{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01842664776754075, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.139130434782609, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Light Rail and BRT: Competitive or Complementary?

A debate has been going on for some time between the advocates of bus rapid transit (BRT) and the proponents of light rail transit (LRT). The two systems both provide service that is considerably better than regular bus transit offers in mixed traffic and require significantly lower investments than metro systems. This article presents a brief review of the BRT and LRT modes, based on facts and experiences from recent decades. It lists innovations, successes and limitations for both. The article stresses the advantages of light rail in providing the high capacity transit systems and for operating in restricted environments. Light rail can combine reserved track right of way, dedicated infrastructure such as tunnel, viaduct, conventional railway track and pedestrian zones in protect historic areas, proposed is a comparative grid between BRT, light rail and conventional bus services. The article concludes that BRT and LRT complement each other more than they compete with one another. BRT should be considered for small to medium size cities which do not justify introduction of different technology; low labor cost favors it over LRT. For heavy passenger volumes, LRT is usually distinctly superior to BRT. With its stimulus for urban physical upgrading and economic development, LRT exerts unique long term positive impacts on livability of city.