3 ms·

Instead of looking at it as buses using up a lane that could have been used for cars, look at it as cars using a lane that could have been bus exclusive. The t

by ufo 9y ago

Instead of looking at it as buses using up a lane that could have been used for cars, look at it as cars using a lane that could have been bus exclusive. The throughput of a bus is so massively larger than that of cars that it will outweighs the frequent stopping. And if you give buses a dedicated lane they become much more efficient as well.

vkou 9y ago
I don't understand why you're being downvoted. Ever since bus-only lanes, as well an HOV has been added to SR-520, my commute by bus during peak became faster then my commute by car. That one HOV lane has more throughput then both of the regular, non-HOV lanes on the highway combined.
zaroth 9y ago
Looking for a proper study... I find articles like this are too obviously pushing a specific viewpoint [1]. They use hard data to come up with 900 passenger vehicles per hour on a single lane at 25mph times an average of 1.6 passengers per vehicle = 1,440 people per hour. Then they use hard data to come up with 50 buses / lane / hour. But then for the final calculation; “A 60-foot articulated low-floor bus typically has 65 seats and can carry 55 standees (per manufacturer specification) meaning that we get a throughput of 6,000 people per hour.” So they do the comparison based on every bus filled to absolute maximum capacity? But their own linked source claims average bus occupancy is 43 making the passenger volume 2,150. The DOT has a great passage on their site worth quoting in its entirety; The Bus Lane Paradox “Bus lanes can provide a strong identity for public transit. They can reduce travel time, but only if they are designed to work properly. A single curbside lane is rarely effective. Designs which are self-enforcing, which accommodate commercial deliveries, and which permit stopped buses to be passed by other buses can be most useful. However, such designs may occupy a significant amount of street space. Where traffic is severely congested, bus lanes can provide the biggest benefit to bus passengers, but it is precisely in these places where it may be difficult to reduce the amount of space available for general traffic— and thereby seem to worsen congestion. Conversely, where there is plenty of road space available, it may be easy to install bus lanes, but they will provide few benefits, given that traffic is not likely to be congested. On some urban streets, bus passengers account for a surprisingly high percentage of total person throughput. Focusing on moving people instead of simply moving vehicles will help to justify priority treatments for buses. Where transit users are a small fraction of street users, it will be more difficult to justify such treatments.” [3] [1] - https://www.theurbanist.org/2016/05/26/the-supply-and-demand-of-street-space/ https://www.theurbanist.org/2016/05/26/the-supply-and-demand... [2] - http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_webdoc_6-b.pdf http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_webdoc_6-b.pd... [3] - https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/bus-lanes https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/bus-lanes

by ufo 9y ago

vkou 9y ago

I don't understand why you're being downvoted. Ever since bus-only lanes, as well an HOV has been added to SR-520, my commute by bus during peak became faster then my commute by car. That one HOV lane has more throughput then both of the regular, non-HOV lanes on the highway combined.

zaroth 9y ago

Looking for a proper study... I find articles like this are too obviously pushing a specific viewpoint [1]. They use hard data to come up with 900 passenger vehicles per hour on a single lane at 25mph times an average of 1.6 passengers per vehicle = 1,440 people per hour. Then they use hard data to come up with 50 buses / lane / hour. But then for the final calculation; “A 60-foot articulated low-floor bus typically has 65 seats and can carry 55 standees (per manufacturer specification) meaning that we get a throughput of 6,000 people per hour.” So they do the comparison based on every bus filled to absolute maximum capacity? But their own linked source claims average bus occupancy is 43 making the passenger volume 2,150. The DOT has a great passage on their site worth quoting in its entirety; The Bus Lane Paradox “Bus lanes can provide a strong identity for public transit. They can reduce travel time, but only if they are designed to work properly. A single curbside lane is rarely effective. Designs which are self-enforcing, which accommodate commercial deliveries, and which permit stopped buses to be passed by other buses can be most useful. However, such designs may occupy a significant amount of street space. Where traffic is severely congested, bus lanes can provide the biggest benefit to bus passengers, but it is precisely in these places where it may be difficult to reduce the amount of space available for general traffic— and thereby seem to worsen congestion. Conversely, where there is plenty of road space available, it may be easy to install bus lanes, but they will provide few benefits, given that traffic is not likely to be congested. On some urban streets, bus passengers account for a surprisingly high percentage of total person throughput. Focusing on moving people instead of simply moving vehicles will help to justify priority treatments for buses. Where transit users are a small fraction of street users, it will be more difficult to justify such treatments.” [3] [1] - https://www.theurbanist.org/2016/05/26/the-supply-and-demand-of-street-space/ https://www.theurbanist.org/2016/05/26/the-supply-and-demand... [2] - http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_webdoc_6-b.pdf http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_webdoc_6-b.pd... [3] - https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/bus-lanes https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/bus-lanes