If I was designing a large city with a high population density,

sorry, but as someone that has lived in Japan for 6 years, heavy rail is the fucking master race.

>>1056265
>If I was designing a large city with a high population density, instead of heavy rail I'd use Bus Rapid Transit

Well let us all be thankful that you are not designing large cities.

>>1056268
Heavy rail is already deficient in providing a competitive alternative to Bus Rapid Transit in terms of pphpd, maintenance and initial investment, but when automated driving comes around it will also smoke heavy rail in the operating cost department.

If a city is planned for BRT (fair assumption, most modern cities were designed with some kind of rail in mind) it can move 2 times the passengers for 1/10 the infrastructure cost and pay for itself.

Also it can have virtually no wait times between vehicles, no pesky humongous stations that take you 5 minutes to travel from one end to the other, and cities can be designed so no one lives more than 1 minute walking distance between stops.

>>1056273
see >>1056274
But ah yes you are the type who enjoys as much time as possible wasted on commutes

>>1056274
But unfortunately BRT does not involve the vast sums of money that rail transportation does so it's not popular with politicians because there is little room for corruption.

Also since there are no flashy billion dollar stations for inter-municipal dick waving it's not popular with voters either.

The only people that benefit from BRT are the commuters and that is it's downfall

File: 4a438c07-69ea-4c98-ab1f-2527de15f39b_749_499 (1).jpg (51KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x400px

>>1056265
We have this in my city and there is still a ton of traffic.

>>1056274
>>1056275
>>1056280
you have to have 4-5 lanes of width to give to the bus.

rail can be put underground

>>1056280
Eh, Los Angeles proves you can easily retrofit in BRT (and shockingly its well, fast), because you can trivially put BRT in its own lanes, give it access station style platforms, making it a cheap way to improve commute times.

>>1056265
I'd just build a city that didn't try to cram all the office jobs into a central core. I'd force the high rises into a ring, leaving the central medium to low density with the outer low density. A correctly built ring road and ring elevated rail would have no traffic issues.

Dedicated bus lanes are an admission of total and complete failure to plan.

>>1056265
Are those special BRT buses for elevated platform?

>>1056315
LA is sprawled out for cars.

try a major metro area that exist before 1950.

Kek

BRT is actually the least efficient when compared to even LRT

Just do the math; let's assume that we're using an articulated bus with a capacity of 80 passenger with 15 minute headway (it's the most a system can do with mostly manual system).

In an hour you can only transport 240 passenger per direction (assuming it is bidirectional, although most BRT isn't due do safety concern), or about 3000 passenger per day. Compare that with about 10000 pphpd in a medium-cap metro.

People are building BRT because of
>low population
>compromises
>lack of fund
>interim system until the increase in population would justify proper rail system

>>1056319

>talks of building a city
>has no knowledge of urban planning whatsoever

>>1056275
>But ah yes you are the type who enjoys as much time as possible wasted on commutes

No I'm a sensible right thinking individual who works from home. My commute is 10ft from my bedroom to my home office.

Although if I *was* a pleb who had to commute, trams would be infinitely better than any form of buses including BRT.

>>1056265
LRT is ALWAYS, WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTION WHATSOEVER better than BRT. It uses less space, it's less intrusive, it offers more capacity and is cheaper to operate. The only downside is a higher initial cost which will quickly be offset by lower running costs.

BRTs only make sense if it is somehow physically impossible to build an LRT, such as when there's more than 8% grade, or if the line is somehow going to run on a freeway for a significant stretch.

>tfw replying to shitty bait

>>1056325
>tfw LA was sprawled out because of the Pacific Electric
>tfw retards still spout the "hurr LA was made for cars" meme
WEW LAD
E
W
L
A
D

>>1056389
Most American cities were primed for sprawl well before the streetcars and railroads did what they did

It's pretty sad

>>1056393
I think what american cities did up to the 1920's was an impressive feat of engineering, and it should be the model to follow by other cities. They developed a certain sprawl, by no means the ridiculously low density of modern burbs, but enough to allow people to live in less cramped quarters.

I live in a 50 sq.m apartment (thats 540 sq ft) because it's either living in the city in a tiny apartment, or living in some shitty satellite town where it takes you forever to get anywhere by public transit if you don't have a car. And urban planners nowadays strive to build mediterranean-style high density mixed use neighbourhoods, which is by itself a good idea, but it usually means a high land value, which in turn means that low income people must live either in very small apartments or move to outlying shitty areas. The "streetcar suburb" concept allowed for more comfortable living, but maintaining good public transportation thanks to reasonable density and burbs built around transit. At the same time you can have dense mixed use neighbourhoods in the city, but land values stay low and people have reasonable low-income alternative that doesn't mean relying on a car.

tl;dr the streetcar suburb was the best thing ever

>>1056291
BRT in Guatemala is not up to standard. No corridor or line in Guatemala meets even the bare minimum standard to be considered BRT, let alone my proposal of a city specifically designed with BRT in mind.

>>1056314
If you design a city you can have a functional system with less lanes. Keep in mind I'm referring to a very large and dense city of the kind you won't find in the US.

>>1056319
Not enough.

>>1056338
The math actually says LRT is the worst transport system, holding a competitive advantage over other systems only in ridiculously specific situations.

>>1056375
Yes the 99,99..% of the populace who commutes to work are just plebeians who can't grasp how patrician it is to work from home right

And it's not what you think would be infinitely better, it's actually not a matter of opinion at all.

>>1056388
Wrong in every point except running cost (for now, automated buses are coming) since to provide a higher pphpd count than the automobile it needs to be grade separated, and actually when you account for the expensive maintenance along with running cost as an operating cost total LRT cost more to keep running.

After all the BRT lanes should have a catenary & pantograph and Hybrid engine for those lines it would cost less resources.

>>1056323
Yes

>>1056375
You can make that commute even shorter, work right from bed.

>>1056474
You realise most office jobs could be done with a laptop from the comfort of your own couch, and the occasional video conference meeting?

File: sundry_shop_by_feigiap-d5rd6de.jpg (264KB, 824x970px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 824x970px

>>1056265
If I could build a city, there would be no height limits or setback rules

With that density, you could walk.

Trams would service longer routes

Now have some weebshit

>>1057159
Shame that it's just artwork and not from an anime show or movie. I generally look for anime with urban themes.

File: imperial boy water city.jpg (232KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 640x480px

>>1057162
Want some more?

>>1057165
Oh yes I do like it very much.

>>1056265
>>1056274
>>1056474
>Keep in mind I'm referring to a very large and dense city of the kind you won't find in the US.
>>1056268
As someone that has lived in the world, OP is the fucking BS master. Case closed. Don't think he knows bus or rail (let alone rail best practices in Japan) enough to understand his genius.

File: stairs and shit.jpg (451KB, 1600x1082px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 1600x1082px

>>1057167
Search up "Imperial boy"

Also "tekkon kinkreet" has a good urban theme

Try "Patema Inverted" too

>>1056338
>15 minute headway (it's the most a system can do with mostly manual system).
???
Personal view disclaimer: BRT and LRT are efficient in respective conditions, geometries and networks.

>>1056265
you can only do so much with brt