DENVER | Transportation Thread

[enjo13]

I guess I'm just strange, then. I have no problem hopping on a train, a bus, or a subway. I honestly could care less, as long as I have a clue as to where the thing's going!

That's entirely the point. With a streetcar (or anything else on 'rails') the destination is quite clear. It feels very regular, and generally is much better integrated into the traffic flow than buses (which are just another vehicle).

The 16th street mall is dead simple. It runs in a very clear straight line, and as such its very easy to utilize. Streetcars, with their well-defined paths and access points provide exactly the same thing. You'll never see development around a bus-stop, but you'll see it around streetcar stops because streetcars provide a huge psychological advantage. They feel permanent. They are fundamentally integrated into the neighborhood. Buses just aren't.

[glowrock]

Why is a streetcar more "clear" than a bus route, enjo13? Streetcars don't necessarily always take a straight path, either. And many buses DO take a more or less straight path (ie: 15L down Colfax, 31 down Federal, 76 down Wadsworth, etc...)

Again, I wasn't debating the investment surrounding bus stops vs. streetcar stops, but I don't think it's any more difficult to ride a bus than ride a train. I think the signage at major bus stops needs to be better (ie: route map of the local area), but still, I refuse to believe it's that big of a problem.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[bcp]

no way aaron....the MAJORITY of denver bus routes are absolutely insane and twist and turn making little sense. it's hard to get on a bus and know, without studying the map, where it's taking you...fixed-guide rails are just much, much easier.

that said, the 16th st. mall works great because it is 100% dedicated to the bus. that model could work great all over the center if dedicated areas were possible.

[Giovoni]

How many times has a streetcar/light rail/train that I've ridden in 15 years broken down: 0

How many buses that I've ridden in 15 years broken down: 3

How many times was I late to class or work because of those buses: 3

How many times as a Dr can I afford to not get to work reasonably on time: 0

How many times will I EVER ride a bus ANYWHERE because of the above: 0

If I'm going to ride something with wheels and feel the road all the way there it's going to be my own wheels with my own a/c, music, my choice of passengers etc. I'm going, in a straight line, from where I am to where I'm going in my car... not stopping every 3 blocks, unless I know when the express bus comes and get lucky and get on it, turn into every nook and crany of every neighborhood and add countless minutes or hours to my trip before I get kinda sorta close to where I'm going.

On rail I go from point A to point B.. the stops are logical, less frequent, faster. Plus I'm probably driving to a park and ride directly from my house getting on the train with largely a population of people who can also afford to have a car to drive to the park and ride and aren't the people who absolutely have no other option but the (blech) busses.

You can argue that some of the notions above aren't logical or are elite or snobby.. but you CAN'T argue that they don't exist. Rail just has "it" .. buses don't. How many young boys have model bus systems around the tree on Christmas morning? Why? Because busses are the fat desperate for attention chick that everyone can get on for next to nothing.. rail is the prom queen.

[DenverInfill]

I'm not arguing with your conclusions and decision, but 3 times in 15 years isn't that bad. Most people don't have that success rate with their own cars.

[Cirrus]

Why is a streetcar more "clear" than a bus route

1. You can see the tracks right there. Tracks are clearly different than the roads on which cars drive. That means it's easy to visually distinguish a rail line from a regular street, which is impossible with a bus line unless you already know where it's going. Even if there are good bus maps, if your route takes even one turn riders have to know about it on their own - they can't just see that it happens. BTW, this effect works on pedestrians too; preference for visual markings are why special pavers are so popular at major crosswalks.

2. Train headways are usually shorter than bus headways, so train lines feel more significant and more reliable. Not needing to consult a schedule is a lot like being able to see the tracks - it means you know with absolute authority that you will get where you need to go in short order. To get that on a bus, you almost have to be a regular rider, which means *new* riders are intimidated.

3. There are so many bus routes criss-crossing any major city that the bus map doesn't have any affect on how people think of their city's geography. On the other hand, in almost every city in the world with rail service, the rail map is one of the most dominant geographic indicators for that city. People look at a rail map once and automatically memorize its basic layout. People then think in terms of where they are on the rail map. For example, I tell people I live on the Orange Line and everyone in DC knows immediately what group of neighborhoods I'm talking about. This is why putting Boston's Silver Line on the rail map is such an important aspect of the Silver Line's success, and why you couldn't just call it the 15J or something. Of course, the catch with this is that though you can put a bus route or two on your rail map, you can't put very many on, or it defeats the purpose.

These are all *real* differences that have a *real* effect on how the majority of people perceive transit. If you don't perceive things that way then more power to you, but virtually everyone else does.

[Giovoni]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

I'm not arguing with your conclusions and decision, but 3 times in 15 years isn't that bad. Most people don't have that success rate with their own cars.

True most people don't.. and if I had used the busses every day to get to and from places it would be fine.. and I'm not saying the busses all suck and are idling waiting to be fixed by the side of the road. The point was just that the nastier, less desireable, more difficult to use, less direct mode is the one that has let me down in the past. The one I would prefer to have around anyway is the one that hasn't..

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

I'm not arguing with your conclusions and decision, but 3 times in 15 years isn't that bad. Most people don't have that success rate with their own cars.

Exactly, Ken. This seems to be much ado about nothing. My problem is not with buses vs. rail, or buses vs. streetcar, or anything else. I have no problem at all with streetcars. I do, however, have a problem with spending a LOT more money on a streetcar vs. more or better buses simply due to psychology. Would a streetcar handle more passengers? Would it be faster? Would it really attract more "choice" riders? I guess it all depends on the specific location and circumstance, but still...

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Giovoni]

The only reason we have cities, goods produced by others and then bought by others, the social contract, art, culture, sports teams, nice looking houses, architecture, design, uban planning or any higher function of human existence that doesnt include the three F's is ALL psychology.. so to dismiss psychology as an irrelevant reason to spend money is bunk.

In urban planning, if everyone prefers something more than another thing and the only reason you can pinpoint is psychology the answer isn't trying to argue against and changing the psychology.. the answer is giving everyone what they psychologically prefer. If you want to ask a computer what it 'wants' you can demand a rational answer. If you want to ask a city what it wants you sometimes can't expect that. Remember the arguement on Denverinfill about the sidewalk at riverfront park? So many people tried to argue that people "should" walk on the route that was there, its only a couple extra seconds..

"Why won't people just walk on the curved sidewalk????" (Or... "Why won't people like riding busses as much as rail?")
Sometimes the answer is just.. "because they won't!"

[1Post2]

A personal anecdote about this conversation.

I ride the #20 from the city park area to downtown nearly every weekday. When it gets into downtown, it heads down 15th street towards union station. My ultimate destination is blake street, but i always get off a couple blocks earlier because i'm never sure where the bus is going after that.

Keep in mind, I'm a regular rider. I have a map, and I know where the bus is supposed to go. But depending on the driver, it takes alternate routes to union station.

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Exactly, Ken. This seems to be much ado about nothing. My problem is not with buses vs. rail, or buses vs. streetcar, or anything else. I have no problem at all with streetcars. I do, however, have a problem with spending a LOT more money on a streetcar vs. more or better buses simply due to psychology. Would a streetcar handle more passengers? Would it be faster? Would it really attract more "choice" riders? I guess it all depends on the specific location and circumstance, but still...

Aaron (Glowrock)

You can increase capacity on most rail systems without increasing independent vehicles. The ride is smoother as well. Rails also give an idea of permanence to the system.

Putting a streetcar in empty land in the middle of nowhere is silly, but if you build a streetcar in such a way that it is well-connected to a major urban center, you can utilize the advantage of inspiring growth and confidence to boost development. Hence the "Portland Model"

And buses aren't as economical as you would imagine, especially given the fact that they are a liability (unguided routes in mixed traffic), they often are at the mercy of repaving projects (and in the case of the gold line in LA, cause them), their tendency to become late also costs money to employers, and they have a shorter lifespan than heavier rail vehicles.

[arkhitektor]

"I ride the train" (Translation: "I enjoy the convienence of leaving my car behind and commuting to work using mass transit because it is faster, cheaper and more environmentally responsible.")

"I ride the bus." (Translation: "I don't have a car.")

[DenverInfill]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

"I ride the train" (Translation: "I enjoy the convienence of leaving my car behind and commuting to work using mass transit because it is faster, cheaper and more environmentally responsible.")

"I ride the bus." (Translation: "I don't have a car.")

That's silly. I've ridden the bus for 10 years and have had a car the whole time. During commuting hours, if I had to evaluate the others on the bus based on their appearance, I would say 80%-90% of them have cars. If you have a relatively easy commute via bus to your job, particularly if you work downtown and would have to pay for parking, and you don't need a car during the day, riding the bus is a no-brainer. I love rail and find the experience more enjoyable than riding a bus, but the bus is just fine.

[PlanIt]

The economic benefits of having a streetcar is an important consideration. Imagine one streetcar line replacing the 15 and the 16th street mall shuttle, running down Colfax onto the 16th street mall, down to Union Station, and back up. Now, imagine how developers and real estate agencies in the Fitzsimmons area would market new housing and office space. Over the course of a couple of decades, we would see a clustering of new retail, higher density housing, and some office space all along the line. Colfax would become an increasingly desirable place to live close to as a downtown commuter. It would also attract tourists on the 16th street mall (who are in abundance) to ride the line into the colfax corridor. You see now how much the 16th street mall is marketed in Denver promotional materials, it is obvious that this new line and its shopping/dining opportunities would be marketed as well. Magazines would include it in articles about Denver much the way they do about Portland. Nobody is promoting the joy of riding the 15 to Cafe Star, or the Bluebird, or Fitzsimmons. Streetcars DRAW peoples attention, buses REPEL it.

[Octavian]

Originally Posted by PlanIt

The economic benefits of having a streetcar is an important consideration. Imagine one streetcar line replacing the 15 and the 16th street mall shuttle, running down Colfax onto the 16th street mall, down to Union Station, and back up. Now, imagine how developers and real estate agencies in the Fitzsimmons area would market new housing and office space. Over the course of a couple of decades, we would see a clustering of new retail, higher density housing, and some office space all along the line. Colfax would become an increasingly desirable place to live close to as a downtown commuter. It would also attract tourists on the 16th street mall (who are in abundance) to ride the line into the colfax corridor. You see now how much the 16th street mall is marketed in Denver promotional materials, it is obvious that this new line and its shopping/dining opportunities would be marketed as well. Magazines would include it in articles about Denver much the way they do about Portland. Nobody is promoting the joy of riding the 15 to Cafe Star, or the Bluebird, or Fitzsimmons. Streetcars DRAW peoples attention, buses REPEL it.

Ok, now imagine the 16th street mall shuttle being replaced by a street car over its current route. Would it be a great boon for Denver. I don't really think so.

Imagine extending the Mall ride bus down Colfax in the median. Why would that be worse than a streetcar?

It might be . . . but to know, I think you'd have to do a careful study, like those done for selecting the modes of transport for fastracks. There was a very clear rationale for EMU over DMU over lightrail on the East Corridor for example. There was a clear rationale for having the SE line be able to connect to the SW line @ I-25 and Broadway.

[PlanIt]

Would you want to ride the mall bus all the way to Fitzsimmons? I sure wouldn't.

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

That's silly. I've ridden the bus for 10 years and have had a car the whole time. During communiting hours, if I had to evaluate the others on the bus based on their appearance, I would say 80%-90% of them have cars. If you have a relatively easy commute via bus to your job, particularly if you work downtown and would have to pay for parking, and you don't need a car during the day, riding the bus is a no-brainer. I love rail and find the experience more enjoyable than riding a bus, but the bus is just fine.

My commute is into the city from the north via Commuter Rail, then back out of the city several miles to my office in an inner ring suburb south of downtown. Perhaps its because part of my commute is actually out of the city during rush hours, but most of my fellow passengers if I ride the bus are homeless or otherwise riding because they have no other way to get around. Even though it takes me a bit longer and requires more walking, I usually ride light rail for the second part of my commute over taking a bus.
Even if it is irrational, there is a stigma associated with busses that exists, and most people would rather ride a train over a bus.

[DenverInfill]

Sure, if I had the option of taking rail or a bus between any two points, I'd pick the train every time. But in Denver, there are hundreds of bus routes, from Locals that bring people into Downtown from central Denver neighborhoods to Regionals that bring people in from far-flung suburbs and, during commuting hours at least, the overwhelming majority of those riders probably have a car at home.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

That's silly. I've ridden the bus for 10 years and have had a car the whole time. During commuting hours, if I had to evaluate the others on the bus based on their appearance, I would say 80%-90% of them have cars. If you have a relatively easy commute via bus to your job, particularly if you work downtown and would have to pay for parking, and you don't need a car during the day, riding the bus is a no-brainer. I love rail and find the experience more enjoyable than riding a bus, but the bus is just fine.

I've gotta disagree with you Ken, I don't think that's silly at all. I think that's exactly what most people think (really, there's a reason that RTD's rather excellent express bus program can't even dream of comparing with rail for attracting commuters). Bus couldn't really be anymore convenient than it is for me, but no thanks, not when I do have a car available. There are a lot of variables that have to come together there in your equation - easy bus commute, work downtown, have to pay for parking, don't need a car - that's getting to be a fairly narrow demographic, when on top of that you have a stigma to combat. No...my bus days ended with my undergrad. It gives me a headache to jerk around in a loud box. RTD has a long ways to go (technologically) to make buses compare favorably.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

"I ride the train" (Translation: "I enjoy the convienence of leaving my car behind and commuting to work using mass transit because it is faster, cheaper and more environmentally responsible.")

"I ride the bus." (Translation: "I don't have a car.")

That is certainly not true in the central city or anywhere that could be described as reasonably urban, but it is probably fair to say it becomes more true the deeper one gets into suburbia.