METRORapid University Corridor

[mfastx]

1 hour ago, 004n063 said:

1) They were quite firm in stating that BRT could not be converted to rail in the future. They said it was going to be BRT because that's what the voters wanted, which rubbed me the wrong way: the choice presented to voters in 2018 was BRT or nothing, not BRT or rail.

This is really annoying. Voters already approved rail multiple times, most recently in 2003, smh. 

[Some one]

What's even more annoying is the fact that the Silver Line, which was supposed to be light rail, was later changed to BRT due to cost. And this was before the Metronext plan was approved. So Metro is really inconsistent with these things. Not to mention that a common complaint about the transit plan was that there was not enough rail, especially on the west side. 

Edited March 14, 2023 by Some one

[samagon]

I'd prefer light rail, vs BRT.

there's a lot of good reasons for this, primary being that when developers see very permanent transit (and tracks in the ground vs curbs on the street are a bit more permanent), they are going to invest in high density that takes advantage of that permanent transit solution.

anyway, BRT still gives a fixed guideway, hopefully with reliable short wait time transit, is cheaper to implement, and at some point in the future, perhaps the hardware can't be upgraded easily, but the ROW will be there for light rail once our future of single occupant BEV (vs ICE cars) cannot be realized with our current 'drive everywhere' mindset.

and that's really the thing, if the future of our world is to move everyone into BEV, we cannot sustain the overall mileage we currently do as a country, there needs to be a disruptive technology change in batteries, and the grid needs a serious overhaul to carry the additional needed capacity to charge those batteries. either that, or we need to stop sprawling, start densifying, and building out serious mass transit solutions so we aren't forced to maintain such mileage needs.

Edited March 14, 2023 by samagon

[j.33]

12 minutes ago, samagon said:

there's a lot of good reasons for this, primary being that when developers see very permanent transit (and tracks in the ground vs curbs on the street are a bit more permanent), they are going to invest in high density that takes advantage of that permanent transit solution.

Apologies if I am misinterpreting your comment, are you saying rail would spur more development than BRT because tracks are more "permanent" than curbs and paint?

BRT will look just as permanent as rail does with dedicated lanes, curbs, and distinct stations. Take a look at all of these cross sections and renderings: 

 

METRORapid University Public Meeting Presentation (resourcespace.com) 

[004n063]

3 minutes ago, Justin Welling said:

Apologies if I am misinterpreting your comment, are you saying rail would spur more development than BRT because tracks are more "permanent" than curbs and paint?

BRT will look just as permanent as rail does with dedicated lanes, curbs, and distinct stations. Take a look at all of these cross sections and renderings: 

 

METRORapid University Public Meeting Presentation (resourcespace.com) 

I'd say the jury is still out on the development effect of BRT vs. rail, but my intuition is that BRT will have to "prove itself" more than rail would in order to spur transformative development. 

The plans - 6min headways, redline-esque signal priority, off-board payment, bike-on-board vehicles, etc. - are for a legitimately high-quality transit experience that would likely only be excelled (locally) by the red line. But all of that is so dependent on operational logistics, and the Silver (aka beta test) line probably hasn't convinced anybody yet.

If the University Line works as well as Metro hopes, though, then I think we will see intensifying development near stops. I just don't really expect that construction to start - in earnest, anyway - simultaneously with the construction of the line.

[HoustonBoy]

There is a novelty to boarding a train that doesn't exist with BRT. I know that BRT is solving a legitimate transit need, but many people will simply refuse to get on a bus rather than a train. I don't know if it's an aesthetic issue, or a mental block, but trains give mass transit a certain level of validity that I don't think BRT can ever offer. Obviously, we on HAIF know that mass transit can be successful with busses, but does the common Houstonian agree? It's hard to imagine many people giving up driving to get on a bus. Since there are so many people going into the city from the West I hope that this line can be successful due to its convenience, but after the silver line I don't know how much faith I have in anything other than rail in Houston. My two cents 

[chempku]

For the BRT vs. Rail debate, I highly recommend visiting the DFW area to get an idea on how light rail fails to compete against "highly congested" highways. Dedicated bus lanes always have the flexibility and potential to carry people faster than light rails. 

Money talks. The state and federal governments have way more instruments funding highway construction than transit programs. So we'd be realistic, don't waste precious local tax money on something that will deprecate from day one. 

 

 

[Some one]

The light rail in DFW fails because DART was more focused on building them in old ROW rather than where the people were. It's the very same reason why the Houston metrorail, despite not covering as many areas as DART does, has almost as much riders as DART does.

Edited March 14, 2023 by Some one

[j.33]

BRT works wonderfully when it is part of a network. The Silver Line is missing out on that right now. With those who are worried this will be like the Silver Line, keep in mind that the Silver Line is still incomplete. Right now, the purpose of the Silver Line is just for Uptown, which had decent transit demand pre-COVID, but the office district has struggled to bounce back with remote work with COVID. Additionally, the route it replaced, the 33 Post Oak, went further south into Gulfton terminating at Bellaire TC, so it was a great frequent route connecting Gulfton (Bellaire TC) to Northwest TC. The Silver Line misses out on those riders with most having moved to the 20, 49, or 309/310. 

Here is how the Silver Line will be a GAME CHANGER.....METRO is in the design process for two extensions: 1) the Inner Katy to Downtown (currently known as Inner Katy BRT), and 2) an extension further southwest through Gulfton terminating at Hillcroft at Beechnut (known as the Gulfton Extension). Both of these extensions would connect the Silver Line to more destinations and more riders and more frequent bus routes. This is when the Silver Line will flourish. 

Luckily for the University Corridor BRT, it already has multiple destinations, so it will get the riders. It will also connect to the Silver Line, which will benefit the ridership on that corridor as well. It will also connect to all three rail lines. It will also connect to SEVEN Metro facilities (park and ride/transit centers). I really do have faith in the University Corridor BRT and all I can say is trust the process and be ready to ride it when it is ready :). 

Edited March 14, 2023 by Justin Welling

[004n063]

33 minutes ago, HoustonBoy said:

There is a novelty to boarding a train that doesn't exist with BRT. I know that BRT is solving a legitimate transit need, but many people will simply refuse to get on a bus rather than a train. I don't know if it's an aesthetic issue, or a mental block, but trains give mass transit a certain level of validity that I don't think BRT can ever offer. Obviously, we on HAIF know that mass transit can be successful with busses, but does the common Houstonian agree? It's hard to imagine many people giving up driving to get on a bus. Since there are so many people going into the city from the West I hope that this line can be successful due to its convenience, but after the silver line I don't know how much faith I have in anything other than rail in Houston. My two cents 

I ride a local bus (the #25) daily, I ride the Red and Green rail lines frequently, and I've ridden the Silver line a couple of times. Based on that experience, I largely disagree with your assessment.

What you are right about is that the riding experience of BRT is closer to a typical bus than rail in terms of smoothness and mechanical noise (though the stretch of Richmond between Hillcroft and Dunvale is another story, and BRT is much closer to rail than it is to that). But the boarding experience of the Silver line is much closer - virtually identical, in fact - to the boarding experience on METRORail than regular bus, with designed and landscaped stations, off-board payment, bike aboard, and all that jazz. For that reason, I think whatever novelty exists that may make bus-averse people open to trams will still exist for the BRT lines.

The most salient aspect of any transit service, though, is and always will be convenience. With at-grade services, this really comes down to logistics and signalization more than anything else. If they have that part down, this will be a successful line.

Here's the thing that a casual outside observer may not realize: the #25 local is pretty much always full at peak hours. A remarkable number of people (myself included) are willing to walk to a stop, wait for potentially 15 minutes or more for a pair of backed-up buses to arrive simultaneously, and then sit in traffic for 45 minutes or more, possibly to then transfer to another bus at Wheeler or Eastwood TC. And while not all of those people will be able to easily switch to the U-Line (the Westpark section leaves out a lot of Richmond riders), there will be a lot of new catchment on the south side of Westpark in the Harwin and Gulfton areas. Combine that with the increasing density on Richmond along that segment of the route, as well as the fact that this line has transfers to all other rapid transit lines (including eventual airport extensions on the Green and Purple) and you've got the makings for what I personally expect will be the most heavily used transit route in the city.

I understand the misgivings after the underwhelming performance of the initial Silver line segment. But I'll be honest - as much as I love rail, I don't think a rail version of the silver line would have been any more successful than what we are seeing today. It's a shuttle service that connects two park-and-rides along a beautified stroad with six general travel lanes and gargantuan parking lots, it runs on 15-minute intervals, and while yes, it has its own lanes and signal cycles, it does not have (or, at least, does not apply) true signal priority at its major intersections.

The plan for the U-line is to have signal prioritization like that on the red line, plus six-minute headways all day. If it implements those two elements successfully, it'll do well.

[004n063]

25 minutes ago, Justin Welling said:

BRT works wonderfully when it is part of a network. The Silver Line is missing out on that right now. With those who are worried this will be like the Silver Line, keep in mind that the Silver Line is still incomplete. Right now, the purpose of the Silver Line is just for Uptown, which had decent transit demand pre-COVID, but the office district has struggled to bounce back with remote work with COVID. Additionally, the route it replaced, the 33 Post Oak, went further south into Gulfton terminating at Bellaire TC, so it was a great frequent route connecting Gulfton (Bellaire TC) to Northwest TC. The Silver Line misses out on those riders with most having moved to the 20, 49, or 309/310. 

Here is how the Silver Line will be a GAME CHANGER.....METRO is in the design process for two extensions: 1) the Inner Katy to Downtown (currently known as Inner Katy BRT), and 2) an extension further southwest through Gulfton terminating at Hillcroft at Beechnut (known as the Gulfton Extension). Both of these extensions would connect the Silver Line to more destinations and more riders and more frequent bus routes. This is when the Silver Line will flourish. 

Luckily for the University Corridor BRT, it already has multiple destinations, so it will get the riders. It will also connect to the Silver Line, which will benefit the ridership on that corridor as well. It will also connect to all three rail lines. It will also connect to SEVEN Metro facilities (park and ride/transit centers). I really do have faith in the University Corridor BRT and all I can say is trust the process and be ready to ride it when it is ready :). 

The fully realized Gulfton-Downtown Silver/Inner Katy line could be awesome, but I hope they work on the frequencies and signal priority through uptown. I'd assume they will - from what I could tell talking to a Metro guy at a U-line meeting in July, those were both reversible choices made due to a perceived demand cap in the with the current configuration.

[mfastx]

They are only considering BRT due to its lower initial capital cost, LRT is the superior mode, generating about twice as much ridership in a vacuum and would generate more development benefits/revenue generation for the city. I wonder if that dirty Culberson law is still in effect preventing rail on Richmond. 

It really is so typically backwards that Houston constructed LRT on lines in lower density areas where BRT would have made more since, while it's constructing BRT on the more dense, higher ridership potential areas in west Houston that connect employment centers (a proven area of demand for transit). 

[samagon]

18 hours ago, Justin Welling said:

Apologies if I am misinterpreting your comment, are you saying rail would spur more development than BRT because tracks are more "permanent" than curbs and paint?

BRT will look just as permanent as rail does with dedicated lanes, curbs, and distinct stations. Take a look at all of these cross sections and renderings: 

 

METRORapid University Public Meeting Presentation (resourcespace.com) 

fair point, I got it from this article:https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2011/02/lrt-or-brt-it-depends-potential-corridor/

I confess, I didn't do a heap of research, and that article is from 2011. I changed some search criteria for my googling and it looks like some additional studies have been done and it's generally believed that BRT will also generate density and increase property values (taxes for the city), but whether it can create more density and higher property values that LRT, that study I can't find, but yeah, to the point...

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2016/01/12/new-evidence-that-bus-rapid-transit-done-right-spurs-development/

http://websites.umich.edu/~econdev/brt/index.html

 

[mfastx]

17 hours ago, chempku said:

For the BRT vs. Rail debate, I highly recommend visiting the DFW area to get an idea on how light rail fails to compete against "highly congested" highways. Dedicated bus lanes always have the flexibility and potential to carry people faster than light rails. 

Money talks. The state and federal governments have way more instruments funding highway construction than transit programs. So we'd be realistic, don't waste precious local tax money on something that will deprecate from day one. 

Are you claiming that if DFW built dedicated bus lanes, it would generate more ridership than its light rail? Because Houston actually built a Park & Ride bus system with dedicated lanes, but that generated only about 31,000 boardings/day pre-COVID (significantly less so now). Dallas' LRT system averages over 60,000 boardings/day and that's right now, with the post-COVID decline. 

Also, the University Line isn't competing against highways, it's an inner-city transit line, not a line to the suburbs. 

[samagon]

4 minutes ago, mfastx said:

They are only considering BRT due to its lower initial capital cost, LRT is the superior mode, generating about twice as much ridership in a vacuum and would generate more development benefits/revenue generation for the city. I wonder if that dirty Culberson law is still in effect preventing rail on Richmond. 

this is 100% true, BRT is cheaper to build, but not cheaper to operate. I wonder what the break even time is?

https://nacto.org/publication/transit-street-design-guide/introduction/why/designing-move-people/

Quote

A reasonable planning-level capacity for a dedicated transit lane is 80 buses per hour; assuming 100 riders per vehicle (a comfortable articulated bus capacity), 8,000 riders per hour can be moved through a single transit lane. At two-minute headways (or 30 buses per hour), a standard 40-foot bus, assuming 60 passengers, moves 1,800 passengers per hour.

High-capacity LRVs, running four cars per train with a capacity of 125 riders, have a capacity of 15,000 passengers per hour.

so yeah, from that perspective, I guess it remains to be seen. BRT is proven to spur development and raise property values, but can it raise them as much as LRT, which has far higher capacities?

[mfastx]

Just now, samagon said:

this is 100% true, BRT is cheaper to build, but not cheaper to operate. I wonder what the break even time is?

https://nacto.org/publication/transit-street-design-guide/introduction/why/designing-move-people/

Yep, exactly. Rail is always more efficient, once constructed, in operating costs on a per rider basis. Anyone can see this by viewing National Transit Database statistics. 

The initial price tag scares people off, but once it's built it is more efficient to operate and generates significant economic benefits for decades/centuries. 

[chempku]

2 hours ago, mfastx said:

Yep, exactly. Rail is always more efficient, once constructed, in operating costs on a per rider basis. Anyone can see this by viewing National Transit Database statistics. 

The initial price tag scares people off, but once it's built it is more efficient to operate and generates significant economic benefits for decades/centuries. 

The public transit system needs to be compatible with real estate development styles and policies. Unlike New York, most U.S. cities won't have the policies that make mass LRT efficient. Houston is actually doing a great job on accommodating high/mid density housing, however it is sadly not enough. 

 

[chempku]

2 hours ago, mfastx said:

Are you claiming that if DFW built dedicated bus lanes, it would generate more ridership than its light rail? Because Houston actually built a Park & Ride bus system with dedicated lanes, but that generated only about 31,000 boardings/day pre-COVID (significantly less so now). Dallas' LRT system averages over 60,000 boardings/day and that's right now, with the post-COVID decline. 

Also, the University Line isn't competing against highways, it's an inner-city transit line, not a line to the suburbs. 

I agree that the P&R in Houston is way better than the LRT in DART. An added benefit of BRT is it creates more synergy with the current P&R system than light rail. It is not designed to accommodate P&R buses for now, but it always has the potential to do so. 

The transit systems being built, including the Uptown BRT, Inner Katy BRT, a part of the University BRT, and the LRT of DART, ARE competing against highways, unless you believe they should only be designed for people who cannot use cars. I-610 is the reason why the Uptown BRT has such a low ridership now: sitting in the traffic is still faster and more convenient than taking a bus ride for most people. Similarly, the University line compete against I-69 and such. 

[Houston19514]

3 hours ago, mfastx said:

Are you claiming that if DFW built dedicated bus lanes, it would generate more ridership than its light rail? Because Houston actually built a Park & Ride bus system with dedicated lanes, but that generated only about 31,000 boardings/day pre-COVID (significantly less so now). Dallas' LRT system averages over 60,000 boardings/day and that's right now, with the post-COVID decline.

That's not a solid comparison, as you surely know.  DART LRT serves as both commuter and local transit. It would be close to impossible to tease out the numbers of people who use DART in a manner comparable to Metro's park and ride services (e.g., how many people ride from Parker Road to Downtown Dallas, etc).

Curious where you got the 60,000 per day for Dallas' LRT system.  The last report I can find (for FY 2021) was 44,800. I don't doubt the number but just wondered where you found it.

Edited March 15, 2023 by Houston19514

[Houston19514]

There are several claims in the preceding conversation about both BRT and LRT spurring development and boosting property values and claiming that LRT does more of that than does BRT.  Can anyone point us to any studies that support those claims?

[mfastx]

25 minutes ago, chempku said:

The public transit system needs to be compatible with real estate development styles and policies. Unlike New York, most U.S. cities won't have the policies that make mass LRT efficient. Houston is actually doing a great job on accommodating high/mid density housing, however it is sadly not enough. 

I'm not sure I follow. In Houston, significant development has sprouted around the light rail, particularly in midtown and even in the extremely underdeveloped northern, eastern and southeastern areas of town where the new lines went. How would BRT spur better development in Houston? 

14 minutes ago, chempku said:

I agree that the P&R in Houston is way better than the LRT in DART. An added benefit of BRT is it creates more synergy with the current P&R system than light rail. It is not designed to accommodate P&R buses for now, but it always has the potential to do so. 

The transit systems being built, including the Uptown BRT, Inner Katy BRT, a part of the University BRT, and the LRT of DART, ARE competing against highways, unless you believe they should only be designed for people who cannot use cars. I-610 is the reason why the Uptown BRT has such a low ridership now: sitting in the traffic is still faster and more convenient than taking a bus ride for most people. Similarly, the University line compete against I-69 and such. 

I'm not sure how you could argue a system with less ridership and connectivity is superior to the LRT in Dallas. Metro has no plans to interconnect the P&R buses with BRT. I guess theoretically they could, but the reason people use P&R buses to begin with is the direct, express service to downtown. The BRT lines have too many stops along their routes. 

4 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

That's not a solid comparison, as you surely know.  DART serves as both commuter and local transit. It would be close to impossible to tease out the numbers of people who use DART in a manner comparable to Metro's park and ride services (e.g., how many people ride from Parker Road to Downtown Dallas, etc).

Curious where you got the 60,000 per day for Dallas' LRT system.  The last report I can find (for FY 2021) was 44,800. I don't doubt the number but just wondered where you found it.

I'm not the one that made the comparison. DART has more intermediate stops and obviously serves more people than the P&R service. I said that because it was suggested that Dallas shouldn't have built rail and should have instead built express bus lanes. The latest APTA 4Q 2022 numbers show about 61,000 daily boardings for DART and 41,000 daily boardings for Metro. You can see the latest ridership report here: APTA 4Q 2022 Ridership Report

[mfastx]

38 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

There are several claims in the preceding conversation about both BRT and LRT spurring development and boosting property values and claiming that LRT does more of that than does BRT.  Can anyone point us to any studies that support those claims?

Unfortunately, there aren't many apples to apples comparisons of BRT vs LRT lines in similar areas with good data. Here is a GAO 2012 study on BRT with a focus on its (positive) impacts on economic development. The focus here is on BRT, but it's referenced numerous times in the article that local officials and transit experts believe that rail transit offers greater economic benefits, with the report saying that "rail-like" features can enhance BRT's positive economic impacts. 

[j.33]

14 minutes ago, mfastx said:

Metro has no plans to interconnect the P&R buses with BRT.

There are multiple park and ride routes that allow transfers with the Silver Line today. The 292 (Southwest Fwy Corridor) connects to the Silver Line at Lower Uptown TC. The 298 (Katy Corridor) and 214/216/217 (Northwest Cypress Corridor) connects to the Silver Line at Northwest TC. Additionally, you would have the Gulf Corridor (routes 244, 246, 247, and 248) connect to the University Line at Eastwood TC, and hopefully the 236 (East Fry Corridor) at Denver Harbor TC and the 255, 256, and 257 (Eastex Corridor) at Tidwell TC. 

 

[Houston19514]

5 minutes ago, mfastx said:

Unfortunately, there aren't many apples to apples comparisons of BRT vs LRT lines in similar areas with good data. Here is a GAO 2012 study on BRT with a focus on its (positive) impacts on economic development. The focus here is on BRT, but it's referenced numerous times in the article that local officials and transit experts believe that rail transit offers greater economic benefits, with the report saying that "rail-like" features can enhance BRT's positive economic impacts. 

Thank you, except your link doesn't work.

[mfastx]

9 minutes ago, Justin Welling said:

There are multiple park and ride routes that allow transfers with the Silver Line today. The 292 (Southwest Fwy Corridor) connects to the Silver Line at Lower Uptown TC. The 298 (Katy Corridor) and 214/216/217 (Northwest Cypress Corridor) connects to the Silver Line at Northwest TC. Additionally, you would have the Gulf Corridor (routes 244, 246, 247, and 248) connect to the University Line at Eastwood TC, and hopefully the 236 (East Fry Corridor) at Denver Harbor TC and the 255, 256, and 257 (Eastex Corridor) at Tidwell TC. 

I think the user I was responding to wasn't talking about transfers, but rather the P&R Buses operating within the BRT right of way. Perhaps I was mistaken though. I am aware of the current and proposed transfers the new BRT lines would offer. 

9 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Thank you, except your link doesn't work.

Sorry, maybe try this? https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-12-811 

[Houston19514]

29 minutes ago, mfastx said:

I think the user I was responding to wasn't talking about transfers, but rather the P&R Buses operating within the BRT right of way. Perhaps I was mistaken though. I am aware of the current and proposed transfers the new BRT lines would offer.

Not sure what you are trying to say.  FWIW, P&R buses that operate in the Katy Freeway and Northwest Freeway corridors will use the Inner Katy BRT right-of-way.  They won't stop at the stations, but they'll use the elevated transitway.

[Houston19514]

1 hour ago, mfastx said:

Unfortunately, there aren't many apples to apples comparisons of BRT vs LRT lines in similar areas with good data. Here is a GAO 2012 study on BRT with a focus on its (positive) impacts on economic development. The focus here is on BRT, but it's referenced numerous times in the article that local officials and transit experts believe that rail transit offers greater economic benefits, with the report saying that "rail-like" features can enhance BRT's positive economic impacts. 

44 minutes ago, mfastx said:

 

Sorry, maybe try this? https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-12-811 

Thank you for that.  (Not intending to attack you as the messenger.)  Even for government work, that was pretty weak. It seems to have been more of a survey than a study.  It merely reported that a bunch of local officials "believe" that "BRT projects are contributing to localized economic development" and "believe" that "rail transit has a greater economic development potential than BRT".  When they provide an example of the local development "believed" to have been provided by BRT, it becomes even more lame.  ". . .  officials in Cleveland told us that between $4 and $5 billion was invested near the Healthline BRT project—associated with major hospitals and universities in the corridor." Does anyone really believe those healthcare/hospital and university investments were driven by the existence of the BRT?  (The full report suggests not.)

To be clear, I am not suggesting that BRT is inherently less-likely to spur development than LRT.  I suspect the difference between full BRT and LRt is probably very little to nothing.  (And I think the economic development created by LRT is routinely exaggerated as well.)

Edited March 15, 2023 by Houston19514

[mfastx]

22 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Not sure what you are trying to say.  FWIW, P&R buses that operate in the Katy Freeway and Northwest Freeway corridors will use the Inner Katy BRT right-of-way.  They won't stop at the stations, but they'll use the elevated transitway.

The user I was responding to seemed to think that the P&R system would not only use the BRT busways but also stop at their stations, or at least that's what I interpreted from their post. 

11 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Thank you for that.  (Not intending to attack you as the messenger.)  Even for government work, that was pretty weak. It seems to have been more of a survey than a study.  It merely reported that a bunch of local officials "believe" that "BRT projects are contributing to localized economic development" and "believe" that "rail transit has a greater economic development potential than BRT".  When they provide an example of the local development "believed" to have been provided by BRT, it becomes even more lame.  ". . .  officials in Cleveland told us that between $4 and $5 billion was invested near the Healthline BRT project—associated with major hospitals and universities in the corridor." Does anyone really believe those healthcare/hospital and university investments were driven by the existence of the BRT?  (The full report suggests not.)

To be clear, I am not suggesting that BRT is inherently less-likely to spur development than LRT.  I suspect the difference between full BRT and LRt is probably very little to nothing.  (And I think the economic development created by LRT is routinely exaggerated as well.)

BRT certainly can spur economic/land development as we've seen from multiple projects over the last decade or so. I'm not discounting that. Most of my preference for LRT over BRT is the actual transit aspect - higher ridership/utilization and greater capacity/ability to handle future demand increases. I'm still in support of BRT over nothing and am excited about the project. 

Of course, HRT (heavy rail) is superior to all modes and it's a damn shame that Houston never built the 1980 proposed system but no use arguing for it since it's not an option Metro is considering now. 

[j.33]

33 minutes ago, mfastx said:

I think the user I was responding to wasn't talking about transfers, but rather the P&R Buses operating within the BRT right of way. Perhaps I was mistaken though. I am aware of the current and proposed transfers the new BRT lines would offer. 

Ahhh okay. My apologies. 

[chempku]

3 hours ago, mfastx said:

I'm not sure I follow. In Houston, significant development has sprouted around the light rail, particularly in midtown and even in the extremely underdeveloped northern, eastern and southeastern areas of town where the new lines went. How would BRT spur better development in Houston? 

I'm not sure how you could argue a system with less ridership and connectivity is superior to the LRT in Dallas. Metro has no plans to interconnect the P&R buses with BRT. I guess theoretically they could, but the reason people use P&R buses to begin with is the direct, express service to downtown. The BRT lines have too many stops along their routes. 

I'm not the one that made the comparison. DART has more intermediate stops and obviously serves more people than the P&R service. I said that because it was suggested that Dallas shouldn't have built rail and should have instead built express bus lanes. The latest APTA 4Q 2022 numbers show about 61,000 daily boardings for DART and 41,000 daily boardings for Metro. You can see the latest ridership report here: APTA 4Q 2022 Ridership Report

The key is any type of public transit need to somehow compete against cars. Any arguments about cost, capacity, etc., go down to this. 

Cities like Houston don't need the capacity LRT provides most of the times, since the city is just not as dense (despite I wish it could be denser)

Check out the Inner Katy BRT, METRO clearly stated that P&R will be using the BRT line. 

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by chempku