[Busguy2010]

Study finds that Parking costs Omahans more than Metro Transit

Omaha Study Finds Transit Programs Cost Less Than Parking, Reduce Parking Demand « Verdis Group | Blog

[harshbarj]

Lets also not forget that the fewer cars we have, the smaller parking lots need to be and the more space we have that can actually be used. Just look at the old aksarben area. Such a waste with only a few buildings in a sea of parking. If you could get even a third of those people to take transit(more would be better, 50%+ would be ideal), you could add more buildings and get an even better use of the land.



the car has it's place, just not in a city.

[iamjacobm]

Harshbarj that is probably Omaha's worst planning decision of the past decade. I think we were desperate to take anything on that land and now with Aksarben Village growing in a truly mixed use urban fashion it just highlights the massive failures made at First Data and UNO South Campus.

We could have had some incredible development that stretched from Pacific to Center.

[harshbarj]

Originally Posted by iamjacobm

Harshbarj that is probably Omaha's worst planning decision of the past decade. I think we were desperate to take anything on that land and now with Aksarben Village growing in a truly mixed use urban fashion it just highlights the massive failures made at First Data and UNO South Campus.

We could have had some incredible development that stretched from Pacific to Center.

I'm not actually a fan of Aksarben Village. It's not really what I call mixed use. Most of the buildings are single use. you either have an apartment building or an office / retail building. When I think mixed use, I want to see ground level retail with perhaps some office above that, and then apartments above all that. Granted it's better than the west Omaha sprawl, but not really the growth I want to see. Just look at just about any street in any major European city to see a fine example. Let's choose Copenhagen as I like the Danes and their style!





Now lets see what I think is the closest that omaha has to this...




Which would you choose.... Note how the Copenhagen view looks alive, and the Omaha view is dead. One is very people oriented, the other automobile.



Lastly, South Omaha. Alive but still car oriented which gives a strong feeling of danger (just try crossing 24th and L without running I dare you). Buses don't have a place to pull into to drop off or pick up as they do in more people oriented cities.

[Old General]

Originally Posted by Busguy2010

Study finds that Parking costs Omahans more than Metro Transit

Omaha Study Finds Transit Programs Cost Less Than Parking, Reduce Parking Demand « Verdis Group | Blog

I'm not anti-car at all. However, there are other good ideas out there. I've seen several major urban areas where they have Park & Ride areas - a large parking ramp in the other suburban area where people park, then are shuttled into the urban center. The parking fee, and ride, are less than half what it would cost to park downtown, assuming you could even find a parking space downtown.

The main problem with Omaha's Metro Transit is that, though it is getting better, it has been a very poorly run entity. They're having a hard time winning people's trust.

[Busguy2010]

Originally Posted by Old General

The main problem with Omaha's Metro Transit is that, though it is getting better, it has been a very poorly run entity. They're having a hard time winning people's trust.

I guess I just don't get it. I think Metro does a fine job of serving the areas that are most likely to use it ie. north Omaha, Downtown, South Omaha, Midtown, central Omaha.

I think the only ones whos trust they'll have a hard time winning is the suburbanites. Metro runs clean buses, is timely, friendly and serves the area well. I think its mostly a social issue, where people who don't ride the bus think people who do are lower class than they.

Unless they ride the express which is like a suburban bubble for them. I remember a few times riding express routes there were all the well dressed privy professionals looked at my dad and I like when we got on the bus wearing our clothes that we normally wear.

Well anyway this thread is less about metro and more about revealing the unknown costs of parking which we all think of as free.

[harshbarj]

Originally Posted by Busguy2010

I guess I just don't get it. I think Metro does a fine job of serving the areas that are most likely to use it ie. north Omaha, Downtown, South Omaha, Midtown, central Omaha.

I think the only ones whos trust they'll have a hard time winning is the suburbanites. Metro runs clean buses, is timely, friendly and serves the area well. I think its mostly a social issue, where people who don't ride the bus think people who do are lower class than they.

Unless they ride the express which is like a suburban bubble for them. I remember a few times riding express routes there were all the well dressed privy professionals looked at my dad and I like when we got on the bus wearing our clothes that we normally wear.

Well anyway this thread is less about metro and more about revealing the unknown costs of parking which we all think of as free.

While they do a good job running what they have, the routes they have are very poor. If you look at any major city, you see the buses run on a grid system so no one is more than about 6 blocks from a bus. It's not till you get out to the far suburbs that service gets more spaced out (about the equivalent of 120th here).

Buses in other cities also run MUCH more often than they do here. While the big lines run fine, many others run every 1-2 hours. If you want high ridership you need both of these areas to improve. That's a big reason I decided to switch to commuting by bicycle permanently, because before the line I was on was eliminated, it ran ever hour to hour and a half (every 2 hours on the weekends). So if you missed a bus, or one was early (which was VERY common) your day was shot.

I like the bus, but service needs to be improved. It will be costly, but in the end the citizens of Omaha would see a benefit.



And I am anti car, VERY anti car

[Raphael07]

Originally Posted by harshbarj

I'm not actually a fan of Aksarben Village. It's not really what I call mixed use. Most of the buildings are single use. you either have an apartment building or an office / retail building. When I think mixed use, I want to see ground level retail with perhaps some office above that, and then apartments above all that. Granted it's better than the west Omaha sprawl, but not really the growth I want to see. Just look at just about any street in any major European city to see a fine example. Let's choose Copenhagen as I like the Danes and their style!





Now lets see what I think is the closest that omaha has to this...




Which would you choose.... Note how the Copenhagen view looks alive, and the Omaha view is dead. One is very people oriented, the other automobile.



Lastly, South Omaha. Alive but still car oriented which gives a strong feeling of danger (just try crossing 24th and L without running I dare you). Buses don't have a place to pull into to drop off or pick up as they do in more people oriented cities.

I disagree with these examples. Aksarben is actually a pretty good example of a successful mixed use. Although the individual buildings themselves may more single use oriented, the development as a whole is multi-modal. Also, as a matter of fact, very few buildings in Europe ever contain retail, office, and residential in one. There are plenty of single use spaces in Europe, and it's usually only in the either touristy or business districts where uses mix. People everywhere have the same set of differing values, if that makes sense. Some people want quieter urban neighborhoods, which is what the residential areas of Aksarben, and the West and South Old Markets are like. Others want more lively urban spaces, which you can find in Midtown Crossing, The Old Market, the Core, and, someday, Crossroads and North Downtown.

Also, the Old Market-Copenhagen comparison isn't the most valid thing with the images you provided. Based on the traffic in the Old Market from those pictures, it's either midmorning or late afternoon, so of course the area would be dead! People are working. Even then, that picture is from just about the only angle in the Old Market where you can't see people. Move the image a few feet back or forward and suddenly groups of people pop up everywhere!

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=omaha...,95.53,,0,9.97

On top of that, Omaha and Copenhagen are two very different beasts. Copenhagen is a city that is more than 1,000 years old, is the most major city and capital of its country, and developed primarily before the automobile. Omaha has none of those things, so of course it developed differently.

Even then, Omaha tried making a street like that with less focus on cars and wider sidewalks and no parking, and we got the 16th Street mall out of the deal because the proper infrastructure didn't exist/wasn't used enough to support it. In 10-20 years when Omaha (hopefully) has its improved transit, developments like 16th street will be able to succeed. But it won't happen overnight.