The Oil Drum

I enjoyed your comments here and below.

In Portland I have recently enjoyed taking the bus to work more than the MAX. Something about the smaller scale means that people are less strange. There is less acting out. Partly it has to do with where the MAX is going or coming from versus where the #12 Sandy Blvd. is going or coming from... but I think that the light rail system somehow attracts louder and angrier people. Not sure why, but it is a reality in Portland. Having a bus driver in front to yell at people if necessary creates a different riding experience than a driver in a cab with no contact with the local ruffians and good citizens forced to mix in the back.

Recently concern with crime on the MAX reached a head and local politicians claim to be increasing fare inspections (they were pretty much nonexistent) and tasking police officers to ride trains (I'll believe it when I see it... not holding my breath.) If you look at the advantages that light rail offers... move more people with just one driver... it is also a disadvantage for safety. You need to add inspectors and police, or the system becomes a magnet for out of control and threatening people... obviating one of its purported efficiencies. In contrast the inefficiency of limited bus size is actually an advantage for safety and security, with fewer people per driver, and the inefficiency of manual fare collection is also an advantage for safety... the driver looks each person in the eye as they board, just as greeters do when you walk into the GAP, knowing that you are less likely to shoplift if you've been looked in the eye. I'm just sayin'.

---

I think one of the advantages of capital intensive rail systems is that anti mass transit efforts can't undermine them because of all the sunk costs and the political capital invested in creating the system. So just on that ground, a light rail system or trolley system is more durable and reliable. You can invest in a building along the route and believe that the rail system can't be moved. Invest in a building on a bus route with minimal capital intensive fixtures and someone can undermine the value of your property by lobbying city hall to change the route. But that's not strictly a technological feature of BRT... it's a political feature that could be fought with political will.

I do wonder whether, counter to all conventional thinking, it might be economical to create a very different kind of bus interior.... slightly higher fare, but with much bigger seats and legroom.... wifi access... a real commuter system that didn't involve quite as much close human contact? I hear that there are busses taken by Wall Street executives from Pennsylvania and New Jersey every day into the city... they pay a price and work for the duration of the commute. I'm thinking of something like that but for intra-urban commuting instead of suburb to city commuting... not quite for that high end market... something that maybe just had 3 across seating... reduce seats by 1/4, increase fares proportionately...

The #12 Sandy Blvd., Portland Oregon, morning commute: