Rapid is coming to San Francisco's transportation

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is an attractive solution for many of San Francisco's transportation problems. It's not a magic bullet-train, but if done right, it should be able to move people quickly and conveniently, and it costs less to implement than rail lines. BRT has not been properly implemented anywhere in the U.S., and so San Francisco could set a national example.

The city's Transportation Authority is working on preliminary designs for BRT on Geary Boulevard and Van Ness Avenue.

The central idea of BRT is to move buses nearly as fast on city streets as a subway would run underground. On a BRT street the city would eliminate left turns and most curbside parking. BRT requires reserving traffic lanes in each direction exclusively for buses. (Think of these as High Occupancy Vehicle lanes with a 20-passenger minimum.)

For example, the current BRT proposal for Geary Street would reserve the existing auto tunnels at Masonic and Fillmore for buses. This part of BRT will actually be an open-cut subway, with stairways and elevators for passengers. Some surface construction will be necessary for auto traffic.

During peak hours a bus lane can move many more people than a lane of cars. The maximum for a car lane is about a thousand people per hour; just 10 loaded articulated buses can carry this many passengers. BRT is the true spirit of Transit First.

Many bus lines can share one BRT lane, with provision for passing so that express buses can pass locals, and shorter routes and turn-back service can be designed to meet actual demand. (This is how the Geary line works today, with expresses, locals, and limiteds serving different parts of the Richmond.)

To optimally achieve these advantages, BRT has to be done right.

• A BRT system needs a physical layout for fast loading and unloading. Buses should have many large doors. Also, either buses should have low floors, or else stations must be built with loading platforms raised to bus level.
• For quick passenger entry BRT also requires fare payment before boarding. Stops should include fare-ticket machines, and BRT lines could operate with proof-of-payment inspectors, similar to the system on the city's light-rail lines.
• BRT lanes should be in the center of the thoroughfare, separated from other traffic by a high curb with boarding islands adjacent to the BRT lane. Buses will no longer have to deal with double-parked vehicles, vehicles making right turns, and heavy traffic blocking buses from leaving bus stops. (The city, however, is considering placing BRT along the curb lanes on Van Ness; this would undermine much of BRT's effectiveness.)
• There is one high-tech aspect to BRT: the use of signal pre-emption. Buses would be equipped with the ability to signal to traffic lights to turn or stay green.
• Most auto left-turn lanes should be eliminated.
• BRT stations are usually separated by a half mile to speed service. This will not happen on Van Ness because Van Ness is crossed by many transit lines which will require closer transit stops for convenient transfers. On Geary, "Local" bus stops will continue to be located every few blocks to reduce walking distances to destinations, while "Limited" bus stops will continue to be widely spaced to serve as transfer points for crossing transit lines.

San Francisco's BRT can provide other amenities:

• medians should be designed to preserve as many mature trees as practical, and boarding islands and medians should be constructed with permeable surfaces to allow rain water to drain to the aquifer rather than to sewers;
• if some parking is eliminated, care must be taken to provide parking for truck deliveries for at least part of the day;
• implementation of BRT provides the opportunity to install corner bulbs, safety medians, and count-down signals to improve pedestrian safety; the boarding islands too will serve as safety medians for pedestrians.

BRT is almost as fast as a subway, yet has advantages over any fixed-rail line:

• BRT construction is much quicker and less disruptive than that for a rail line;
• BRT costs a few hundred million dollars, versus up to twice as much for light rail and many billions for a subway.

WhatYouCanDo

Contact your supervisor. Tell them of your support for BRT, and urge them to make sure that it is well-implemented, including center-of-the-road alignment, provisions for rapid loading and unloading, and stations sufficiently separated to allow fast operations.

The mailing address for all supervisors is:

City Hall, Room 2244
One Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102.

Jake McGoldrick (District 1)
(415)554-7410
Jake.McGoldrick@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7415

Michela Alioto-Pier (District 2)
(415)554-7752
Michela.Alioto-Pier@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7843

Aaron Peskin (District 3)
(415)554-7450
Aaron.Peskin@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7454

Fiona Ma (District 4)
(415)554-7460
Fiona.Ma@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7432

Ross Mirkarimi (District 5)
(415)554-7630
Ross.Mirkarimi@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7634

Chris Daly (District 6)
(415)554-7970
Chris.Daly@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7974

Sean Elsbernd (District 7)
(415)554-6516
Sean.Elsbernd@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-6546

Bevan Dufty (District 8)
(415)554-9698
Bevan.Dufty@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-6909

Tom Ammiano (District 9)
(415)554-5144
Tom.Ammiano@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-6255

Sophie Maxwell (District 10)
(415)554-7670
Sophie.Maxwell@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7674

Gerardo Sandoval (District 11)
(415)554-6975
Gerardo.Sandoval@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-6979.

Howard Strassner