Transit Politics: The Little Engines That Could Get Federal Funding

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Transit Politics: The Little Engines That Could Get Federal Funding

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

I'll post more on Chicago later, but it's in a weird spot right now where service cuts six years ago and the white dinc push back into the city has resulted in a third of the city riding on maxed out infrastructure while the rest of it is underserved.

There's also talk about adding high speed rail out to O'Hare, using the heavier rail tracks, but it wouldn't really be that effective vs the current light rail that goes there.

That being said, this gentleman has a fantastic weblog about gentrification, housing, transit and racism in Chicago and elsewhere. https://danielkayhertz.com highly worth a read and it's completely on point to this thread.

And speaking of brt, here's a hilarious Portland nimby article http://www.wauwatosanow.com/news/wauwatosa-parents-protest-proposed-bus-rapid-transit-system-b99693083z1-373377771.html?lc=Smart

Personally I don't like the Chicago brt idea that's being implemented and think it'll be a disaster but that's the future of transit for most cities.

mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Apr 2, 2016

# ¿ Apr 2, 2016 04:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 16:08

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

Curvature of Earth posted:

The Institute for Transportation & Development Policy has a rigorous scoring system for grading BRT.

They also have a brief BRT guide here, in case you don't find detailed scoring systems inherently interesting. This page is much more useful, since it has a map of every known BRT system in the world, and classifies each as meeting basic, bronze, silver, or gold standards for BRT. (The blue dots on the map represent BRT systems notable for exemplifying a particular element of BRT. You can actually click on these, unlike the other dots. Also, white is "basic" but barely-darker-than-white gray is "silver", confusingly. They should've made basic black or something.) Individual BRT lines are rated, which is why there are dense clusters of them in Central and South America.

So to answer your question: the US has 3 basic BRTs, 4 bronze-standard BRTs, and one silver-standard BRT (that's the Cleveland Healthline). It has no gold BRTs. For that, you'll have to go to south of the border to Bogota, Columbia, where BRT was invented and there are five gold-standard BRT lines servicing that city alone.

Nobody came up with it. It's just American clusterfuck politics in general.

BRT is sold as "like light rail, but cheaper", so you can get anti-rail-transit people to support it*, and transit advocates in the US are generally desperate enough to compromise. Of course, the usual crop of white baby-boomer NIMBYs appear to oppose any transit at all. Then when it comes time to actually dedicate entire road lanes to the BRT, car-lovers go "Whaaaaa? Take... a lane away? But muh freedom cars! " Then anti-government-spending conservatives come spilling out, because they just can't fathom putting actual resources into what they view as last-resort poverty transit. "Spend money on a bus station?! It's just a bus station! Gubmint wastin yer money agin! "

The coup de grace, of course, are the sudden disappearance of the anti-rail transit people's support. For them, BRT is a red herring to distract transit advocates with. Their support was never genuine. Once they managed to stop the Great Rail Satan, they evaporated and recondensed back into NIMBYs, car-fuckers, and budget hawks.

*I am not kidding, the fastest way to make a bunch of insincere BRT advocates materialize is mention "light rail" on a libertarian website.

To be fair, removing a lane of cars to put in BRT seems incredibly short sighted. So far it's been tried once in Chicago and is about to go in on another major road, and exactly what you'd expect to happen does: the cars that all get forced into the other lane end up blocking the bus lane, whether waiting at turns or just in general. Enforcement needs to get upped bigtime but no one's going to want to come out in favor of more parking/traffic tickets.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2016 21:49

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

DoctorWhat posted:

Why aren't municipal and state bus services getting similar attention in this thread? Recently, for the first time with any regularity, I've begun utilizing NYC's Select Buses and New Jersey Transit and they both function remarkably better than I could have imagined as an avowed Subway User, though the former is of course infuriatingly traffic-dependent.

Of course, NYC having whole overpasses built specifically to prevent buses, and their undesirable patrons, from travelling under them are worth mentioning.

Outside of the east coast, I'm guessing they're all incredibly inefficient and unreliable. Buses get worse fuel economy/environmental impact than cars do when not running at peak times, but they absolutely do need to run 24 hours a day to provide access. However they seem to end up showing up only every 20-30 minutes, and heavy traffic makes them unusable.

I need to read up more on how BRTs actually worked successfully in other areas because they sure do suck in Chicago, let alone regular buses that are slower than walking 99% of the time.

# ¿ Apr 14, 2016 16:21

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

That's phenomenal, wow.

# ¿ Apr 15, 2016 02:16

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

My Imaginary GF posted:

Its the same trend which done killed the slaughterhouse industry in America. Why have a vertical facility when one can spread it out horizontally?

Well, that and the cost per sq ft is much higher in downtown buildings. Let alone the fact many of them are much older than suburban ones.

# ¿ Apr 19, 2016 20:44

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

Combed Thunderclap posted:

Absolutely loads of them.

Just from a quick search, this paper argues that bus stops in particular are best spaced roughly 4 to 5 stops every mile (in busy urban corridors), but there are many different models that are designed to give answers appropriate to the unique situation in which they are deployed (taking into account congestion, network frequency, dwell time, rider demand, etc.). When it comes to the density argument, it's difficult to tackle because you can just as easily argue for a spot popping up in a place where there's no demand (time to get development going and create more network-connected housing!) as there is extant demand (meet residents' transit needs!) etc.

Regardless, here's a good paper discussing these so-called infill stations and how their need is calculated, which are often great ways to squeeze relatively cheap stations out of existing systems. Which new station in Chicago are you interested in?

EDIT: The humantransit.org link talks about station distances way simpler.

The new station is on the Union Pacific North line , going in around Peterson between the Ravenswood (2 stops from the terminus) and Rogers park (3). That line covers the wealthiest suburbs if that's important , but the new stop is going into a more average area.

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150422/edgewater/new-edgewater-metra-station-opening-delayed-2017

And yea the bus stop every block (so 8 a mile) makes them very difficult to use, especially in rush hour. It's often faster to just walk at 3 mph.

# ¿ May 2, 2016 14:56

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Transit Politics: The Little Engines That Could Get Federal Funding

Curvature of Earth posted:

DoctorWhat posted:

My Imaginary GF posted:

Popular Thug Drink posted:

Combed Thunderclap posted: