The city has $900K a year devoted for this. What else ya got? 
Well, how bout some of that food and hotel tax money? 
4 Likes
I think Option 1 is the best here. 2 & 3 just don’t make sense to me unless there were other routes offered, like a subway map looks
1 Like
Option 3 looks like it would be a logical trimmed down version but it doesn’t have any time over option 1.
The drivers must have a welcoming attitude. Most times when I take the R, I feel like an inconvenience to the driver. These initial encounters are VERY important for those not accustomed to Mass Transit (includes all buses). Patience & a smile doesn’t cost much.
2 Likes
But the type of vehicle has a direct impact on route options. Trolley type = smaller = more route options.
Whatever the route is, it needs to stop at the new Publix. Giving DT residents a way to get to/from the grocery store seems like a no brainer to me.
What if option 1 was modified to just go straight south on West St. into the Warehoue district, and then hook to the east on Martin Street to get back to Salisbury?
What if the second bus ran clockwise on a similar route but ran south on Blount and north on McDowell to get back to Martin?
Both of these routes would give riders access to Publix/Smokey Hollow/Glenwood South, Warehouse District/RUS, RCC/Duke Energy Center, Moore Square/Marbles, etc.
4 Likes
In any case, we need to add one or two more vehicles to the route to improve the frequency. Trip time matters some, but wait time matters more.
1 Like
This is the “problem” we have with the R-Line as it is being used by a lot of different users. Residents, visitors, commuters, workers, social, etc. are all using it now when it was really designed as a convention center amenity back in 2009. (RCC opened in 2008)
I approached it from a thinking of, “How can it be frequent and serve the most areas?” and still within the biggest constraint of no new cost. (that $900k a year I mentioned earlier)
It’s possible too that the future transit options may offset any shortfalls that the R-Line has so we should all try and not think of this in a vacuum. The R-Line will never be bulletproof.
4 Likes
Good point Leo, but I can make an argument that conventioneers would appreciate access to the same things as residents. I’ve been a conventioneer many times, and access to entertainment, transportation, services (like groceries), food, and shopping are always things that I appreciate in another town.
I don’t think that the solution needs to be an either/or situation in regard to conventioneers and residents.
3 Likes
How about Option 1 but continue on West St to Martin St without the jog over to Glenwood Ave? Cross Martin St back to Wilmington St. This simplifies the route into a rectangle and eliminates a couple of turns/lights making it faster. It also reaches Raleigh Union Station. The Convention Center is a 2 block walk.
I think people will happily walk 2 blocks if they can catch a circulator bus with high frequency.
5 Likes
I’m not a big fan of Option 3. Having ridden the R-Line a number of times, I see a lot of people shuffle on/off the bus at the Seaboard Station stop. I attribute this to the affordable housing directly behind Seaboard. I wouldn’t want to see those folks lose their access to downtown.
4 Likes
That makes 2 of us with the suggestion to go down West St. instead of the jog to Glenwood. 
This really does make sense.
But, it can still make the jog to the convention center and the performing arts center, and still be faster than option 1.
1 Like
oops John, sorry I missed your earlier suggestion, but I obviously like it.
BRT LANES? Another advantage is this route would largely run where there are BRT lanes so the circulator should be able to take advantage of those also.
COUNTERCLOCKWISE: I like the idea of a counterclockwise bus to provide flexibility instead of two in the same direction. How about Blount/West on Martin/South on West St/East on Peace? Both buses would service West Street and RUS that way with stops on both sides of West St.
This should be a relatively quick loop with only 4 turns to make.
1 Like
I attended a meeting today where this was discussed. It was mentioned that 5 options are being considered; the 3 routes Leo mentioned in the discussion above and one “e-Cab” hail on demand option and one hybrid. The discussion on the e-Cabs was wide ranging from “How is this different from Uber, funded by the city?” And “Wouldn’t this better than running a 40 foot bus through the streets?”
Leo, maybe you can offer additional details on the idea.
Also, I asked how the chosen plan would relate to the RUS/GoRaleigh Station circulator mentioned in the BRT plans and the response was that any plan adopted for the R-Line should be considered a short term (2 to 5 years max) plan which will be adjusted as the city changes around BRT and other development.
3 Likes
Yes, basically there is one plan where the rline routes proposed above operate until only 9pm and then an electric cab company would take over. Only 2 or 3 cans would run due to funding.
The last plan is for full electric cars running all day in place of the bus route. Only 4 or 5 cabs can be afforded in this plan.
I felt like both these plans were duds due to the vehicles being 4 seat sedans and so few being available.
4 Likes
After compiling all the feedback from the stakeholder group, the “candy cane” option was the top choice. There’s still a lot of interest in electric cabs but staff suggests this option. Keep in mind there’s still more work to do and a public feedback process to go through so this isn’t done yet.
3 Likes
I’m fine with this option (it’s not an overwhelmingly great route -especially, for example, if I want to go out to Glenwood after an event at the convention center or a concert), since it still gets the job done. Even better if there’s two buses running at the same time in a way that it feels bidirectional.
I’m more worried about the arguments on that poster, though, and how weak that message is. “4 out of 8 stakeholders liked this!” and “18 out of 24 categories were met!” are… kind of meaningless to anyone outside of the planning committee… (not to mention, it doesn’t sound like a convincing reason to support this option)
Leo, do you know if there’s any work on better wording for this announcement that actually sounds convincing to the general public?
3 Likes
From my perspective, there was no clear best option. This had 4 out of 8 while others had 2 or 3. No majority really.
Also important to add is that they see this, the final, updated product whatever that may be, as an interim circulator solution and can be adjusted in the next 5 or 7 years as new things start to be put in place including more frequent local bus routes, BRT, the RUSbus station, etc.
How quickly they’ll respond to that change is yet to be seen. The R-Line has been in it’s current form for 10 years without a major change.
Yes, they’ll be something more polished to share. Not that this isn’t ready to share we just have to recognize where it is in the process.
3 Likes
My bad, I should’ve been clearer (post is edited now); I didn’t mean that as in “isn’t there a better route option”, but more like “isn’t there a better way to pitch this route to everyone else”?
I agree the route itself is a reasonable and flexible compromise, especially as long as it doesn’t get warped towards specific landmarks and get ground into a halt like the current route.
1 Like