferico lines, the capacity of these systems is between 2000 and 4000 people per hour per direction on a 2-mile/3.2km line. Crunching the numbers, this essentially translates to 4-8M passengers a year. For this reason, I could easily see it being adopted in small-mid sized cities like Louisville, Savannah, Albany, Halifax, Portland ME, and Indianapolis that can't justify the capacity of a metro, but still aren't adequately served by their city bus lines. Rail transit still has a place for these cities, but it should be used for longer commuter/regional routes, while aerial tramways and sheltered bike corridors funnel people into these stations. The aerial tramway lines should also be short (it's a bike/streetcar replacement), since cross platform transfers are convenient and very easy to design, and this reduces the impact of delays.
You are speaking our language! Lol- Chris and I are big fans of gondolas. Stay tuned for an episode or a few on them. That is why there is a gondola on our logo 😅. Thanks for watching and leaving a thoughtful comment! -Louis
The actual lifetime cost of light rail is much lower than BRT. BRT is predicated on having a cheap labor force to compensate for the smaller vehicles. We don't have that anywhere in North America where there is any demand for higher order modes of transit. There's a reason why BRT was invented in low-cost South American countries and mostly spread in other low-cost countries. BRT just ain't it, for us.
True, but BRTs can serve a different purpose in cities with developed or developing transit rail networks. They can serve as feeder lines to metro rail networks and help to close the FLM gap to metro stations, too.
@@mrxman581 That's the only acceptable use of BRT imo - to boost ridership temporarily on feeder lines that can later be turned into light rail or a light metro line. Unfortunately, in the US our politicians view BRT as just an easy way to degrade transit projects without political backlash. The only reason any BRT is ever built in North America is because light rail is much harder to scop-creep into "affordable construction costs". With American BRT we're effectively just getting scammed out of high quality transit.
Or you could get onto why you need to build up expertise but don't actually want to build up expertise. So instead you argue to justify higher operational costs on a bus because of not wanting to build up expertise. Or you argue speed vs coverage.
You discuss light rail in the USA and don't even mention the largest and busiest light rail system in the USA? Really? Well, since you obviously don't know, it's not in San Diego or Dallas. It's in Los Angeles! It's the best light rail system in the USA and very soon in all of the Americas come 2025 with the extensions of the C, K, A lines and the opening and connection to the LAX People Mover.
Do you have BRT or LRT in your city? Let us know your experience with it!
Thanks for all of the support! If you are not already subscribed, considering doing so 😊
This type of comment is typically "pinned" to the top to act as an introduction to the comments section. Funny to find one buried 20 some comments down the page lol
The capacity of a BRT unit is very limited compared to an LRT unit. Therefore you need 3-5 times more drivers.
The lifespan of a BRT unit is some 10-15 years with very high maintenance and energy costs compared to an LRT unit with a lifespan of 40 years.
Ah the lifespan of a bus vs train was not something we got into, but totally should have mentioned! Thanks for watching and leaving a comment 🙌
BRT. No construction is required for BRT. Just put the buses out on the road and go!
@TracyC-nj2tq
You mean for a regular bus line no extra construction is needed except for shelters. For a BRT system you need special buslanes, adaptation for 100% priority at traffic lights, special sliplanes or connections at intersections, shelters, preboard ticketing systems, etc. These are not free at all.
You mentioned the LRT, Trax, in Salt Lake. We also have 2 BRT systems in Utah. One in Ogden, the OGX, and one in Provo/Orem, the UVX. I haven't been on OGX yet, but UVX, while not gold standard is really good. It connects from the Frontrunner regional rail in Orem to Utah Valley University then on to BYU in Provo and downtown Provo before connecting back to the Frontrunner station in Provo. As of right now it's free fare, it has platforms for boarding, and it has some but not all with dedicated bus only lanes.
Ah I forgot about the BRT is Salt Lake! We didn't make it on our last trip, but we are talking about heading back! Thanks for the reminder and the comment 👍Curious to look more into it! -Louis
The San Diego Trolley is indeed light rail/tram (despite the name - ugh!) and currently uses Siemens S70s - low floor cars. I just got back from a trip to Amsterdam and Berlin and was reminded how much more accessible and how much more capacity exists when you're not navigating bogeys intruding into the interior of the car!
The definition of light rail is so blurry lol. Hope you had a nice trip! Thanks for watching and leaving a comment 🙌
I hate calling it the "trolley" too
Compared to a high boarding platform metro? I would certainly hope so…
Light Rail is better but we don't have a good transit culture in the US.
I think implementing BRT is easier and cheaper. It could be used as a stepping stone to get more people on transit and change some minds. Then longer term we can switch over to light rail.
All that being said, light rail is fantastic.
Thanks for the comment! While I do think implementing BRT might be easier, I don't have a lot of faith in it being converted over time unfortunately. I could be wrong though! Appreciate you watching and leaving a comment 🙌 -Louis
@@TransitTangents It took Holland 50 years to get to where it is now so I'm optimistic for the future even if I don't get to enjoy it myself.
Thanks for making this content and I'm glad to see that other parts of America are starting to think about these problems.
One more thing, I could be wrong but I think self driving buses will be huge going forward. They could make it financially feasible to keep buses safer and cleaner by freeing up the driver to keep order during the ride. This is probably overly optimistic but a man can dream🙏
Anyway, keep up the good work!
But the culture is changing as the older population ages out and younger population see public transit much more favorably. I see it happening in Los Angeles. As the LA Metro continues to grow so does the the mindset of more people to decide to use the Metro. The opening of the Regional Connector in June 2023 was a game changer for Los Angeles.
I'm in my 50s and started taking the metro again in June of 2023. I hadn't taken it since March 2020 due to Covid. What I'm seeing now are a lot more teens taking it with their friends along with their skateboards and bikes. That's a very good sign going forward.
When I was a teen, I couldn't wait to get my driver's license. These kids don't seem in such a hurry to get their driver's license now. If this is happening in LA, it can definitely happen in other cities, but the public transit infrastructure has to be there for these teens to use on a regular basis as part of their normal routine.
@@me12722Los Angeles is at year 34 with the expansion of their Metro system. In another 16 years, they'll be second to only NYC in terms of public transit rail infrastructure
@@mrxman581 🙏 that would be amazing.
Los Angeles and San Diego are beautiful places with great weather that are currently designed to keep you from being outside 😂.
Being a life long resident of the city of angels, I have a different take on the issue local density around metro stations to predict positive ridership numbers.
LA is in a unique situation because of how spread out it is, and the historical dependence on the automobile and subsequent comprehensive freeway infrastructure to support it. But, at the same time it's the city that's been building the most public transit rail infrastructure in the USA and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future since two of the funding sales tax measures don't have a sunset date.
My point is that LA is approaching the issue of getting increasing number of meter riders not only in the traditional way you discuss with higher local density, but also by convincing car drivers that it's not a matter of giving up your car, because in LA you will always need a personal vehicle at some point, it's about driving your car a lot less.
Using the personal vehicle to help bridge the FLM gap makes a lot of sense for LA County that is 4700 square miles and LA Metro is responsible for servicing it.
Imagine if within the next 10 years people regularly only drive their cars for 30 minutes a day? And not 2-3 hours a day as it stands now.
I've been doing this regularly for almost a year. The closest metro station is a 15 minute car ride from my house. I drive to the LA Metro parking structure, pay $2 (for all day), and procede to use the LA Metro for the rest of the day. At the end, I come back to my car and drive 15 minutes back to my home. In about 8 years, I'll have a much closer Metro station which I could easily get to in 5-10 minutes on the bus. I will need my car even less.
The unexpected side effect is that my car insurance has gone way down because now I'm on a plan that is based on the miles I drive.
I'm a huge supporter of public transit, but will never give up my car as long as I want or need to drive. I'm planning a couple of road trips to Vegas and Napa. Much more enjoyable to use my car than a rental. Besides I enjoy driving.
I know I must sound like contradiction, but I'm a product of my city, Los Angeles has always been a contradiction in many ways.
Denver co is getting brt along colfax which is the busiest corridor in Denver. It will pair nicely with the lrt system.
Isn’t Colfax also the longest continuous road in Denver?
@@grahamturner2640yes colfax is. It used to be called the longest wickedest street in the US. It runs through Denver urban neighborhoods so it will be a great candidate for this.
Another big reason for cost being so high in the US (and English speaking countries in general) you guys didn't mention is in-house expertise to design and build the projects within transit agencies being replaced and outsourced to private companies as well as a suboptimal-bidding system for project contracts that favours the lowest bidder no matter what (which then inveatibly leads to them failing to deliver the project on budget and on time).
There also aren't any consequences if contractors don't meet deadlines so they are actually incentivized to delay project in order to extract more profits (this is also why including a huge amount of "contingency" money to contracts is a bad idea because the contractor will definitely use it up), even road construction has become several times more expensive in the last decade, before the 2000s construction costs were on par or at least pretty comparable to other countries.
Thankfully Bogotá is getting a metro which will hopefully solve the problem of crowding on the TransMilenio (it's still around half a decade away though)
also I would say the main distinction between light rail and metro is not whether it's underground but rather the capacity; light rail uses smaller (shorter) trains and the frequency is lower than a metro which uses longer trains which come at a very high frequency
Atlanta has really tried to shift planning from LRT to BRT. Here is the problem with BRT (at least here). I call it bus creep. The BRT starts little by little turning into just regular bus service. First they start chipping away at the percentage with it's own ROW. It's 95% then it's 80%. Next they decide to forego signal priority due to expense. Eventually you aren't saving that much time vs a car or regular bus. Flexibility isn't always a good thing. With a LRT system, you are committed to the design since you have to lay track. That leaves less room for political maneuvering, but it plagues BRT since flexibility allows negative changes as the project progresses even late into the planning and construction. Also, BRT is MORE expensive long term because the maintenance is higher when you are having to replace tires and service all the parts on the bus motors. BRT done correctly "should" be every bit as good in theory, but very rarely does it turn out that way.
Yeah Gwinnett county is trying to do a 17B yes B! Project for BRT. I hate to do it but I’m gonna vote no because that’s insane for buses and we need light rail. But the other residents here narrowly voted down LRT UGH. I need to leave this country
I love the phrase bus creep and agree whole heartedly. We're hoping to do an Atlanta focused episode at some point! Thanks for watching. -Louis
Depends. Sometimes it’s one or the other or even both.
ART despite the name is actually not driverless. The "autonomous" part means it automatically aligns to non-rail guideways, which are either optical markings or magnetic embeddings in the road. A driver still needs to drive it, but the automatic alignment makes it similar to driving a train, because otherwise driving a 3 part bendy bus is unwieldy.
I love your channel guys, keep it up. Greets from Guadalajara.
For having less than 1000 subscribers you have insane production quality
In my city we have both, 2 BRT lines and 4 light rail ones, u should check them out!
Thanks for the comments! We appreciate the support 😊. We'll look into the BRT and Light Rail in Guadalajara! -Louis
Denver has both Commuter Rail (It is, in reality, a regional rail system) and light rail. The line to the airport is commuter rail not light rail.
Brisbane has a gold standard BRT system. Two lines, fully grade separated, with turn-up-and-go battery-powered articulated buses about to enter service and plans to extend.
In my country (Brazil), both Light Rail and BRT are common in several cities. Rio de Janeiro's Light Rail system is impressive and efficient and connects with the metropolitan train, subway lines and BRT lines. In the city where I live (Belo Horizonte) we have BRT with exclusive roads crossing the entire city. Very efficient. If you want to see it, it's called "Move Belo Horizonte".
Great video!
I used to ride the 801 regularly in Austin and when I was still learning the buses, I really liked the simplicity of the route that basically went in a roughly straight line across town and came every 15ish minutes. I also really appreciated the next bus countdown clocks and the little stations that they built for the two "BRT" lines. It really felt like a step forward from the occasionally circuitous city bus routes that often had nothing but a sign on the side of the road for their stops. It's hard to call it actual BRT but it was a step forward. It really felt like the bare minimum they should have been doing for regular buses. I also remember seeing the big articulated buses for the first time and thinking they were cool as hell, and they made me want to ride them so I gave it a shot. Having cool vehicles and nice stations does tend to work!
I personally believe ART is the future of **BRT** rather than LRT. I believe due to the ability of it being very low for cost and providing a lot of functions that BRT does, it might and possibly will be what cities go to for future **BRT** projects. This being said, I believe the current meta will stay for LRT and that ART will not be a feasible replacement for that.
Awesome episode fellas
Thanks for watching!
I like the calm way you discuss the different topics.
As for this Video, the answer is always, all legit modes are good if they're up to the task.
BRT can be great in some cases but as the main transport mean it's not a good idea. In Bogotá the need for a system and the lack of funds is the reason for the system. It's understandable but, as you said yourself, it cannot work well as a city of 8 million cannot count on BRT fir the main transit system. Luckily they are now constructing the first metro (subway) line.
In Guangzhou the system is in addition to a metro system, rail, regular buses and even water transit service as with 18M people you must have everything.
In general, if you're building special grade separated routs, big stations and more than it's not cheap and you should build light rail.
I'm from Barcelona that has it all (metro/urban buses, trams, suburban/regional/intercity and high speed rail, funiculars and even cable car and gondolas - but those are of a touristic nature and not part of the regular system) but the relatively cheap change they made in the bus system changed a lot to the point that mostly use buses.
There are no big stations (it's a basic stop with a small covered area and a next buses sign but where not possible it can be only a pole, nut this is rare), the new network was a change of many of the existing routs turning them into a, mostly, grid with horizontal, vertical and 3 diagonal lines that intersect in clearly marked change points. They also added much more bus lanes, but the very basic ones by taking a lane and turning it into a bus lane. Stops are )and have been before either on the edge of the lane itself or on an island extending from the sidewalk when there is parking allowed bringing the edge to the lane so buses can sop adjacent to the sidewalk. Stops are not exclusively for those buses. There are specific location with priority if needed but in general, the lane helps the bus be faster. As for validation, you do it on the bus but you can use the back door as well and there are multiple validation devices along the bus. Lately the did another important step, they replaced all information displays, that were different on different buses and depended on the model, to a single unified clear system that were installed on all buses (older and newer, and on all the urban buses). The most important thing, which many of your systems lack, is high frequency that can get up to a bus every 3 -5 minutes on busy lines during rush hour.
Light rail is good for higher loads but in the US you use it as a type of suburban regional service and keep insisting on the star format (which is the one used on regional rail).
As I said, a place like Bogotá did the best it could with the funds they had but the US is suppose to be the reaches country in the world so a city like Dallas cannot be praised for building a very basic and inadequacy system for a city of this size that results a ridership on the whole system (including buses, light rail, 1 commuter rail and 1 streetcar) that is almost the same as one 7 mile light rail line in the country I'm originally from. I understand the political problems you have but, just like the rail journey youtubers, you cannot judge a rail line in a small third world country the same as you would one in a modern country like the modern location in places like Canada, the US, in Europe, Asia, Australia etc.
As for why the costs in the US are so high, you've mentioned a few things that do not explain it. I've heard more than a few reasons that are the main cause but lately i watched an interesting video from the High Speed Rail Alliance with Paul Lewis with DB E.C.O. North America that has a B.S. in Civil Engineering and M.S. in Transportation that goes over the main reasons for the high costs and what can be done to change this.
th-cam.com/video/WaAPl-E1_Bs/w-d-xo.html
You guys got awesome footage of a lot of transit systems around the world, may I ask where you were able to find such cool shots?
Thanks for the comment! The vast majority comes from a Stock Video subscription we have. We are slowly building up our own library of content though! Anything from Salt Lake City, New Orleans, or Austin is likely our own (Although we do still rely on some stock footage in these places). It still takes a lot of work to track down all of that footage though haha! -Louis
Honestly, when I see a BRT I get the impression that its a cheaper version of a rail system. Which it is. Rail systems have the benefits of creating pockets of TOD around stations. BRT dont really do that. Obviously LRT is better but it costs more and cities are less likely to have that cash.
Eh it's goodish at around 300k to 500k metro pop it has Diminishing returns after that if solely relied upon
DART Light Rail as a system.....is great. But in terms of getting places, it's rough. Yes you can get to DFW Airport or American Airlines Center on light rail but for many other stations, it may get you to the neighborhood but you still need that last mile. Sound Transit (Seattle regional transit authority) has the problem of running with traffic in South Seattle (besides Mount Baker Station) but you do have multiple bus routes that do connect stations and the communities within. Mind you, King County Metro does have problems with transit going East-West in South Seattle and south King County itself. But I will say that King County Metro has done an awesome job with the RapidRide lines (as someone who rides on one daily to/from work).
How compare Interurbans to commuter rail and regional rail?
If y’all need a host for exploring DART…I’m here!
We definitely want to do that soon! Shoot us an email or fill out the contact form on our website! Both links are on the main page of the channel here.
Have there been many places where bus rapid transit was later converted to light rail. Alternatively, are there any US cities where BRT is only used during rush hour? I think of Austin, and if the MetroRapid were given the ability to shut down one lane of Lamar and Burnet during rush hour times, it would make the bus much faster than driving. All people driving would be stuck in more traffic because they lost a lane and if the bus doesn’t have to compete with traffic it makes the bus much faster. Would love to see BRT implemented where light rail was originally supposed to be and maybe eventually converted to light rail.
Never spoke about Curitiba
Nice video We from South Africa Brt Bus Rapid in Johannesburg Rea Yaya not good options bus get loaded full passages stand in bus no way to come out. Where maybe light rail transit as tram is more open for space then Articulated bus. To compare Bi Articulated bus still no enough space than light rail. Some country have them with trolleybus as well, but in Mauritius In Port Louis Metro Express light rail tram good service as length long then bi Articulated bus has.
BRT is just the poor man's LRT. The money should not be a problem in such a rich country like in the US.
Te problem is that the people still thinks that car is the ultimate transportation way even in cities.
These transportation projects won't be successful without changing the zoning laws in the suburbs.
Some transportation corridors should be assigned. The zoning should be changed along those corridors, and allow mixed used walkable neighborhoods. Outside of the corridor the single family homes can stay.
The trick is that new development should be allowed only in these corridors. This way the developers will buy those houses and the required density will be reached "soon".
No, the issue is reduced expertise.
LAX just built its elevated people mover & LA should just follow suit and pass all lights & build elevated light rail throughout the city especially the extra 6 lane roads🚉
I know this goes against the views of many popular TH-cam urbanists (e.g, Adam Something), but Aerial tramways are a very underrated transit mode that deserve a place in the conversation, as they could bring reliable transit into smaller US and Canadian cities.
While capacity is a very important metric for transit in dense European/Asian cities, as well as the downtown areas of the largest US cities, most of the US lacks the critical mass to support decent, frequent, reliable rail transit. Even in relatively transit oriented cities like Boston and Washington DC (denser than most of suburbia can aspire to be in the 21st century), subway lines run at less-than-ideal frequencies, and the cars are well below capacity. However, aerial tramways seem to have an unrealized niche, as they tend to be superior to street cars in terms of construction costs, attractiveness, and convenience.
The average construction cost of an aerial tramway is about $40-60M USD in developed countries, which is similar in cost to BRT, undercuts the cheapest streetcar projects, and beats LRT by a four-fold in most cases. It also doesn't require the same amount of traffic disruption that might piss off drivers and hold projects back.
Also, while the average 12mph/19kph speed of aerial tramways might seem slow, that's actually similar to the average speed of most subway systems when stops are taken into account (beats New York). Also, since gondolas have continuously flowing pods, there is no headway. In other words, regardless of the time of day, there will always be a pod ready to take you where you need to go, so long as lines aren't too long. They're also automated, grade separated, and electrified which is very expensive to achieve in metro/light metro systems (especially in the US), and like trains, they benefit from a conservation of energy, as the pods pull each other forward in a continuous loop.
Going off the specifications of La Paz's Mi Teleferico lines, the capacity of these systems is between 2000 and 4000 people per hour per direction on a 2-mile/3.2km line.
Crunching the numbers, this essentially translates to 4-8M passengers a year. For this reason, I could easily see it being adopted in small-mid sized cities like Louisville, Savannah, Albany, Halifax, Portland ME, and Indianapolis that can't justify the capacity of a metro, but still aren't adequately served by their city bus lines.
Rail transit still has a place for these cities, but it should be used for longer commuter/regional routes, while aerial tramways and sheltered bike corridors funnel people into these stations.
The aerial tramway lines should also be short (it's a bike/streetcar replacement), since cross platform transfers are convenient and very easy to design, and this reduces the impact of delays.
You are speaking our language! Lol- Chris and I are big fans of gondolas. Stay tuned for an episode or a few on them. That is why there is a gondola on our logo 😅. Thanks for watching and leaving a thoughtful comment! -Louis
@@TransitTangents Thank you for the response! I also really appreciated your recent video.
I like taking light rail. I hate taking the bus
The actual lifetime cost of light rail is much lower than BRT. BRT is predicated on having a cheap labor force to compensate for the smaller vehicles. We don't have that anywhere in North America where there is any demand for higher order modes of transit. There's a reason why BRT was invented in low-cost South American countries and mostly spread in other low-cost countries.
BRT just ain't it, for us.
True, but BRTs can serve a different purpose in cities with developed or developing transit rail networks. They can serve as feeder lines to metro rail networks and help to close the FLM gap to metro stations, too.
@@mrxman581 That's the only acceptable use of BRT imo - to boost ridership temporarily on feeder lines that can later be turned into light rail or a light metro line.
Unfortunately, in the US our politicians view BRT as just an easy way to degrade transit projects without political backlash. The only reason any BRT is ever built in North America is because light rail is much harder to scop-creep into "affordable construction costs". With American BRT we're effectively just getting scammed out of high quality transit.
Or you could get onto why you need to build up expertise but don't actually want to build up expertise. So instead you argue to justify higher operational costs on a bus because of not wanting to build up expertise. Or you argue speed vs coverage.
You discuss light rail in the USA and don't even mention the largest and busiest light rail system in the USA? Really? Well, since you obviously don't know, it's not in San Diego or Dallas. It's in Los Angeles! It's the best light rail system in the USA and very soon in all of the Americas come 2025 with the extensions of the C, K, A lines and the opening and connection to the LAX People Mover.
Please don't say "square acre." It's redundant. An acre is already a two-dimensional measure.
I sure hope ART's are a fad. I would not trust my life to any driverless, autonomous vehicle that is not on rails.
Chris is really cute