>>1573908Not him, but that if certain routes become more heavily traveled, like if a neighborhood is getting popular, it only takes like 3 days to get a bus line running through there. With a train, that would require tearing up the earth and putting in tracks, then sourcing a car and building million dollar stations. With a bus just drop a couple flag poles and benches along the way and tell the driver to go a little further. Likewise, if a route is no longer traveled, it’s easy to just say “welp no more buses” and stop servicing that route, whereas with the train there’s a sunk cost that makes it harder for people to admit that one line isn’t working.
Read about the LA purple line extension and just imagine if that were BRT rather than train.
BRT could also be scaled where if there are big events in town like music festivals or sports games, it would be easy to dynamically increase the amount and routes of cars to stop attendees from packing train cars full of commuters.
The fact of the matter is, BRT is scalable, dynamic, it’s easy to modify routes, frequency, and more, and suited to dynamic, lively cities. It doesn’t have the massive cost that laying tracks for everywhere you would ever want to go does, and it’s use of already existing infrastructure makes it the perfect solution to actually serve the needs of the community, not serve the needs of anyone who happens to live and work near a train stop. To dumb it down even further, giving a train the ability to run without tracks increases its utility tenfold, and that’s what BRT is. Bitch.
