Interesting idea, I was curious how Raleigh downtown compares to the loop in Chicago:
6 Likes
My personal take on the Chicago Loop is that it is a magnificent piece of transit infrastructure. It’s a fantastic way to distribute riders around the core of the city (well, the “loop” as the CBD itself is called.)
Having used it a few times, I think the size strikes a good balance between accessibility and speed, although I think eight stations is too many (six or maybe even four would be better). It also was built to serve downtown Chicago as it was in 1895; it misses important places like Streeterville that have grown up since then.
I think a transit loop (even if ours is on-street and carries buses instead of trains) would serve us well. We just need to be sure not to overload it with too many stops, and be sure it provides good access to the up-and-coming parts of downtown rather than just the core.
4 Likes
Here’s a map of what I’m thinking… There’s not as many options streetwise as I expected. It also shows the 4 stops in the corners.
5 Likes
So as currently planned, does each BRT line terminate in downtown, or is just what you are proposing? I thought the proposed lines were more continuous north-south and east-west? Although, I guess it wouldn’t be too hard of a transfer. If I’m coming from the North and heading to a NCFC game at the Cargill soccer stadium, I’d take green line to RUS station, hop off, grab a quick coffee or just wait, and then hop back on a yellow line bus. Actually doesn’t seem that bad.
I’m not sure what the current plans are for the buses once they get downtown. This was just an idea I was throwing out there for fun. But yes you’re correct, the buses continue farther north-south and east-west I just didn’t want to draw the lines for the whole route.
So what you’re suggesting is pretty similar to what I’m suggesting. No wonder, my idea is based on yours!
The main differences are:
- I’m suggesting to use Lane instead of Edenton for the north side of the loop. I see the tradeoff; Edenton makes a smaller/faster loop, while IMO Lane gives a better station location for Glenwood South and Smokey Hollow. Another interesting note is that GoTriangle owns some land there at the corner of Harrington and Lane, including a property between Harrington and West, which would be a great spot for a stop, would allow for Lane to be punched through to West, and would allow them to generate some revenue through TOD like what they’re doing at Union Station phase 2.
- I’m showing a different way for the Western Blvd buses to get into downtown, via West Morgan Street and a new bridge over the tracks between Central Prison and the Morehead School. I think this is a best case scenario since it puts a station in a great spot along West Morgan Street and it increases connectivity. I think it would be possible - the city studied a bridge in that spot a few years ago and it was found to be mostly feasible. But if this isn’t in the cards, a connection by Boylan, West Street Extension, Dawson/Morgan, or Wilmington/Salisbury would work as well.
6 Likes
I actually like your map better than mine! I didn’t take the Lane/West or Western/Morgan connections into play. If those are possible I think it’d be better options.
Lane/West is easily possible and in fact highly desirable since GoTriangle already owns the land.
Western/Morgan would be physically feasible
(reference alternatives 2 and 4 of the city’s Blair-Hunt-Morgan connector study) but expensive and require negotiation with the state for a corridor of land between Morehead and the prison.
2 Likes
I had never heard of the Blair-Hunt-Morgan connector idea before. Thanks for sharing.
Thinking a bit further on this, besides the Western-Morgan connection which I would admit is a stretch,
the riskiest piece of this BRT loop is signal priority where the buses cross Dawson and McDowell. This happens at Lane (Westbound) and Martin (Eastbound.) These are state highways and I remember this was a sticking point a few years ago when we were considering alignments for on-street light rail through downtown as well.
With a perfectly timed one-way pair like Dawson/McDowell, it is not possible to have perfectly timing on all the cross streets. It is, however, possible to perfectly time the signals on just one of the cross streets, in just one direction. I would pick Eastbound Martin as that street on account of the BRT. Then, on the north end, I would have a flyover to cross the pair just north of Lane, next to the railroad tracks.
The BRT route is orange, the flyover is green, and the land owned by GoTriangle is purple.
This would be kind of expensive ($10 million?) but it does fit with the topography and existing built environment, would benefit all four BRT lines, and it could save about 3 minutes for every single bus that uses it by bypassing the traffic lights at McDowell and Dawson.
5 Likes
What if a fleet of these connected our downtown loop. Have them run every 5 minutes regardless of passenger, and queues of them ready at each BRT or bus/transit station ready to leave once someone gets in. Then maybe we don’t have to bring brt through downtown and can have it be a node on the downtown loop.
1 Like
This is a great idea for tourists, but for people who use this service everyday, they’d enjoy the tunnel the first time or two but they’d stop paying attention pretty quickly. Transit users consistently rate reliability, convenience and speed as what they want most out of a transit system.
3 Likes
because the platform doesn’t tell me which post you’re replying to (or does it?), I am going to take a guess that it’s the one where I suggested that the path between stations could also be an art installation. If so, I was not suggesting a tunnel. I was suggesting that it be at the sidewalk level so that it’s not just for those in transit. It would be for everyone.
Yeah, that’s what I was referencing (I misunderstood about the tunnel). I’m 100% on board with public art on sidewalks, but I don’t think it’s relevant for transit riders.
That being said, I LOVE the idea of pedestrian-oriented art installations. They’re fantastic for tourists and for local people who are taking a walk but don’t have a tight deadline (i.e. not commuters or people with “places to be”).
1 Like
My thought was to kill many birds with one stone. If transit riders were required to walk from one station to the other, at least make it an experience.
1 Like
Some of us are seniors, with onset of mobility problems. Quarter-mile isn’t far, until you’ve done a round-trip on crutches. Especially in the rain. Doing the quarter-mile round-trip several times a week? I don’t think a significant part of the electorate would buy that.
The United tunnel at ORD was enjoyable the first few times I went through it. After that, ho hum.
1 Like
I am saying this is an ideal situation. I am only saying that, if there were going to be two stations and people HAD to walk, why not make that walk better?
As for the example of the UA terminal at ORD, it was just an illustrative example of how that experience was improved.
I sincerely apologize for causing so much friction over just sharing an idea.
Oh, thanks but there’s no need for an apology. I was merely calling attention to the plight of some seniors who already “hoof it” from their home to the nearest bus stop and again from the bus stop nearest their destination to their destination. If the city then interposes a walk to make a bus connection, it becomes quite burdensome. I hope the city bears this in mind, that’s all.
2 Likes
Agreed. And I am certainly no senior (quite yet) but it’s getting difficult to be as mobile for a longer period of time unfortunately. 
1 Like
This convo reminds me on all the Metro stations in Paris. Each one has a different style/decor to it. One has tiles of letters covering the tunnel and you can find words (wordsearch) while you wait for the train. The Louvre station has copies of some of the paintings you will find in the museum above. One station has gigantic gears sticking out of the tunnel, like some sort of steampunk movie. Each station has its own personality, and I think that is awesome and interesting for the riders while waiting for their trains. I am not typically a fan of “public art” but this is one form of public art that I fully support. Too bad we don’t have an kickass metro system like Paris where we can go crazy with this sort of thing. 
2 Likes