Fun fact: LA is actually doing what I think should be done here. Under their NextGen study, the intent is to get rid of all but three Rapid routes (as well as a few outlying local routes) in order to provide consistent 15 minute or less headways across 80% of the system.
To recoup some of the lost time, all stops would be spaced closer to every 400m/1400ft.
For those wondering why, the answer is this: In order to reap the time savings benefit of Rapid buses, one would need to ride at least 7 miles.
Similarly to our Limited routes. I don't compare SBS as LAs Rapid routes are stated to be spaced similarly to our Limiteds. SBS has wider stop spacing in many cases.
From the day I learned that frequency is more important than speed, that idea came into fruition. And I'm glad there is a city in America that will run the experiment for me.
The MTA has already committed to changing the transfer policy with the redesigns (as they would require it anyway) and OMNY (my hopes anyway) may well introduce an unlimited number or transfers over a 2-hour period.
Vision Zero is the correct idea btw. It's the way we go about it, as well as actual enforcement, that is the issue. It's been proven that faster city speed limits lead to more congestion while lower speed limits not only lead to less congestion, but a more even flow of traffic. Mortality rate need not be mentioned. Influencing both are street width and distance between intersections.