(08-16-2016, 02:13 PM)clasher Wrote: The cost to build a true BRT with a separate ROW seems like a wasted opportunity to just built an LRT right off the get-go. Aren't labour costs are lower on an LRT system since BRT generally needs more buses to provide a similar level of service?
Yes, but only at high service levels where it is reasonable to run fewer larger vehicles rather than more smaller vehicles. So LRT scales better as traffic increases.
The editorial made at least one subtly-incorrect point: it claims BRT routes are easier to move thanks to the lack of tracks. Well, that might be true of a regular bus route or cheap Walmart BRT such as has been built in Cambridge so far, but real BRT requires … a dedicated right-of-way with dedicated lanes, which is guaranteed to be just as hard to move as an LRT line.
I will say that of all the places to cheap out and just build BRT, the Cambridge extension is a less-bad place for it. Just expand Hespeler Road with BRT lanes, protect for LRT conversion, and have the bus pop onto the 401 and expressway to get up to Farview Mall. So the cost savings over LRT is larger than usual (an entire segment of the route from Fairvew to Hespeler/401 can be skipped), and the route runs down the middle of an already-large road.
Having said that, let’s do it right, build it as LRT, and prove wrong all the people who said Cambridge would never get LRT (including, I believe, Doug Craig himself). If it is built as BRT, however, I want a signed statement from Doug Craig that he will never whine about Cambridge getting the short end of the stick ever again. I always thought he would become pro-LRT once it was clear that the KW area was definitely getting an LRT system. So I guess points for consistency but minus points for not pushing for the interests of his constituency. Except politicians aren’t really scored on consistency so that’s really only minus points.