NextStop Blog

Courtney says:

Hey Matt – I got your answer from our Long-Range Planner Mark:
Thank you for bringing up the question of potential BRT service along Grand Boulevard. We’re all excited about the possibility of improving transit service along one of the region’s busiest corridors, and we have ideas, but we won’t be certain exactly what form it will take until we’ve completed preliminary design & engineering work. However, we can tell you that our current “big-picture” plan would only operate along the stretch of Grand that consists of four lanes, between Natural Bridge and Chippewa. We don’t think BRT service would be viable where Grand narrows to two lanes. Within the identified project area (in the event that this BRT option is selected to move forward by regional leaders), we will face barriers along the stretch between Utah and Arsenal, where the street has been realigned to restrict vehicle travel to two lanes. Throughout the long-range planning process we’ve been working closely with both East-West Gateway and the Great Streets advisory groups, and we’re hopeful we’ll be able to find a workable solution for providing quality service to those vibrant City blocks.
The important thing to remember about BRT, both in the long-range plan and across the world, is that it is NOT a one-size-fits-all standard, but rather a range of technologies and service strategies that work together to make bus transit more comparable to light rail travel. The possible range of service strategies is very wide. Most BRT systems operate along major urban arterials like Grand and Kingshighway, but some systems (like Phoenix, AZ) also have had success running dual-commute, city-suburb routes along major highways. BRT service in St. Louis will be a combination of highway-based lines that better connect the region’s core to outlying suburban communities, and some urban routes that bolster transit service along the core’s busiest corridors. Possible street infrastructure varies greatly, from bus-only roads to exclusive bus lanes to running in mixed traffic with signal prioritization. In every case, BRT systems seek to maximize travel speed and minimize travel time by making limited stops at major intersections/destinations, and utilizing efficient technologies such as low-floor boarding, automated fare payment (smart cards), GPS tracking and signal prioritization. Obviously bus-only roads or dedicated lanes would ensure the fastest service, but lack of adequate street capacity, comparatively higher costs, and community feedback can make them difficult to implement. National (and international) experience has shown that BRT in mixed traffic can also be effective (and less expensive) if it is wisely matched with Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), particularly signal prioritization.
At this point, Moving Transit Forward identifies the general corridors that will most facilitate movement around the region, as well as the type of transit that would serve those corridors most effectively. They are all excellent options for improving the Metro Transit System, but at this stage they’re still conceptual. The actual configuration of service strategies and technologies for all of the BRT options identified in the plan will be determined during the design & engineering phases.