>>2009249You're not thinking like a bureaucrat.
1. They're cheap to put in. You can use the buses you already have, though you might order a few new ones for promotional pictures/hype.
2. No lenghty time disrupting traffic to lay down rails and catenary.
3. It's achievable for our level of dysfunction
4. You can make it ADA-compatible easier than trains. (ADA is the death of rapid transit and everything good in transit. Spoiled, high-standards. Can't just have a lean-to shelter and people step up into the train, now it needs a huge platform, elevators, and so on, blowing out costs.)
5. You don't have to actually deliver anything. It can be literally just a normal bus line, under-invested, but you still get to call it "BRT," because there's no real standard for it like there is for High Speed Rail.
>>2009288Good points.
