basics: the "new route" problem

When people think of a new transit need, they often jump prematurely to the idea that they need a new route.  This new article of mine -- linked to in Chapter 7 of my book -- explains why this can be a bad idea.  

Comments

[Greg in Osaka]

Jarrett

Picking up on your versatility point sometimes a new route or network will be needed because the current network design may not be working particularly well. Perhaps the current network may be completely radial and new cross-town routes are needed. Meandering indirect routes probably need to be replaced by more direct routes.

Of course the new/restructured routes/networks would be consistent with what you point out in the article re connectivity, frequency, legibility etc.

[Daniel]

An example of a proposed new route in Brisbane, which is getting criticism for wastage:

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/sillyglider.html

[Morgan Wick]

On "The Existing Service Doesn't Stop Exactly Where You Want" and the topic of deviations, I'm surprised you didn't add "(Of course, the real solution is to be on the way in the first place.)"

[Yvonne Li]

Love this article - it is making me think outside the box, so to speak. My bus loop proposal for Rosalie is simply to help residents get across suburbs rather than move into the city which is what the bus routes in Toowong ward currently do. Perhaps there is way to enhance the existing routes. i am not opposed to this, just need a solution and I'm not wedded to making a new bus route to get it happening.