Reinventing the Urban Interstate: A New Paradigm for Multimodal Corridors (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 36-45
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 36... ...
Transit Versus Automobile Corridor Orientation The tradeoffs between freeways and transit lines involve the facilities themselves as well as the corridors they inhabit. The orientation of a corridor's urban form (including land uses and urban design)
|
From page 37... ...
These tradeoff choices will, in turn, determine corridor orientation and market segmentation. The following is a list of critical tradeoffs that describe and determine the relative success of a new paradigm corridor: • Transit corridor accessibility versus operating speed • Freeway accessibility versus operating speed • Freeway capacity versus transit ridership • Transit-oriented versus automobile-oriented urban form • Local access versus intermodal transfer stations • In-median and adjacent versus offset freeway alignment • Supplementary versus complementary transit and freeway service • Fixed versus flexible transit routing • Incremental versus concurrent corridor planning approaches Transit Corridor Accessibility Versus Operating Speed To a large extent, both transit coverage and operating speeds are a function of the number of stations provided on the transit line.
|
From page 38... ...
Table 4-2 suggests how this tradeoff can serve the purposes of developing a new paradigm corridor to have market segmentation and an optimized corridor orientation. Freeway Capacity Versus Transit Ridership Performance On transit lines that directly compete with freeways, ridership can suffer when freeway capacity is maximized.
|
From page 39... ...
Freeway capacity versus transit performance outcomes. Transit-Oriented Urban Form Automobile-Oriented Urban Form Market Segmentation Nonmotorized transit station access Automobile transit station access Corridor Orientation Transit-oriented Automobile-oriented Table 4-4.
|
From page 40... ...
Figure 4-4 illustrates the range of horizontal multimodal corridor alignments. In-median and adjacent alignments offer the greatest potential for cost-savings in land acquisition and construction for the transit line (assuming it is the second facility built in the corridor after the freeway)
|
From page 41... ...
These conflicts can be minimized by effectively dividing the corridor's travel market into long- and short-haul trips and then designing the transit line and the freeway to cater exclusively to one or the other. Although it is understood that traditionally the spacings of freeway interchanges are keyed to street patterns and design standards, while the spacings of rapid transit are keyed to bus routes, development densities, and street patterns, the effects of multimodal coordination can affect operations and patronage, without respect to the original intentions of the systems' designers.
|
From page 42... ...
Table 4-7 suggests how this tradeoff can serve the purposes of developing a new paradigm corridor to have market segmentation and an optimized corridor orientation. Fixed Versus Flexible Transit Routing One of the most important advantages automobiles have over traditional transit services is their flexibility -- wherever roads go, cars can go.
|
From page 43... ...
Table 4-8 suggests how this tradeoff can serve the purposes of developing a new paradigm corridor to have market segmentation and an optimized corridor orientation. Planning Multimodal Corridors: Concurrent Versus Incremental Approaches To understand how a multimodal corridor functions and its relative success, it is necessary to understand something about its history and the process by which it was planned, 43 Source: Courtesy Washington State Department of Transportation and IBI Group, I-405 South Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Pre-Design, Final Report.
|
From page 44... ...
can result in suboptimal operations and outcomes. Table 4-9 suggests how this tradeoff can serve the purposes of developing a new paradigm corridor to have market segmentation and an optimized corridor orientation.
|
From page 45... ...
generally be classified as having either a transit or automobile orientation. This chapter identifies the following tradeoffs that can be made when planning a new paradigm corridor: • Transit corridor accessibility versus operating speed • Freeway accessibility versus operating speed • Freeway capacity versus transit ridership • Transit-oriented versus automobile-oriented urban form • Local access versus intermodal transfer stations • In-median and adjacent versus offset freeway alignment • Supplementary versus complementary transit and freeway service • Fixed versus flexible transit routing • Incremental versus concurrent corridor planning approaches 45 Concurrently Planned Incrementally Planned Market Segmentation High level of segmentation possible Intermodal transfers/Transit as congestion relief to freeway Corridor Orientation Transit-oriented Automobile-oriented Table 4-9.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.