No love for DDIs? Lol trust me, they’re going to be all over in a few years. So many in the planning stages.
Something I’ve seen in Connecticut that’s actually pretty cool is using old rail lines for BRT lines. I don’t think we have any lines here that would be useful that are going to be up for grabs.
2 Likes
Yeah I think that not having dedicated lanes between Gorman and Kent/Method is a bad idea - isn’t the point of dedicated lanes to avoid the areas of greatest congestion? If the concern is weaving between vehicles getting onto the beltline and the BRT lane, add a queue jump for the bus lane at Kent/Method.
4 Likes
The Southern BRT map they showed appears to just show the intersections that they are studying as part of the traffic impact analysis (and whether it is signalized/unsignalized today or not). At least I hope the Tryon & Wilmington Extension intersection is signalized 
2 Likes
1 Like
It still hasn’t started yet because that route has always been planned to be the last of the 4 routes to go through project development.
Think about it: that route may be the shortest of the 4 proposed corridors, but it’s also the most complex and the one that’s the most impacted by other, existing roadway projects. You can’t really start to design it until other plans like the Capital Blvd. North corridor plan (where Pierre’s PDF is from) are formally adopted and when BRT-specific features for RUSbus are finalized. If you don’t wait, you may just waste your time because the constraints of this BRT line could change as you’re designing it.
This is true, but how would you make DDIs work with bus-only lanes?
Me too. Besides, having an unsignalized intersection there that still “prioritizes” BRT makes no sense…?? Especially if they want to bring more TODs around that intersection.
3 Likes
Just like any other interchange (whether the lanes are on the inside or outside would depend on the traffic patterns between the road and freeway to reduce conflicts between the right turns).
Now whether a DDI is appropriate along a corridor that is slated for BRT is another issue.
As far as making a DDI work with BRT I think if they have queue jumps and send them down the middle with the sidewalk maybe? Now I’m curious, I’ll do some digging to see if we have any plans anywhere with that type of scenario.
2 Likes
During the planning for the beltline rebuild, the DOT reps at the public meeting said they weren’t considering BRT at all for their design. Then at the initial public meeting for the BRT at the convention center, the GoRaleigh reps specifically said that bus lanes are not possible through DDI’s and they were thinking about a queue jumper lane if it was possible.
Diverging diamond interchanges have diverging and converging moves from both the right and the left lanes so there isn’t really a consistent place to put bus lanes.
At any rate I don’t think this is as important for the success of the line as Kent-Gorman. Mixed traffic through there will be problematic.
4 Likes
It’d cost and be complicated but they could definitely incorporate a dedicated busway through the center. It’s far fetched, but Let me sketch something up.
3 Likes
Good luck… 
You can see more detailed plans in this NCDOT presentation given to NC State, as well as some of the state’s planning documents for the 440 “improvements”. It doesn’t look like you’ll have lots of wiggle room, though, since I assume support columns will need every square feet it can get (but their positions, grade of retaining walls etc. aren’t explicitly drawn in).
Notes for additional context about this portion of the interchange upgrade projects (since it deals with several different exits):
1 Like
Would be interested to see this. For a bus to cross to the center it seems it would need a separate signal cycle independent from car traffic proceeding in the same direction, on both sides of the interchange. Which means when car traffic heading through the interchange has a green light, buses get a red. Might slow down busses worse than just putting them in mixed traffic.
1 Like
Wake Transit just posted this tweet saying they anticipate 100% of the design work complete by this winter? and awarding a construction contract Spring 2022 for the New Bern Ave BRT.
19 Likes
Fantastic! I hope part of the budget is on marketing and education to the public on how this isn’t “just another bus”
5 Likes
We talked about this a bit upthread and, as always, I have a strongly held, somewhat contrarian opinion.
In my opinion, it’s much better for BRT to be seen as an effort to “make buses better” rather than “make something better than buses”. We want the shine of BRT to reflect onto the entire bus system, not throw shade on it.
The fact is, even after all the BRT routes are complete, a lot of people will still only have access to “just another bus” in their neighborhood. We don’t need a marketing plan that makes humble city buses seem worse in any way! It will just backfire.
I should also mention this post by @Kevin which gives me cause for great concern as to the direction this will go…
4 Likes
Very good points. The argument in Atlanta has always been that people won’t ride it because of the horrible misguided notion that MARTA (busses and trains) is only for poor people.
It seems like there’s, at least slightly, a better view on transit here in Raleigh.
Thinking about it that way, that’s true BRT could be used to look at busses overall in a better way.
I hope so!
6 Likes
I personally don’t see this as a zero-sum fight, but instead, that it’s more helpful to see BRT as something else, a new transit modality with an unfortunate name that’s neither a bus or a train.
But… also… is it bad if I don’t care? The city and county already has a robust, Jarrett Walker-approved transit plan with 15-minute-headway bus corridors (rather than a hypothetical rail service) as a backbone. Since we’ve been putting in so much money and hours into such a service, I feel like we don’t need to be worried, for now, about BRT overshadowing much-needed bus improvements in Raleigh.
The city’s latest internal updates on BRT branding and amenities doesn’t seem to suggest this, though? I’m pretty sure I’ve alluded to this, though (maybe it got lost in the noise lol), but the fine print said this in a GoRaleigh subcommittee meeting as recently as last month:
5 Likes
Disappointed if they don’t go with GoRapid.
1 Like
Also! Making this into a separate post: city staffers are leaning towards the full Wilmington St. route option for the southern BRT corridor. They already committed to the Wilmington St. route (rather than Saunders) for the northern half in October.
From the GoRaleigh board’s monthly meeting last week:
This Wilmington St. extension doesn’t exist yet, so it must be built (and, before that, we have to see if it makes sense to build it in the first place). By using this route, the city can buy right-of-way for cheaper, the BRT won’t have to fight with existing US-70/401 traffic and stoplights, and there will be more TOD opportunities. So from a cost, development opportunity, and equity perspective, the numbers seem to favor this option.
There are two funky design issues with this for the southern part of this corridor... (click me)
…the first of which is figuring out how to make BRT cross Tryon Rd.
The city and NCDOT are finishing up the traffic impact analysis of the potential intersection (and nearby roads), and they found an alternative where BRT can run through this intersection without grade separation. Staff are still working on finishing this analysis, but it seems like the key conclusion is already there…?
The second question is why the Garner portion of this BRT corridor is shaped so weirdly:
…to which the answer is that Garner Station Blvd. (the solid orange line) already exists, and is mainly a four-lane road with a median that barely gets used. Compare that to the ten-lane behemoth around the 70-401 split with tons of traffic and turn lanes, and it means this is actually not that bad of a detour!
Besides…
This proposal passed with 5 ayes and 2 (Omokaiye and Stevenson) abstentions. Before we can start building this, it still needs to:
- go through public comments (starting later this month?)
- pass a City Council vote (later this spring, or in the summer?)
- be written up as a Locally Preferred Alternative and sent to the FTA
- get a funding rating from the FTA (if the rating sucks, this corridor project will die here)
- go through 0-30% engineering and development (the Western corridor’s here), which includes detailed traffic and environmental analyses
- go through 30-100% development (the New Bern corridor’s here)
- get all non-federal funding allocations sorted out
- get chosen by the FTA for federal funding (the New Bern corridor’s lucky and got here early)
You can watch the full presentation here.
5 Likes
The MARTA is good, I don’t get the concern!!!
It’s the 9th largest system it’s just Atlanta is so spread out that it’s only useful for maybe 10% of the region’s population. Even downtown itself is so spread that there are parts where it’s impossible to walk to a Marta station such as some of the biggest destinations in the former tuner field, Ponce city market and Atlantic station
1 Like