>>1513654As a bus fan, they are often misleading, misused, over-used, and overblown. Thus you get this LRT vs "BRT" bs. On quite a few occasions, I see worse arguments crafted by "BRT" advocates.
They make sense for branching, moderate density spread over a wide area without prevailing radial corridor, or at lower capacity with limited forseeable growth in the long term, etc. If you have railways around (eg freight), it's better to invest in them, although they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
>BRTAs a language purist at the same time, I consider these busways only. A "rapid transit" must be grade-separated and uninterruped to be called such. Aside from Europe, Korean (with quite a successful bus system in Seoul most prominently) uses a more accurate term "trunk express/rapid bus system".
