5 ms·

Bay Area buses don't solve this problem but many bus systems do. Compared to an effective bus network, Bay Area buses suffer from: * Short distance between sto

Bay Area buses don't solve this problem but many bus systems do. Compared to an effective bus network, Bay Area buses suffer from: * Short distance between stops (due to low housing density). * Traffic due to lack of bus lanes. * Long time spent at stops due to cash payments and/or single door entry, rather than proof of payment or tap on stations at every door, no cash allowed. * Inaccurate/nonexistent realtime updates. A bus every 30 minutes isn't a big deal compared to SF/Bay Area travel times, but only if I can rely on a timetable/GPS to arrive at the stop 2 minutes before departure and be confident with a scheduled arrival 2 minutes before my appointment.

chrisseaton 9y ago
> * Short distance between stops (due to low housing density). Wait, this doesn't make sense. Lower density means shorter distances between stops? No, lower density should mean longer distances between stops, because you will go for longer distances before another person wants to get on or off. Higher density would mean shorter distances between stops because there will be more frequently people wanting to get on and off.
- bckygldstn 9y ago
  Yeah sorry, I mean fewer people per stops.
- richardknop 9y ago
  Low density means that there are less people per km within walking distance of a bus stop which means you pick up less people. So it’s less efficient in that way. High density means at each stop there is much higher amount of people who live near the stop.
  - chrisseaton 9y ago
    How do you think that means shorter distances between stops for lower density? You pick up less people per stop, but it's less also people over a given distance, so it doesn't imply stopping more frequently.
timr 9y ago
"Short distance between stops (due to low housing density)" If anything, you have it backwards. In most of SF, places with high housing density (e.g. Van Ness) have their stops closer together than places with far lower density (e.g. Geary in the outer Richmond). I suspect (but do not know for sure) that this is done on the theory that dense neighborhoods require more granular transit access.

chrisseaton 9y ago

> * Short distance between stops (due to low housing density). Wait, this doesn't make sense. Lower density means shorter distances between stops? No, lower density should mean longer distances between stops, because you will go for longer distances before another person wants to get on or off. Higher density would mean shorter distances between stops because there will be more frequently people wanting to get on and off.

bckygldstn 9y ago
Yeah sorry, I mean fewer people per stops.
richardknop 9y ago
Low density means that there are less people per km within walking distance of a bus stop which means you pick up less people. So it’s less efficient in that way. High density means at each stop there is much higher amount of people who live near the stop.
- chrisseaton 9y ago
  How do you think that means shorter distances between stops for lower density? You pick up less people per stop, but it's less also people over a given distance, so it doesn't imply stopping more frequently.

timr 9y ago

"Short distance between stops (due to low housing density)" If anything, you have it backwards. In most of SF, places with high housing density (e.g. Van Ness) have their stops closer together than places with far lower density (e.g. Geary in the outer Richmond). I suspect (but do not know for sure) that this is done on the theory that dense neighborhoods require more granular transit access.