Comments on: Are Clean Buses the Answer?

By: Joeventures

Joeventures — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:02:15 +0000

That's quite ironic. Having been to downtown Orlando, I can tell you the photo there is not very representative of what I experienced when I was there. I mean, yes, they do have one-way streets, etc., but the downtown area is decidedly not like most of the rest of Florida. I'll be going there again later this month and plan to take photos. The photos I took last time I was there are admittedly not that great.

By: Ridgelandistan

Ridgelandistan — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:52:10 +0000

Barry, you’re right. That photoheader with the text “Orlando” over the tailpipes of cr%p spewing cars couldn’t be a worse choice…unless its a Freudian slip and really represents what Orlando is about. …Since killing cyclists is a popular pastime in Florida, the latter is probably true.

http://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-05-10/story/florida_the_most_dangerous_state_for_bicyclists

By: Barry

Barry — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:39:25 +0000

Some irony, methinks, in the photo-header of the City of Orlando Transportation site for Lymmo — I counted at least five lanes of one way traffic there, around 15 cars visible, no real hint of a bicycle lane, and no buses nor lanes for them.

Welcome to Orlando. Please bring you car and enjoy driving our wide, wide roads uncluttered by unsightly rail lines, buses, bikes, or actual people. (Two walkers glimpsed in the distance, surely . . . tourists.)

By: Flaka

Flaka — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:10:34 +0000

I agree, Ridgelandistan. The masses in Atlanta don’t use public transport because the network is limited (in terms of destinations and frequency), but the state (or whoever) won’t expand upon the network because people don’t use it.

I’d like to see a congestion charge applied in Atlanta, but we all know that’s not going to happen. No elected official is going to dare infringe upon the public’s love affair with the car! Gradually eroding the convenience of the car and expanding the desirability of public transport is probably the only way forward.

By: Joeventures

Joeventures — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:36:55 +0000

There was a proposal to build what would have become a not-entirely-genuine BRT system here in Atlanta. It would've been part of the same project that was planned to widen I-75 on the Northwest to 23 lanes. The plan was not to give the buses dedicated lanes, but to have them travel in the HOT lanes. And when there's traffic, the BRT would've become what some of us call BST -- Busses Stuck in Traffic. That's not to mention the really awful (and extraordinarily expensive) station designs they were considering. And the routes they thought up were circuitous and illogical. Let's face it: with GDOT and GRTA working on the project, it would've been destined to fail. I would hope that should we ever try BRT in Georgia in the future, we take some lessons from Bogota. If I recall correctly, the Transit Implementation Board's plan for transit in the Atlanta region does not include any dedicated BRT, per se, but would use buses to accomplish much of the suburb-to-suburb service they are planning. Closer to home, Orlando has a free, dedicated-lane, signal-prioritized bus service in their downtown area, called the Lymmo.

By: Ridgelandistan

Ridgelandistan — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:01:34 +0000

It seems that effective changes to an entrenched behavior (like using single passenger gasoline automobiles) takes a carrot and stick approach.

London did it with a congestion fee. Amsterdam did it with infrastructure design, Columbia is doing it with restrictions. What they have in common is active governmental authority to impose or restrict a set of rules and options to favor rational transportation options. A political climate that is not averse to providing amenities and favoritism for public transportation options is required.

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:25:52 +0000

I won’t speak definitively, DM, because I don’t have the data in front of me. Long story short, though, it’s hard to really gauge the difference in cost between light rail and BRT because both sides have their advocates and have their own ways of evaluating cost. For example (made up), light rail advocates might present a study that shows higher ridership on a rail line than a BRT line, so that may be used to offset higher initial expenditures.

The only thing I’m sure of, because I assumed the same thing as you, is that the costs between the two are a lot closer than you would think. I think part of this has to do with the fact that a BRT vehicle maxes out at two segments long, while a train can have greater capacity, requiring less vehicles and operators. Don’t quote me, though.

By: sleight

sleight — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:56:34 +0000

I just came back from a vacation to Colombia and yes, the Transmilenio is impressive. When I last went to Bogota, before the Transmilenio, I quickly developed a respiratory infection from the pollution and was sick during my entire visit. This trip, the decreased smog was immediately noticeable to me. We rode the Transmilenio often, and it’s clean & efficient. But sadly, I don’t see such a system being effective here. I think the reason why it works so well in Bogota is because truly, the majority of people there use public transit daily. Cars are discouraged. First of all, they’re just not affordable to the average person. Bogota also has a system called pico y placa where drivers can only drive certain days of the week based on the last digit of their license plate. So, even if one has a car and is willing to brave the traffic, they can only do so on certain days of the week and they have to find alternative transportation on the others. Any politician who’d even dare recommend that for Atlanta is sure to be skinned alive!

Another thing that I found impressive, and wished I could import to Atlanta, was their Cyclovia. Every Sunday, the main arteries of the city are closed from 7am-2pm to allow bicyclists, skaters & joggers access. It’s wonderful!