The report in the link ends at page 38, so I'm not sure what Page 39 you are refering to. If it's "Attachment B" it labels a few bus corridors for the one system option, which gives a bit clearer picture than the two images in the report, but not really something you can judge the level of service provided from. Are they all-day service or peak service? Are they 60-, 30-, 20-, 15-, 7-minute headways? What was considered high transfer average 2-3 for the longest trip? What was considered low transfer average 0-1 transfers? Was this judged by total trip time or that "transfers are undesirable" mentality?
You found the information that I was referring to yes? Good
These are questions that I don't have the answers to. If you are really this curious you should contact the people who are writing these reports.
1) Higher capacity relies on vehicle size. If you have higher capacity per vehicle, you either have less vehicles and greater headways or you have an excess in capacity with trains running emptier than buses.
I'd rather have some excess capacity now than a completely overburdened transit system 20 years from now. See the transitway.
2) I believe standard track gauge is 4.27m and lateral clearance requirements are 1.00m either side, so that's 6.27m per track, unless they are using skinner units with less seating. What is the width of a vehicle lane? Are the curbing for a LRT different than the curbing for a BRT?
See Waterloo Warrior's post. Because trains have a fixed guideway, they can pass eachother at a closer distance than buses could. Driver error is removed, which can then allow a narrower right of way for a similarly sized vehicle.
3) An electric train produces less noise than an electric bus? A deisel train produces less noise than a deisel bus? I'll support this if you compare like-to-like, but not apples-to-oranges.
I am comparing like-to-like. The region of Waterloo is either getting electric trains or diesel buses, hybrid or not. They are not getting trolley buses because the economics simply aren't there. It's also not likely that we'd be getting diesel trams either. Electric trains or diesel buses are the two technologies being considered for rapid transit due to economics, this is how they are alike.
But if this isn't enough, let's isolate the one thing that doesn't change regardless of propulsion technology; the wheels. Rubber on asphalt has much more surface area and more friction than steel on steel. This increase in surface area creates more noise. Rubber tires are also textured to deal with rain and snow, producing even more friction. When the travelling surface is wet, that added surface area of a tire compared to a steel wheel splashes around quite a bit of slush and water.
While I'm on the topic, light rail vehicles require less maintenance and last longer than a bus due to the surface conditions they have to ride on.
4) What about a train provides better suspension than a bus? Smoothness of ride depends on surface varibility and sprung mass versus unsprung mass.
Trains don't need as much suspension as a bus because of the nature of the path they travel on. Rail is designed to provide a smooth ride, with a smooth surface, and gentler grades, and does not deteriorate at the rate that asphalt does. This is especially true in Canada, where our roads have to deal with salt corrosion and frozen water. Asphalt will almost certainly have more surface variability, necessitating shocks, and causing a bumpier ride.
You can put the same design concepts into a train as a bus. The difference between a train and a bus is a train has steel wheels and runs on a steel road and a bus has rubber wheels and runs on an asphalt road. Everything else is down to how you design the system.
You said it. Trains and Buses are different. And while many design concepts can be transferred, not all can.
Edit: To be clear I'm not in favour of bus service over train service, but I don't mistake design features with techology features,
We agree, neither do I. I only mentioned it because you brought it up.
It's clear that you have your issues with the rapid transit plan, and that's perfectly OK. If you want to get more informed on the transit plan, I suggest you contact the people working on it.