The Monday Roundup: A threatening float, Pokemon Go, walking while black & more

Streets that should have them: Powell, Barbur, Burnside, 122nd…

As a very regular transit user, I would agree that 12 minutes (not 15) is probably a good minimum standard frequency to make buses really work for people. I’m glad to see to see TriMet and Metro Transit (here in the Twin Cities) expanding their 15-minute high frequency service, but I do think that in the long run 15 minutes will still not be considered quite good enough. I’ll point out that TriMet doesn’t even have 12 minute frequency on its MAX trains most of the time. One thing I like about Metro Transit’s light rail trains is that they run every 10 minutes, which also just makes them easier to use: if you know a southbound train comes by at :16, you know it also comes by at :26, :36, :46, :56 and :06. Just makes figuring out the schedule sooooo much simpler.

I also agree that making buses faster is also necessary. As an example, on the route that goes from near my house to downtown, in higher density areas it usually stops EVERY SINGLE block, plus the bus is often stopped for a significant time at each stop as multiple people board, dropping average speed well below that of a bicycle. Frankly, it’s kind of agonizing to ride those last two molasses miles into downtown, and I’m usually wishing I was on my bike. The same thing happens with many eastside (and NW) Portland routes as they approach downtown.

Full-blown BRT is great, but expensive and time-consuming to develop. Last month Metro Transit just opened the A-Line, an “arterial BRT” (think of it as “BRT Lite”) service that offers a lot of the speed benefits of full-on BRT at much lower cost and construction time. Stops (which all have heated enclosures and electronic signboards) are spaced 1/4 mile apart, you pay before you board, and there are extra-wide doorways to allow mass boarding and deboarding through both doors at the same time. As a result its speed approaches that of light rail through a similar urban environment. It’s GREAT! I wish every bus line were like this, and I hope TriMet can start doing it too.

MT is planning to add aBRT along its most popular routes at the rate of about one per year going forward – I think my route is 3rd or 4th in line, so looking forward to that. There is some signal prioritization for buses in MT’s aBRT scheme, but not total signal preemption as light rail and “heavy BRT” has.

Full signal preemption and dedicated bus lanes are among the features of full-blown BRT, but harder, more expensive and more politically challenging to develop. “BRT lite,” if you want to call it that, can get you those benefits in much shorter order.

Of course doesn’t solve the problem of bus routes on congested arterials, and I think the most effective solution may not be holding out for fully dedicated bus lanes, but semi-dedicated bus lanes.

One solution used here in Minnesota is that state law allows buses to use freeway shoulders whenever there is congestion. Due to a number of factors (more sprawl and way too many freeways but also a much higher concentration of jobs downtown) Metro Transit has a large number of rush hour express routes that use freeways, and it’s awesome to watch buses rip along the shoulder, bypassing all the stopped traffic. The express route from near my house hops on the freeway about a mile from my house and usually cruises the shoulder for at least part of the route. This gets me downtown in about a third of the time as the nearby local bus route, and probably faster than light rail would cover those 5-6 miles.

Freeway shoulders, which are underutilized much of the time, are one example of buses not having a fully dedicated lane, but still effectively getting one most of the time. In Portland I think we can find other examples of underutilized pavement that could be repurposed: think of those long parking lanes along 122nd (you know the ones, that force the bike lane uncomfortably far from the curb) that hardly ever get used. You could ban parking along those during busy times and turn them into bus lanes. Some lane reconfiguration would be needed (maybe move the bike lane back to the curb as effectively a parking-protected bike lane, with the parking replaced by buses during rush hour). Of course you may still need fully dedicated right of way approaching busy intersections, but I think there are ways you can get 90% of the benefit of dedicated lanes by sharing the space with other lanes that aren’t fully used.