3 ms·
> Streetcars/trams/light-rail is always a bad idea unless it is segregated from regular traffic I find this interesting, since there is a lot of mixed light ra
by cbhl 12y ago
> Streetcars/trams/light-rail is always a bad idea unless it is segregated from regular traffic
I find this interesting, since there is a lot of mixed light rail traffic in the San Francisco Bay Area, whereas in my hometown of Richmond Hill, Canada, there is ongoing construction of segregated bus lanes (with the intention of building light rail over the bus lanes in the next ten years).
What were the arguments for mixed light-rail/roads, and what are the current counterarguments that make buses and/or segregated light rail strictly better?
- hapless 12y agoSeparate rights of way are the only way to ensure on-time service. Bus "bunching" is an unsolved mathematical problem. Traffic is just not predictable, and since buses follow a defined route, they have an even worse time of it than the average driver (who only goes from point A to B, with flexible routing) This is equally true whether you use rail or bus. A bus system on dedicated busways can be just as fast and reliable as a traditional subway. A rail system running at-grade in traffic will suffer the same low ridership and stigmatization as a regular bus line. Advantages to buses on dedicated busways: They're slightly cheaper than rail development. Advantages to rail on dedicated railways: Much greater capacity than a bus system. More "headroom" to upgrade capacity. Segregated lanes in an at-grade system are a half-measure at best. It gets you nowhere close to the service improvements made possible by a dedicated RoW. A bus system with segregated lanes is just a slightly faster bus system. A bus system running on dedicated busways is rapid transit.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]