Transportation in Indianapolis: Take Two (Lafayette, Lawrence: employment, transfer, neighborhood)

[A2DAC1985]

Alright. The first thread was shut down. I didn't get what I wanted out of it's limited life. So, we're going to try this again!

I don't want this to get severely off topic, so I will give extra emphasis to try and curb such dialogue (maybe the internet can still read and comprehend words?):

I DO NOT CARE ABOUT COST. I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW IF PEOPLE WOULD OPPOSE IT. ALL I CARE ABOUT IS IF THE ROUTES WOULD WORK FOR THE CITY AND SURROUNDING AREAS, IN TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION AND MOVING PEOPLE AROUND THE AREA, AND IF THE MAPS HAVE AN AESTHETIC LOOK THAT IS COMPARABLE TO OTHER MAPS OF THIS NATURE.

With that in mind, what do you think about these routes/maps?:

Indianapolis_Metro_Subway copy2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Indianapolis_Metro_Subway copy | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Indianapolis_Metro_Subway_Map_Diagram_RED | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

My initial post (that was shut down) is here, Public Transportation in Indianapolis that Actually Works? , that explains my particular view point on this and why I made them to begin with. Feel free to read if you are intrigued. But it's not necessary for this particular thread.

My initial thought with these color coded lines is one that revolves around some form of rail. But feel free to think of those lines as bus rapid transit, express buses, expanded bus lines, priority access roads (I think I just made that up), expanded walking/bike trails, horse-and-buggy lanes, whatever floats your boat. I just want to know if you think those lines would help to improve movement through the city.

Your thoughts are appreciated.

[msamhunter]

No, your model still uses the old Hub and Spoke. 360 sq mile cities aren't very good at handling that. Too much time, and too much emphasis on having to go to the hub. For instance a person on W. 86th street having to take a 45 minute bus ride downtown so he can go to East 82nd which is another 40-45 minute bus trip. Then have to do it all over again. That's too much time when all a person has to do is go cross town.

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by msamhunter

No, your model still uses the old Hub and Spoke. 360 sq mile cities aren't very good at handling that. Too much time, and too much emphasis on having to go to the hub. For instance a person on W. 86th street having to take a 45 minute bus ride downtown so he can go to East 82nd which is another 40-45 minute bus trip. Then have to do it all over again. That's too much time when all a person has to do is go cross town.

Fair enough.

If I were to add something to it, I would (like IndyGo should be doing already) have bus service that uses 465. And ideally, I would also put in place a smaller loop bus route inside 465. Something like:

38th --> Emerson --> Raymond --> Tibbs --> Lafayette --> 38th

Do you have any other ideas? Would you add lines? Take away lines? Reconfigure them?

Hopefully I can deactivate my previous installation of Photoshop and I will be able to amend my current plan.

[msamhunter]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

Fair enough.

If I were to add something to it, I would (like IndyGo should be doing already) have bus service that uses 465. And ideally, I would also put in place a smaller loop bus route inside 465. Something like:

38th --> Emerson --> Raymond --> Tibbs --> Lafayette --> 38th

Do you have any other ideas? Would you add lines? Take away lines? Reconfigure them?

Hopefully I can deactivate my previous installation of Photoshop and I will be able to amend my current plan.

Township level. Each township has a hub with express routes dt and to the airport. Each township slightly overlaps with its adjacent townships. This will allow quicker routes, more routes and allow people to travel east to west and north to south without having to go downtown.

[chalcedony]

Originally Posted by msamhunter

No, your model still uses the old Hub and Spoke. 360 sq mile cities aren't very good at handling that. Too much time, and too much emphasis on having to go to the hub. For instance a person on W. 86th street having to take a 45 minute bus ride downtown so he can go to East 82nd which is another 40-45 minute bus trip. Then have to do it all over again. That's too much time when all a person has to do is go cross town.

I've never thought of it that way, but that's not a half bad idea at all. Even mostly rural townships like Franklin could find a hub in the Wanamaker area. While Lawrence could obviously use Castleton, Washington could use Keystone at the Crossing or Broad Ripple, Pike could use Intech, etc...

[msamhunter]

Originally Posted by chalcedony

I've never thought of it that way, but that's not a half bad idea at all. Even mostly rural townships like Franklin could find a hub in the Wanamaker area. While Lawrence could obviously use Castleton, Washington could use Keystone at the Crossing or Broad Ripple, Pike could use Intech, etc...

Franklin and decatur are so underserved, it's just an embarrassment. For ft, hub would more than likely be southport and emerson with meijer and st. F's right down the street or thompson and emerson.

[Chicago76]

Originally Posted by msamhunter

No, your model still uses the old Hub and Spoke. 360 sq mile cities aren't very good at handling that. Too much time, and too much emphasis on having to go to the hub. For instance a person on W. 86th street having to take a 45 minute bus ride downtown so he can go to East 82nd which is another 40-45 minute bus trip. Then have to do it all over again. That's too much time when all a person has to do is go cross town.

The reason the hub and spoke model exists is because the hub is often the only true point with sufficient job density to promote widespread use of transit. It is imperative that the ridership #s are strong enough that the system would only slowly bleed cash rather than instantaneously hemmorage cash.

This map is a nice start:

http://www.urbanindy.com/wp-content/...is-Density.jpg


If we could overlay the major employment areas (airport/465 on W side, downtown, Keystone/31 on North side) with the highest density residential areas (north along Meridian, NE side corridor, E-W axis near Washington, and S side to Homecroft), that is the best we could hope for at the moment using primarily BRT with maybe DT-airport light rail).

There is a catch-22 that you've identified though. If a system doesn't take someone on a fairly direct route to their ultimate destination, ridership suffers anyway.

OP: the route signage here is way too busy: Indianapolis_Metro_Subway_Map_Diagram_RED | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Destinations should be listed only on one side of the line (preferrably above) and the text needs to be slanted in the same direction, if at all. It looks pretty, but try reading it. If you want to add some artistic flair to it, I'd suggest putting text above the line with some sort of iconic designation below the line near each stop to show amenities. Ex: rather than putting a line over near I-65 (where buses could easily traverse on the interstate anyway), move the line west to the Greenwood Park Mall. Include an icon indicating shopping/Greenwood logo below the line at this stop. DT could have monument circle below the line. A stop in Broad Ripple an icon of the Monon Trail Bridge over the canal, a stop near IMA could incorporate the "LOVE" sculpture. Pts in closer proximity to bike trails a bike sign w/ a specific trail logo and so on. This allows you to "brand" the city better to visitors and it makes for an easy graphic representation of several key areas.

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by Chicago76

...OP: the route signage here is way too busy: Indianapolis_Metro_Subway_Map_Diagram_RED | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Destinations should be listed only on one side of the line (preferrably above) and the text needs to be slanted in the same direction, if at all. It looks pretty, but try reading it. If you want to add some artistic flair to it, I'd suggest putting text above the line with some sort of iconic designation below the line near each stop to show amenities. Ex: rather than putting a line over near I-65 (where buses could easily traverse on the interstate anyway), move the line west to the Greenwood Park Mall. Include an icon indicating shopping/Greenwood logo below the line at this stop. DT could have monument circle below the line. A stop in Broad Ripple an icon of the Monon Trail Bridge over the canal, a stop near IMA could incorporate the "LOVE" sculpture. Pts in closer proximity to bike trails a bike sign w/ a specific trail logo and so on. This allows you to "brand" the city better to visitors and it makes for an easy graphic representation of several key areas.

Thanks for the input.

I wasn't quite sure how to make a line diagram. I mean, I know how to, but I wasn't sure if the traditional way of doing such a thing would have been the best way to approach it.

I avoided using a strict "street name only" way of labeling the stops because I did want to give some "branding" to the stops. I felt like if I didn't include a street intersection with the neighborhood name, it would have left some people scratching their heads as to exactly where the stop was. That's where it gets a little crowded. If I had just left it as the name of the stop (no mention of streets), I could have placed them all on one side of the line.

I chose to angle them towards the main transfer point (in the case of the red line I posted, Monument Circle), and once past that point they were angled the other way. What also adds into the congestion of the diagram is the fact that I didn't space out the stops evenly, like a traditional map would. The red line itself (in the diagram) was a representation of the total time it would take to go from the far southern end to the far northern end.

With that in mind, you can see that Monument Circle isn't in the middle of the diagram. It's skewed to the left. Why? Because looking at the transit map as a whole, about 60% of that line (and about 60% of the travel time) is north of the Circle. About 40% is south of the Circle. That also factored into why I had alternating labels above and below the line. Some of the stops aren't far apart, so it would have been extremely crowded to place the stop names (along with the intersections) on one side of the diagram only. Tarkington and Rocky Ripple are much closer (physically and time wise) together than 96th and 116th. The diagram, at the cost of labels only on one side, reflects that.


Sidenote: Take a look at a diagram for the Brown line in Chicago. All the stops are evenly spaced and give the impression that the stops in the real world are also evenly spaced. That is not the case. Rockwell to Western (1/4 of a mile) is spaced just like Sedgwick to Chicago (more than 1 mile) is spaced. The approach I took to this diagram to illustrate the differences in time/distance.


As far as reading it... well... I'm sorry about that. Flickr would only allow me to post up to a certain size. It had to be resized to go on the site. My original photoshop file has the diagram being about the size it would be inside a train/bus. It is about 3 feet long and about 18-20 inches tall. It's much more readable at that size.

If I can get my stuff up and running again, I will definitely take into consideration your suggestions.

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by msamhunter

Township level. Each township has a hub with express routes dt and to the airport. Each township slightly overlaps with its adjacent townships. This will allow quicker routes, more routes and allow people to travel east to west and north to south without having to go downtown.

Duly noted. I'll tinker.

[ischyros]

I like it. I do agree about the hub and spoke thing. One complaint of the current system is it can take 2 hours to go from Castleton or Nora to the College Park area or St Vincent because they have to take the bus downtown, transfer and then ride all the way back out to 86th Street. This model should make that time much shorter, but they still have to come all the way down to 38th and back out. And even worse if you want to go from Fishers to Zionsville. As for the inline map, I'd have all on the same side and remove the part listing the intersection. I don't think you really need that.

That being said, with money being an issue, I think this is a good design. Even Washington, DC, which has what is often regarded as one of the best subway systems in the country, is kind of a hub and spoke design where you often have to go from the suburbs into the National Mall to get to any other suburb.