Mar 21, 2008
this should be interesting
a little bit of what i've been up to at work lately. linky is self-explanatory.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
good boy.
foco weather
broadcasts from around the galaxy
frozen h2o
bicycles
fellow travelers
- a problem of the good kind
- jedionabike
- tp
- mod
- carney
- davey boy
- the dirt blog
- bike fag
- maynard hershon
- gb seth
- suhl
- sydney b
- 34 x 20
- hoss
- thad's zine: lincoln ve-low
- ckb
- 8 feet in the fort
- chris p
- stone cold lampin'
- emily remotely
- austin single speeds and beer
- carp, he'll pull your teeth out
- tw and fam
6 comments:
hey sda, speaking of transportation... I ride the bus a lot and a recent letter to the Lincoln Journal's editor pointed out that a grid system would work better for our fair city than the 'spider web' currently woven. Until I read that, I confess I really hadn't considered various configurations of bus routings and their respective efficiencies. You know anything about this topic?
It is a little counterintuitive but the "grid" approach tends to produce more rides; the "spider web" approach tends to cover all your bases. So we call them the "productivity" vs. "coverage" models. Here is my take on it:
The "spider web" approach is good for linking common community destinations together (schools, hospitals, some major employment centers, etc.) and works well for smaller communities where transit is often operated essentially as a social service for those who have limited mobility options (the sick, the young, the elderly, those who have trouble getting/maintaining a drivers license, etc.). These groups tend to make up a realtively small portion of the population and a similar portion of a communities work force. This is significant because most of the demand for daily travel in a community is related to the am/pm work commute.
The vast majority of a communities population have choices when it comes to their mobility needs - we call them "choice" riders. To attract choice riders to transit you need to provide efficient access to destinations other than those I mentioned above. The grid system is the most effective for providing access to more destinations overall, and tends to produce more rides - because the choice riders can get where they need to go efficiently. So in that sense the grid can become more efficient by attracting more riders (the goal of transit in larger urban areas) who pay more fares back into the system (not to mention fewer cars on the road, which makes the whole transportation system more efficient).
The grid design also introduces some operating efficiencies for the agency (StarTran if I remember correct) - fuel savings and revenue hours from more direct travel patterns are the two key areas. Travel time is extremely important to choice riders, so cruising down an arterial is much less frustrating than winding your way through suburbia or hospital parking lots.
The caveat though, is that in order for the grid system to succeed folks have to be able to access the bus (begin their trip) and then complete (after they get off the bus) the trip safely and efficiently. This is where the walking and biking environment of the city comes into play. Since the grid approach tends to pull service out of the core of some neighborhoods and onto arterials - bike/ped access becomes key.
Research shows that the typical transit rider is willing to walk a quarter mile to a bus-stop. It also shows that you can stretch that if there is a high pedestrian level of service (LOS) that is direct, safe, continuous, and .... a little interesting. Biking access can be stretched to 1-2 miles(or further if your inclined like some of us) but then of course you either need a bike carrier on the bus (they have those in Lincoln yet? They are unbelievably cheap for the agency if they go about it correctly with grants ....) or a secure place to leave your bike at the stop. If you don't have these elements in place the grid system will not achieve its full potential.
This is where land use comes into the equation. Compare the feel of the Near South neighborhood (higher density, a mix of uses, complete sidewalk network, narrower streets and street crossings, a grid that allows for direct access to arterials, interesting architecture, parks, and whatnot) to the newer development say, oh I don't know, much of south lincoln neighborhoods(lower density, limited uses, dead end cul-de sacs with limited connectivity, pretty good but sometimes incomplete sidewalk connections, curvy streets that are sometimes wider ...). All of that has a big impact on how efficient transit can serve portions of town and how much people will use it once its on the ground.
So what I'm saying is, some efficiencies will result immediately by introduction of a grid, but its more than simply changing the structure of the routes. There needs to be a comprehensive approach that considers access/egress to the system and land-use patterns if a community makes the commitment make transit a viable choice for its inhabitants.
Sunday morning brain dump = done. Thanks for bearing with me. I'm going for a xc ski now ;).
Thanks, sda. That was really interesting and I appreciate the time you took to explain. I did some web searches and didn't come up with anything.
Your explanation helped me understand why Lincoln may be sticking with a web approach. And, no, they don't have any bike racks on the busses yet. Which is unfortunate. I know it would be useful for my youngest boy. He could put his bike on the bus to get to the Y, so he could enjoy more time there, then ride it home after bus service quits at 6.
heh, you'd have to dig pretty far into some fairly uninteresting (unless your a transit geek such as myself) research literature to ferret that stuff out on the web.
too bad about the bike racks. doesn't make sense to me why they wouldn't do that.
i like the way you ignored allard in the announcement. i would have done the same...
cp -
it was easy - he came to the party late. salazar instigated the whole event .... but when the chief of staff of a us senator calls, you can't really say no.
Post a Comment