BRT Station<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nHow is BRT faster than conventional\u00a0buses? One, the stops are more spaced out \u2013 roughly a half a mile apart rather than a few blocks. Second, fares are paid at the station rather than onboard the bus. Consequently, passengers can board quicker and more efficiently. The buses are also built so that they can easily stop at stations with raised platforms without having to leave traffic lanes.<\/p>\n
Interestingly, as well, BRT buses will signal traffic lights at 20\u00a0intersections to receive priority \u2013 almost receiving automatic green lights. This will extend green lights for buses approaching and shorten red light wait times.<\/p>\n
How will this effect travel speed? These buses are an\u00a0estimated 20%\u00a0faster than conventional\u00a0buses taking the same route. This roughly equates to saving 8\u00a0minutes on a 35\u201340\u00a0minute trip. Will this improvement result in more riders? Metro Transit says ‘yes’ and predicts a 50%\u00a0increase in ridership by 2030.<\/p>\n
27\u00a0or more BRT systems are in effect or under construction in the United States and, as this trend continues, 20\u00a0more are in the planning stages. The benefits of BRT are being studied beyond the fact they systems are much cheaper than rail. However, urban developers tend to see rail infrastructure as a hotter commodity since it cannot be decommissioned and disassembled as easily as a BRT system — so the jury is still out as to whether or not BRT is a viable alternative to rail.<\/p>\n
As written by Arthur C. Nelson and Joanna Ganning, \u201cWe find substantial though often circumstantial evidence that bus rapid transit systems can influence development patterns in important way \u2026 we conclude that, on the whole, BRT systems are associated with positive development and job location outcomes, though not necessarily population or housing outcomes.\u201d<\/p>\n