AG 1994 09 19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Existing Charlotte Transit services are efficient, but the critical question for the future is one of placing services where they are needed. The City should look closely at the types of services provided in outlying areas and consider cutting back on certain services and removing "big buses" from the ends of routes (using timed transfers and smaller vehicles to address the "ends of the route" productivity issues). Short-Term (3 to 5 Years) RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Express, local, and regional bus services are the preferred alternative. These services meet the needs of working commuters and those without automobiles. 2. "Special Bus Services," typically operated with small buses or vans and which are employment-oriented or serve special purposes such as "feed- er buses" and route deviation, were ranked second by the subcommittee. 3. Carpools/vanpools, and the provision of reversible lanes or high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on existing streets or highways, tied for third place. Long-Term (5-25 Years) 4, Express, local, and regional bus services again ranked Erst in the subcommittee's consideration for future transportation alternatives. 5. hight rail - and discussion of development and growth-related policy decisions necessary to support the creation of a light rail system - ranked second. Most members feel a light rail system is the preferable mode for future development in this city and region. 6. Reversible lanes and HOV lanes in existing streets and roadways are the third most important set of long-tem~ alternatives. 7. Separate HO¥ lanes/busways ranked fourth. When HOVFousways were combined with light rail, however, they exceeded conventional bus alternatives as the first choice for the future. Still, buses should be used until ridership and revenue justify the investment required for light rail. These subcommfttee recommendations are based on a prioritization exercise. 11.