Friends of BRT
Questions and Answers About BRT
Our Letters to the Editor
The Nov. 2006 District 7 race for city council was highly combative, and BRT was a big issue. Candidate George Beier attempted to stir up fears of BRT. Click here to read several letters to the editor from members of Friends of BRT who wanted to set the record straight.
Bus Rapid Transit Leaflet Misleading
by Rob Wrenn
(This article was first published as a Commentary in the opinion section of the Berkeley Daily Planet, 05-09-06)
At the recent community workshop on the Downtown Berkeley BART Plaza redesign plan, an anonymous leaflet was distributed that is full of factual errors and misinformation about Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service, which AC Transit is planning for Telegraph Avenue, the Southside and Downtown Berkeley.
BRT vs. Existing Bus
Service
The author of this anonymous leaflet tries to suggest that we don't need to
improve transit service on the Telegraph corridor by implementing BRT because
existing bus service is adequate. The anonymous leaflet states that buses
that currently use Telegraph are "almost empty." This is simply false. Anonymous
must never ride the bus. Anyone who does ride the 40 bus from Berkeley to
Oakland and back on Telegraph will note that people are getting on and off
the bus all along the route. How full the bus is varies, not surprisingly,
by time of day. AC Transit gathers statistics about how many people ride their
buses, which is not hard to do since everyone must pay, or have a pass or
transfer, to ride. According to AC, the Telegraph Avenue portion of the approved
BRT corridor currently draws about 8,000 bus riders a day.
A Billion Dollars for
BRT?
Anonymous says AC is getting "a billion or more taxpayer dollars" for BRT,
which anonymous describes as a "grand scheme to compete with BART." This is
simply false. The total cost of BRT construction is estimated at between $190
million and $340 million.
Is BRT meant to compete
with BART?
Hardly. It will, as the current 40 bus does, serve areas that are not well
served by BART. BART is good for longer distance travel. If you are going
from the center of downtown Berkeley to the center of downtown Oakland, BART
is obviously the best choice; the same holds true if you are going from downtown
Berkeley to Market Street in San Francisco. But BART stations are spaced much
further apart than both current bus stops and planned BRT stations (which
will be one-third to one-half mile apart). For many people living near Telegraph
or International Blvd, there is no BART station close by.
Why BRT is Needed
BRT is expected to increase transit ridership by 30-40 percent on the corridor
it serves. Most of these new transit riders will be people who currently drive.
In addition, for people who don't own cars and are dependent on transit for
commute and other trips, including those in low-income and minority neighborhoods
along the route, it will substantially improve the quality of service. How
does BRT improve service?
First, of all BRT buses will run in their own dedicated lanes in the street
and will have traffic signal priority at intersections. BRT stations will
be spaced further apart than current bus stops, so the bus will spend less
time stopping. The combined impact of these changes will be a substantial
improvement in travel time. Trips will take one-third less time and will be
much more competitive with automobile trip travel time to the same destinations
along the corridor. For someone boarding in the area south of the UC campus,
the travel time to downtown Oakland will be reduced by about ten minutes,
a substantial improvement. A survey of commuters conducted a few years ago
found that the top reason given for NOT taking transit to work was that it
"takes too much time."
BRT will attract more riders to transit because it will reduce travel time.
Also in the top five reasons for not riding transit is concern about transit's
reliability. People who ride buses regularly know that buses are not always
on schedule. Dedicated lanes will make it easier to stay on schedule since
it is often traffic congestion that knocks buses off their schedules.
Why does it matter if bus service is improved and more people choose to ride
transit as a result? Berkeley's population is increasing as more housing is
being built. UC plans to expand as well. Both Berkeley's General Plan EIR
and UC's Long Range Development Plan recognize that the volume of traffic
will increase. If more trips are made as a result of growth and there is no
change in the percentage of those trips made by transit and other alternatives
to driving, then the net result will be more traffic. There will also be more
demand for on-street parking in neighborhoods and commercial areas. BRT will
reduce traffic overall and will benefit neighborhoods adjacent to its route
by doing so. Anyone in these neighborhoods who opposes BRT forfeits their
right to complain about traffic and competition for neighborhood parking spaces.
Without BRT and similar efforts to improve transit service and to encourage
transit use, more traffic is inevitable.
Reducing Emissions
Since BRT will reduce traffic and eliminate an estimated 9,000 to 11,000 daily
auto trips, it will also reduce emissions that contribute to global climate
change and that pollute the air. It will help Berkeley implement the Urban
Environmental Accords, which include an action which calls for implementing
"a policy to reduce the percentage of commute trips by single occupancy vehicles
by ten percent in seven years." AC Transit has introduced "clean diesel" buses
that have sharply reduced emissions of nitrogen dioxide and particulates to
levels far below those set by the California Air Resources Board. AC is also
trying out zero-emissions hydrogen fuel cell buses and gasoline hybrids. There
is no question that the emissions from BRT buses will be far below the emissions
that would be generated if all the car-owners who decide to ride BRT buses
were to drive instead.
The anonymous anti-BRT leaflet suggests that BRT's "polluting diesel buses"
could emit more harmful particulate pollution into our city's air and add
to greenhouse gases. Had anonymous talked to anyone at AC, this mistaken impression
could have been avoided.
Impact on Pedestrians
and Business
Anonymous says that BRT's raised concrete platforms and bus shelters will
"impede pedestrian movement and block views of businesses on the street."
First of all the raised platforms will only be 8-13 inches high. They will
make things easier for pedestrians because they will allow for "level boarding"
which will make it much easier for people with wheelchairs, people with strollers,
and people with mobility problems to board the bus. People will board buses
in the median, so sidewalks will not be obstructed by BRT shelters. Given
all the rain we had this winter and spring, bus shelters are an obvious necessity.
AC is working on a design that will be attractive with a transparent canopy.
AC plans to seek public input on the specific design.
Next Steps
The BRT EIR should be released to the public in a few months. The EIR will
look at BRT's impact on traffic among other things and will provide data on
the route alternatives being considered. The Berkeley City Council endorsed
BRT and dedicated lanes in a general way when it approved the current General
Plan. But many specific decisions remain to be made. What should the specific
route be through Berkeley's Southside and Downtown? Should buses run both
ways on all of Telegraph and on Bancroft and Shattuck? Or should buses use
couplets of streets: Telegraph/Dana (north of Dwight); Bancroft/Durant; and
Shattuck/Oxford? What mitigations will AC propose for the removal of some
on-street parking spaces near their new BRT stations? How many stations should
there be in Berkeley and where should they be located. Should there be a station
between Dwight and Ashby on Telegraph or is the distance between those stations
about right? What's a good design for stations and shelters and what's the
best design for the streets where BRT buses will run? Clearly we can work
with AC to come up with an optimal design that will give a boost to Downtown
and the Telegraph area while meeting AC's and our need for improved more rapid
bus service.
AC has welcomed public input in the planning process leading up to the EIR.
They have hosted public meetings and have made presentations and heard input
at meetings and hearings before the Planning and Transportation commissions.
There will be more opportunities for public input in the post-EIR phase of
the planning process. Hopefully that input will be informed by accurate information
and not by misinformation coming from people who long ago made up their minds
that BRT is a bad idea.
Rob Wrenn is a member of the Transportation Commission and the Downtown Area Plan Committee.
