<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Panel: How Should NYC Bus Rapid Transit Program Expand?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.tstc.org/2009/03/18/panel-how-should-nyc-bus-rapid-transit-program-expand/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.tstc.org/2009/03/18/panel-how-should-nyc-bus-rapid-transit-program-expand/</link>
	<description>News and opinion from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:36:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David R. Yale</title>
		<link>http://blog.tstc.org/2009/03/18/panel-how-should-nyc-bus-rapid-transit-program-expand/comment-page-1/#comment-1098</link>
		<dc:creator>David R. Yale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2009 03:58:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tstc.org/?p=3995#comment-1098</guid>
		<description>Don’t settle for Bus Rapid Transit! Light rail is far superior to BRT for several reasons:

1. Light rail vehicles are less expensive in the long run, with useful lives of 40 to 60 years. Reconditioned LRVs from the 1950s are still running in San Francisco and Philadelphia. Where do you see a 40 year old bus in regular service?

2. Light rail vehicles have better acceleration than buses do, and can run a route much faster than buses. This means that you need fewer LRVs and fewer drivers to cover the same route.

3. Light rail vehicles can run in much narrower lanes than buses can, so they take up less space. This is especially important in crowded urban areas.

4. Light rail vehicles only use energy when they are accelerating. When they decelerate, the momentum is turned back into electric energy. When they’re at rest, their motors use no energy at all. Most buses use energy continually, whether they are accelerating, decelerating, or standing still.

5. Light rail vehicles give a smoother, bump-free ride far superior to the bouncing around bus passengers are subject to.

6. Operating expenses for light rail vehicles are significantly less than for buses, according to the Federal Transit Administration&#039;s 2001 National Transit Database. Boston’s light rail line had costs of $1.25 per trip vs. $2.04 for buses. If you want the figures expressed as costs per passenger mile, Boston spent $0.51 for LRVs and $0.71 for buses.

7. In city after city (St. Louis, Denver, Phoenix, Boston, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas ……) people prefer light rail to buses. Ridership on the entire transit system increases when even a single light rail line is opened.

8. Light rail stations often spur development around them that doesn’t happen around bus rapid transit stations.

For extensive information about the benefits of light rail, go to http://www.lightrailnow.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don’t settle for Bus Rapid Transit! Light rail is far superior to BRT for several reasons:</p>
<p>1. Light rail vehicles are less expensive in the long run, with useful lives of 40 to 60 years. Reconditioned LRVs from the 1950s are still running in San Francisco and Philadelphia. Where do you see a 40 year old bus in regular service?</p>
<p>2. Light rail vehicles have better acceleration than buses do, and can run a route much faster than buses. This means that you need fewer LRVs and fewer drivers to cover the same route.</p>
<p>3. Light rail vehicles can run in much narrower lanes than buses can, so they take up less space. This is especially important in crowded urban areas.</p>
<p>4. Light rail vehicles only use energy when they are accelerating. When they decelerate, the momentum is turned back into electric energy. When they’re at rest, their motors use no energy at all. Most buses use energy continually, whether they are accelerating, decelerating, or standing still.</p>
<p>5. Light rail vehicles give a smoother, bump-free ride far superior to the bouncing around bus passengers are subject to.</p>
<p>6. Operating expenses for light rail vehicles are significantly less than for buses, according to the Federal Transit Administration&#8217;s 2001 National Transit Database. Boston’s light rail line had costs of $1.25 per trip vs. $2.04 for buses. If you want the figures expressed as costs per passenger mile, Boston spent $0.51 for LRVs and $0.71 for buses.</p>
<p>7. In city after city (St. Louis, Denver, Phoenix, Boston, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas ……) people prefer light rail to buses. Ridership on the entire transit system increases when even a single light rail line is opened.</p>
<p>8. Light rail stations often spur development around them that doesn’t happen around bus rapid transit stations.</p>
<p>For extensive information about the benefits of light rail, go to <a href="http://www.lightrailnow.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.lightrailnow.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clark Morris</title>
		<link>http://blog.tstc.org/2009/03/18/panel-how-should-nyc-bus-rapid-transit-program-expand/comment-page-1/#comment-1097</link>
		<dc:creator>Clark Morris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 01:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tstc.org/?p=3995#comment-1097</guid>
		<description>It shouldn&#039;t expand until the streetcar alternative has been tested and found wanting.  A well designed streetcar line will carry more passengers at lower cost per passenger mile.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It shouldn&#8217;t expand until the streetcar alternative has been tested and found wanting.  A well designed streetcar line will carry more passengers at lower cost per passenger mile.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

