Date: 2008-10-27 03:48 pm (UTC)
BRT systems have been remarkable successful in attracting ridership (in dozens of cities, even in Los Angeles, where there's certainly more attachment to driving) so it's not clear if your hypotheses depending on it being underutilized are valid. Part of the plans have included platforms in the street (I'm not up-to-the-minute), which among other things would drastically speed wheelchair/elderly boarding (they'd be at door level). Even without them, and even without the dedicated lane, the 1R really slashes the time it takes to go up Telegraph/International. (Of course,
if your walk is 10 minutes, then no bus is going to be useful to you. But it's certainly the most efficient way for you to get to Downtown Oakland.)

With regard to bike safety, I don't understand your arguments: first, having fewer vehicles riding next to you (if you had a dedicated bus lane), and if the system succeeds, fewer vehicles total. Second, I find the row of parked cars with their visible-only-too-late occupants dooring folks left and right (well, just right) much much much more dangerous than buses. I also don't see how having a sidewalk to one's left is any less safe than having a row of cars, even if they were to keep their doors closed. I suppose an empty parking lane is a nice buffer when someone draws near, but it can't be relied upon, and when the lanes are not empty but just sparsely filled, it's certainly not safe to be darting in and out of the parking lane in heavy traffic (and I rarely do; merging is much more dangerous than taking the lane).
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

darcydodo: (Default)
darcydodo

March 2009

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
1516171819 2021
22232425262728
293031    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 24th, 2025 02:34 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios