Report Proves That Seattle's Rapid Ride Is Not Bus Rapid Transit

Comments

1
Well, at least they qualify as Brass.

Nobody in Ballard or Fremont or most of N Seattle likes RapidRide changes, just means it takes us twice as long to get anywhere.
2
But it's pretty and stupidly expensive to build. That should keep progressives happy.
3
But that Broadway trolley it'll be a huge improvement and totally worth the extra cost. Man that thing will be so much better than rapid ride. Even if it does have the same limitations, multiplied.
4
Did Metro or Sound Transit actually ever claim that Rapid Ride was equivalent to BRT?
5
@4 When this plan was put together, Ron Sims was the King County Executive and therefore the ultimate boss of metro. He advocated for it strongly over light rail.

Interestingly, Sound Transit express routes like the 545 or 555 get riders from point A to point B faster than BRT routes, but I don't believe ST has ever claimed these are BRT because they're just buses that stop less frequently.
6
@4 When this plan was put together, Ron Sims was the King County Executive and therefore the ultimate boss of metro. He advocated for it strongly over light rail.

Interestingly, Sound Transit express routes like the 545 or 555 get riders from point A to point B faster than BRT routes, but I don't believe ST has ever claimed these are BRT because they don't have fancy ticket machines or new bus stops. They're just buses that stop less frequently.
7
Go, Cleveland, go!

(You're going faster than we are, at least.)
8
RapidRide which crawls along streets isn't.

However Metro and SoundTransit's network of express buses that use HOV lanes is.

We'd have a great transit system if we simply ran those...all the time.
9
"Rapid Transit" must go places people want to go.

Nobody wants to go to the shoulder of a highway.

And thus highway buses can never be "BRT".

There. Discredited Bailo in three easy sentences.
10
#9

People "want to" go to downtown Seattle...that is why the highways are clogged for 3 hours every night with people fleeing from it.
11
But the new buses have 3 doors.
12
If only we could come up with something that rode ABOVE traffic? Some sort of train that would have a few limited and dedicated stops. A train that never had to deal with traffic because it rode on a single rail above it all.

Man...if only we could think of something like that. Wonder what we could call it? Singlerail? No...that's not quite right...
13
It's no coincidence that rust belt cities Cleveland and Pittsburgh have successful BRT. Those cities have extensive abandoned railroad lines which could be converted to separate-grade BRT. Anywhere else, you have to build the separate grade from scratch, and BRT becomes as expensive or more expensive than rail.
14
The Health Line goes right down Euclid Avenue. It was political will that made it happen- not a convenient right of way.
16
Why bother with monorail when you could build an elevated busway? No fancy tracks - just flat concrete. No expensive guiding system, just a dude behind a wheel with no fear of pedestrians other cars. Need to go up or down a hill? No problem! The 4-stroke combustion engine and rubber wheels - with parts available from manufacturers all over the world, in standard sizes and costs. An entire nationwide infrastructure to train potential operators is already in place, as is fueling. Maintenance could be handled by the same facilities and staff that we already have!

To me this is the most obvious thing in the world. The #1 problem is existing street congestion; not the wheel technology (steel/rubber/"mono"), number of doors, or fueling (we've had electric buses since the 1930's)
17
Paul, a bitchy style note from a onetime copy editor... King County Metro's pseudo-BRT express bus system is "RapidRide"; "Rapid Ride" is the name of both a pseudo-BRT express bus system in Albuquerque, NM, and a conventional bus system in Rapid City, SD.