From: peirce@outpost.SF-Bay.org (Michael Peirce)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Viable auto alternative system? (long)
Date: 9 Oct 92 23:24:09 GMT
Reply-To: peirce@outpost.SF-Bay.org (Michael Peirce)
Organization: Peirce Software
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1


In article <92283.31435.J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> (ba.transportation), J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
> In <qrlmrks@sgi.sgi.com>, Jeremy Higdon writes:
> 
> >It's not as hard as you might think.  With a hub-and-spoke transit
> >system, you can get pretty reliable transfers.  And late at night,
> >when this is especially useful, traffic is least likely to cause
> >lateness.
> 
> I would heartily agree.  With the funny looking network known as the Santa
> Clara County Transit system, there are very many connections between lines.
> "Assured connection" would require precise timing with close to 10 other bus
> lines in some cases.  By using one or two "main lines" operating with few stops
> at high speeds (like BART or CalTrain), and local connections to those other
> stations, we could not only have all of the buses leave right after the train
> arrives, but it would be far easier to plan to have all feeder lines enter
> a "hub" at or near the same line.
> 
> For example, I can walk/bike/drive to the Blossom Hill CalTrain station (but
> with only two trains daily, it's hard to rely on this), board the train, and
> get off at the Sunnyvale station.  I could then get on the 54, which should
> (ideally) be waiting and ready to leave.  The 54 would then drop me off right
> in front of the building I work in.  With CalTrain going from South San Jose to
> Sunnyvale in around 30 minutes, and a bus waiting to depart from the Sunnyvale
> station, I could commute to work in 45 minutes.  And that's with existing
> schedules!  They could certainly cut 10 minutes from that by creating more
> express runs and having the bus depart right after the train arrives.  Such a
> system would be as fast as existing SCCT "express runs" (the express bus I
> sometimes use, the 122, still takes about 50 minutes).
> 
> Such a system would require that local bus routes begin and end at major
> "transit hubs" where there are train stations.  It would be a change, but it
> sure beats getting on the 81 and transferring to the 28 and then to light rail
> and then to the 53....

And people wonder why folks don't take transit.

People don't want to mess around, they want to get somewhere with
the least amount of hassle.  I know people who will take a longer
car trip just so they avoid sitting a lots of stop lights (they are
taking a longer, but more convenient highway trip).

If you want to have people use transit you need to make it much more
easier to use than it is.  

As the the stick approach, elected officials aren't too likely to
make the voters too unhappy.  Even for something a mild as building
car pool lanes, they're getting seriously beat up.

You'll quickly see an elected official become and unelected official
if they vote for manditory fee parking.

--  Michael Peirce      --   peirce@outpost.SF-Bay.org
--  Peirce Software     --   Suite 301, 719 Hibiscus Place
--                      --   San Jose, California USA 95117
--  Makers of...        --   voice: (408) 244-6554 fax: (408) 244-6882
--            SMOOTHIE  --   AppleLink: peirce & America Online: AFC Peirce
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,rec.railroad