Quote:
Originally Posted by Doady
The other city I've said should get LRT next is London. Its system gets even more riders that Hamilton, 24.6 million in 2019, but the city is in the Snowbelt, lots of lake-effect snow. That means it cannot rely on articulated buses as much, BRT is not as good an option as it might be for other bigger systems in drier climates like Winnipeg. So I hope they start to think about light rail there too. It might seem crazy for such a small city but they are not in a typical situation with that climate.
|
I completely disagree and i'm glad London isn't getting light rail.
I fail to understand this fascination with rail when BRT can provide the same service at a vastly lower cost, can be expanded far easier and cheaper, and can run interlining getting rid of unnecessary transfers. I often think that city's that want LRT are doing so just for ribbon cutting opportunities and this childish notion of 'look Mom, we have LRT too'.
Rail will always provide a far nicer ride than standard buses but that the difference greatly declines with BRT with dedicated lanes. A good chunk of the reason buses are often uncomfortable is not due to the bus itself but rather the roads. The buses have to go down regular roads with potholes and very uneven paving. BRT lanes don't suffer from this and hence offer a far smoother ride. The difference in quietness is also being reduced as electric buses become the norm.
You also have to take into account the geography of the city. London spreads out in all directions due to not being up against a major river or along a waterfront. This means that 10km from the downtown may find you in near farmland but not so in cities that stretch longer along waterfront. KW is different because the metro area is very linear due to Waterloo, Kitchener, and Cambridge being along a straight north-south alignment. London also suffers from very thin and disconnected roadways unlike Kit/Ham.