You're crazy for taking the bus - update
Looks like i'm not the only one noticing that as the Triangle's cities get larger, the needs for a bus system that actually serves the community get more pressing.
From the N&O:
That's right, only 10% of Durham's bus stops have either shelter from the elements or a place to sit.
The reason, at least in Raleigh:
cities experiencing the growth that Triangle cities are currently have choices to make. There are more people to move around, but essentially the same amount of space in which to move them. Widening roads and building new ones, which amounts to socializing the costs of a private transportation decision, only does so much. Public transportation is going to have to receive a much larger chunk of the budget if Triangle cities (and to be honest, i'm mostly talking about Durham. If Wake County citizens want to live in little Atlanta, that's their choice) are going to retain their livability in the face of astounding growth rates over the next decade or so.
From the N&O:
Out of roughly 1,700 stops (in Raleigh), nearly 1,600 lack shelters. More than 1,300 stops lack even a bench, leaving the majority of Capital Area Transit's riders -- 13,000 a day -- to stand by a lonely pole. Durham riders face much the same: 150 shelters or benches for 1,500 stops. In Chapel Hill, the chance of catching shelter or a seat at one of the 606 stops is about 1 in 3.
That's right, only 10% of Durham's bus stops have either shelter from the elements or a place to sit.
The reason, at least in Raleigh:
. . . Raleigh provides far too few on its limited budget of $13 million to operate the bus system, a sum that equals about what the city is spending to widen two roads.
cities experiencing the growth that Triangle cities are currently have choices to make. There are more people to move around, but essentially the same amount of space in which to move them. Widening roads and building new ones, which amounts to socializing the costs of a private transportation decision, only does so much. Public transportation is going to have to receive a much larger chunk of the budget if Triangle cities (and to be honest, i'm mostly talking about Durham. If Wake County citizens want to live in little Atlanta, that's their choice) are going to retain their livability in the face of astounding growth rates over the next decade or so.
Labels: transportation issues
Since 1949, Durhamites have slept soundly, secure in the knowledge that, in our town, erection can be depended upon. Now, thanks to the power of the internets, we can spread that security all over the world.
4 Comments:
Barry
Thanks for highlighting this issue, and taking the discussion beyond the usual bitch-about-the-bus level that is out there. I would say, for the most part, our public transportation systems do a really good job for the meager funding they receive. I think we need a radical reworking of the transportation paradigm in this country, which, in my mind, would include a disentanglement of gov't involvement in private transportation except to regulate environmental/public costs. Let's get public money focused on public transportation/infrastructure.
GK
By
Gary, at 11:22 AM
i'm looking forward to Kevin's report on his bus journeys.
i think that in Durham, and i assume this is true in most midsize cities that aren't in very specific parts of the country, the bus is only there for people who can't afford to won a car.
and by "can't afford to own a car" i mean really can't afford to own a car, because the number of clankers and junkers that i see on Durham's roads, that can't possibly cost more than a hundred bucks, is pretty large. You have to wonder how many of their drivers can afford to have car insurance.
Since the middle class, and even much of the working class, shuns the bus (and we won't even discuss the elites), there's no base of support, and no built-in constituency to appease by throwing a decent amount of tax dollars to making the bus a genuine lifestyle choice.
it's a pretty vicious cycle. Kevin asked the question in private, and he hope he asks it out loud: Do any of our elected officials ever ride the bus? In NYC, it's common to see people from all stations of life, including people who are in positions of power, on the bus or the subway. There's no class divide,a nd as a result, the political will to make sure those systems are funded at levels reasonably near to what they need exists.
In Durham, not so much.
It'll be interesting to see what Thomas Stit, late of Art Pope's employ, has to say about this. Pope's other baby, the John Locke Foundation, released a study earlier this year calling for more and wider roads to relieve congestion, which is precisely the stupidest policy recommendation that the city of Durham could follow.
By
Barry, at 11:36 AM
I'm not sure what Gary means by disentangling government involvement in private transportation. Ethanol and petroleum subsidies? CAFE standards? Help me out here...
That said, Barry, you're beating a drum I've been trying to beat without much success ever since I moved back here. I remember being told at a Sierra Club meeting that any emphasis on buses was likely to fail because "there's no political support." And as I think I mentioned at BCBC dinner last week, when I tried to engage Becky Heron about it, she essentially implied that the TTA (that of, at most, four stops in Durham) would solve most of the problem.
As bad as things are, they're a lot better now in Durham than they used to be. I'm not sure more than a dozen shelters existed before a building program went into effect a few years ago. That we're up to 150 now is at least a sign of progress.
Three years ago or so (I still have the article somewhere) the Washington Post ran a series of articles about buses in DC, and how construction of the Metro (don't get me wrong - a very, very good thing) had essentially caused the bus system to be ignored. One of the things that they pointed out was that in Arlington, simply spending $80 at each of several major stops on a large, customized map of the system, showing where you were and where you could go, caused ridership to jump like %250.
As for when the bus system moves from being only those who are transit dependent to having some substantial portion of people who opt away from their cars to transit, the general rule of thumb I've heard for buses is 15 minute head-times. i.e., if someone misses their bus, they're willing to wait 14 minutes for the next one, but not 19 or 29 minutes. Given that we're currently sitting at 30 minute head-times, getting there for the whole system would likely involve doubling our budget. Unfortunately, doing it just during rush hour isn't that much less, as you have to have the buses to put in service during those times, and right now, most of the time about 70% of the fleet is out serving routes. You save on maintenance, gas, and labor, but not on capital costs.
By
Unknown, at 12:07 PM
Sorry. I hesitated to get more detailed with limited time to get into the trickier points. CAFE standards are a regulation of public cost, so no. I'm talking about pulling away from the business of building roads for endlessly increasing private transportation. Convert all Fed/State roads to toll (and reduce gas tax concomitantly), even sell off some roads to private sector when appropriate. Roll funds into infrastructure to support bus/rail. Again, I've thought through a lot more detail, but that's the gist.
I've ridden the TTA for 3+ years now, first to Chapel Hill, and now to Raleigh. It's, for the most part, great. But I live and work 5 minutes from the start/stop point and the state/UNC pays the bus fare. So I'm quite forgiving of a late bus or inadequate shelter. I tried taking the DATA for awhile to my practice up near Durham Regional, and that was no fun.
The unfortunate problem with our bus systems in the Triangle has little to do with the transportation infrastructure, though, and a lot to do with our land use. Until/unless we end up building more densely, public transit isn't going to become much more successful. Of course, if gas goes up to $30 a gallon, that would probably change the incentive to move near the bus route. The advantage of rail, in that case, is the difficulty in changing a route or a stop. The added value of moving to a dense development near a stop can't be removed because of transit politics. Unless they never build the rail, like for "Station 9."
GK
By
Gary, at 1:29 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home