Have you ever ridden a municipal bus?
In the last week it came to my attention that I know many people, including some supporting Proposition A, have never once ridden a city bus. That was me well into my 30s. So my poll this week is trying to see if readers here have actually ridden a bus or not. The poll is in the right column.
I’m still no daily rider but I’ve ridden the bus in several cities so I feel I know enough to give a general overview. Hopefully more experienced riders will add their tips in the comments below. The route number for the bus is show at the top and on the sides, #13 in the above example. Where you have more than one bus using the same stop this is helpful so you get on the correct bus. All our buses here have bike racks on the front. I was very nervous the first time I went to place my bike on the rack.
In these examples the rack is folded up since it is not in use. Loading your bike just requires you to pull down the rack so you can load your bike. Each rack will hold two bikes in opposite directions from each other. The rack has trays for the wheels and a bar to hold it securely in place. For more information see Metro’s Bike-N-Ride FAQ page.
Regular adult fares are $2.00 and $2.75 with a transfer valid for a connecting bus. Bus drivers do not give change so if you use three singles to buy a pass w/transfer you will not get any change. Unlike our light rail where you buy a ticket and just walk on, with a bus you pay as you enter. The fare box accepts bills and coins. Riders with passes just swipe their pass as they enter. See the Metro Fare Chart for all the details.
Riders are asked to exit the set of doors that are midway toward the back. That allows new passengers to begin entering the bus.  Unlike our light rail, or commuter rail/subways in other cities, a bus doesn’t automatically stop at every stop. A pull cord runs along each side of the interior of the bus. You pull the cord to alert the driver you wish to stop at the next stop.
If you are among those that has never ridden a municipal bus I encourage you to do so. I still prefer modern streetcars but the bus has a place in most transit systems.
– Steve Patterson
Buses are very useful for transit, and I think one of the things holding people back from riding buses is their misconception that it is unsafe or for poor people. Quite honestly I think that a bus is safer than a metrolink train (not to say I dislike metrolink) because on a bus the driver has to check everyone who gets on the bus, on metrolink anyone can walk on if security isn't checking tickets at the time.
Buses are very useful for transit, and I think one of the things holding people back from riding buses is their misconception that it is unsafe or for poor people. Quite honestly I think that a bus is safer than a metrolink train (not to say I dislike metrolink) because on a bus the driver has to check everyone who gets on the bus, on metrolink anyone can walk on if security isn't checking tickets at the time.
Anything is a bit scary the first time. Just ask. A good place to start is Metro's own website: http://www.metrostlouis.org/GettingStarted/FAQs… To Ride MetroBus
I also agree that there's more of a perception here that buses are “unsafe or for poor people” than in many other cities. I'd chalk some of that up to the existing route structure, which focuses on serving St. Louis city, but I'd place the biggest “blame” on how the region has evolved into a fragmented political structure that is primarily suburban in density. If you don't have access to public transit (Jefferson or St. Charles County, much of St. Louis County), and you think of yourself as “not poor”, middle class or better. then, yes, you'll likely perceive the bus as something “unsafe or for poor people”.
For Metro to get beyond this perception, three things will need to happen. Highway congestion will need to get a lot worse (making driving oneself a much bigger hassle, and not 2-3 times quicker than taking the bus), pay parking will need to become a lot more pervasive and Metro will need to provide real suburb-to-suburb service. The vast majority of the trips in the region aren't focused on downtown St. Louis – the bus sytem shouldn't be, either . . .
Nine years ago I took a bus from the Forest Park station out to St. Luke's Hospital. It took over an hour, as is snaked up and down streets in downtown Clayton, and drove around in circles at Missouri Baptist. Including the Metro ride from the Convention Center, and finally cabbing it for the last six miles to my parents' house, it took me 2.5 hours to get from downtown to Clarkson and Kehr's Mill Roads.
As someone mentioned already, the bus will not be competitive to private automobiles until traffic has become so awful, or owning a car so expensive, that people turn to buses as an option. I can't justify taking an 1.5 hour bus ride to my particular place of work when I can get there in 15 minutes. It may be a little stressful at time during that 15 minute commute, but having lived in a large East Coast city where I commuted by bus every day because I couldn't afford a car, it is a LOT less stressful than waiting around wondering why my bus was not coming.
Your experience going from Mid-County to St. Luke's hospital is one reason I am in favor of the idea of Rapid Bus Transit lines on the interstate. I live in Mid-County and work near St. Luke's, and any commute there takes much too long, party due to the fact that so much time is spent winding around on local streets.
I never really rode the bus until I realized it was important for me to do as a supporter of Prop A. Now I have realized that it is also convenient and fun! I took my little brother downtown for Yesterday's St. Pat's Day Parade on the bus and we made it downtown in record time. Driving would have been much worse (but I do live in the city right on a bus route).
I know everyone here obediently bows down to the deity that is public transportation but I let's be realistic. A bus is not a viable long term personal transportation solution for the general populous. They are unreliable, slow, uncomfortable and inconvenient.
I just don't think that's true. There are only a couple of bus lines I take regularly (the 18 and the 70) so I can't speak for all of them, but I'm satisfied by those I use. They are reliable (when I'm running late I pray they are too…and they're usually not), no less comfortable than my car, not much slower than driving (for small trips at least; I can see how on longer trips with more stops the time difference between driving myself and riding the bus increases, but most of my longer trips involve the MetroLink), and practically free with long-term passes (saving on gas money plus getting 1 more car off the street and limiting the pollution I put out). The only inconvenient thing is the infrequency of some routes, and as more people utilize those routes and more money goes in to the system, the routes (hopefully) get run more frequently. The only trip I use my car for regularly is to the grocery store, and that's mostly because I like to do my shopping rarely and in bulk and it's hard carrying all those bags on to the bus.
Buses and street cars were viable 50 years ago when people lived and worked within a few miles, whose friends and relatives likewise were in close proximity to them, and there simply was no place to go outside of the city. But today, I see the bus's only valid use is when your car is in the shop.
Just a question, when was the last time you rode a bus?
I can't tell you. It's a secret. Sorry. But I will continue my rant against my nemesis -the bus. A better solution? Honestly? How about shared taxi services that were the norm many many years ago and still the main form of pub trans in other countries. Definitely more convenient with curb service in many cases. Their relatively small size makes them more nimble in traffic causing negligible congestion compared to the behemoths that lumber around our fine city currently. They're more fuel efficient and cheaper to maintain. The city just needs to get out of the transportation business.
I don't really understand your argument here. How are buses causing that much congestion? They seem to be pretty minor contributors to traffic compared to the number of cars on the road (most of which are single occupied). If everyone currently using the buses switched to using taxis with 2-3 passengers per taxi, wouldn't that lead to even more congestion? And how nimble in traffic do you need to be? It's not like taxis can zip between lanes anymore than buses can. Per vehicle they're more efficient, but I'd have to see some hard data to believe they're more fuel efficient per passenger than buses.
Also, the city doesn't run Metro and is out of the transportation business.
Is it regulated by the government? Is it funded by the taxpayer? Yes and Yes. Thus, the city is in the transportation business.
The big bulging buses are not designed for use on city streets. They are designed to be used on long distance interstate roads. Have you ever been in the left turn lane waiting patiently for that magic green arrow to appear, only to be shocked back into reality by the sudden looming presence of one those monsters barreling down on you as it tries to navigate a right turn?
And besides the danger it poses to vehicles a fraction of it's size and weight, there is the congestion it causes with the sudden stops that force all the unfortunate souls that couldn't speed past it on the left to sit and wait through another light cycle.
City transit buses are specificallu designed for use in urban traffic, while over-the-road coaches are specifically designed for long-distance travel. I'm also not too concerned by their “looming presence” – they're operated by trained professionals whose jobs depend on NOT hitting you, unlike the many multi-tasking commuters out there who view driving as a necessary evil . . .
If you're not on a dependable bus line, it is pretty much useless isn't it?
Mike, none of the adjectives you use to describe the bus system are true. I am a daily rider using various lines on various days. Most people with your perception have rarely ridden or caught a particular bus on a bad day and use that for justification. It isn't always perfect but never as you describe.
When I was on the grand jury they gave us bus passes and I used them.
It was a good experience but I would have difficulty saying I'd really, really take the bus even if I worked downtown because I'd still be paying to keep a car, when the weather sucked I drove, carrying groceries on the bus is a drag that I couldn't talk myself into, having to run to make a connection or risk waiting was NOT fun, etc.
I have ridden public transit in many cites including SF, STL, and CHI. I even tried riding the bus/metro for a month to see what my savings/costs were and where I saved alot of money it cost me alot of time. My commute every morning was from South City to North County. It took me 1.5 hours including almost a mile walk into the office. I was fine on nice days, but rainy days sucked, and I can only imagine what it would have been like in the snow. If they ever put a stop closer to my office, I might try again.
I rode the 16 City Limits to the Skinker Station when I worked Downtown and lived in DeMun Hi-Pointe. It was extremely reliable, and enjoyable. It took about a half hour, door to door, which was great. I got in about a half hour of reading going to work each day. Going home, I would usually talk with fellow passengers. I got to know several people this way. Riding Metro builds little communities this way.
Of course, I had the luxury at that point in my life of setting up everything around the transportation system and moving to a walkable neighborhood. I selected De Mun because I could walk to the grocery store, Kaldi's, and church –my other major destinations. That year I changed the oil in my car exactly once –meaning I drove less than 5,000 miles. I was single and fresh out of college, so it was pretty easy to achieve this kind of setup. The only unfortunate thing about it was that I hated my job, and ended up quitting and moving to a different company in Creve Couer, MO.
After getting married, we moved to South St Louis, as buying in Demun Hi Pointe was infeasible. It now takes me about a half hour driving to get to work and I miss the MetroLink. Riding Metro to work would now take over an hour for me. I do still take the Hampton 90 to the MetroLink when needing to go to the Airport. $2.75 Metro fare beats a $30 taxi any day, and is only marginally slower.
For those who say it's not viable, it totally is for many people, especially for those who are able to structure their lives around the system. But it takes some careful planning. And unfortunately, still some variables are not under your control.
I ride buses successfully every day – several different routes in the course of a week to various jobs and for shopping, visiting friends, or just exploring. Buses are almost always on time and drivers are generally courteous. Planning ahead is essential: use Metro schedules or Google Transit. Steve: a TRANSFER TICKET is good for any combination of train and bus for two hours, not just bus-to-bus. Yes, bus travel can be tedious so bring a book or take a nap. Or start a conversation!
City routes go through old neighborhoods once linked by streetcars – areas where “New Urbanism” could take root. Yes, streetcars would be fun, and useful, but streetcars can't make detours for events like the St Pat's Parade and Mardi Gras. In Toronto, streetcar riders have to wait for the parade to pass by (and they can get very crabby about it!). In St Louis a transit rider will check on-line RIDER ALERTS, updated daily, to know how bus service will be maintained and when extra trains may be available. Sometimes Rider Alerts are also posted at transfer stations and on City streets.
The negative perception of buses has roots in racism: when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, white people stopped riding. Add to that the cult of the personal automobile made possible by cheap gas and subsidized highways, and we have a depopulated urban core surrounded by ever-increasing sprawl.
Metro has been stretched thin trying to keep up. It has done an excellent job in spite of meager resources and lack of respect. Support of Prop A would mean St Louis has a chance to become more than a few gentrified enclaves surrounded by wasteland, linked by automobiles, and smothered by bad air.
It's pretty extreme to blame the decline of public transit on “the cult of the personal automobile”. By definition, a cult is “a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.” If anything, the users of the personal automobile have become the majority, while the users of public transit have become the cult . . .
The primary reason that the private automobile has become the preferred method of transportation for most Americans is simply convenience – like a horse or a bicycle, and unlike public transit, you can go when you want, where you want, directly. You don't need to worry about schedules or transfers, and you're not screwed if you're running a few minutes late. You can also carry a lot more stuff (important in our consumer society) than you can on public transit. And, unlike a horse or a bicycle, and in many cases, public transit, in a car you can go both faster and further. Are there tradeoffs? Of course, and we all know what they are. But to assume that public transit has none or fewer is both myopic and way too idealistic.
Public transit does have place in contemporary America. Given the right investments, both financial and in urban planning, it can play a bigger role in many urban areas, including St. Louis. But remember, even in the heyday of the streetcar, it wasn't the only option. At its core, transportation, of any type, is just a tool. Become a better solution, and more people will choose public transit. And, unfortunately, guilting people into using transit isn't very effective . . .
I live in the suburbs and don't work in the city, so generally none of Metro's current routes are useful to me. However, once when I took the train home from Chicago I was able to take the Twin Oaks Express home. I had a pleasant conversation with a lady on the bus and it was a perfectly nice experience overall, that'd I'd recommend to anyone. If I ever change jobs to somewhere in the city I'd consider taking the bus to work, although unless the location is perfect I'd probably have to move closer to keep the commute time under an hour.
@Mike: I beg to differ. My dad has been using the bus for his daily commute to and from CWE to K-wood. Yes, he's a little crazy for sticking with it through thick and thin, but the overall benefits for the past 25+ years (less $ than a car, fitness from walking to/from stops, relaxing w/ a book instead of dealing w/ traffic, environmental benefits) definitely outweigh the costs. It's very convenient for him, only a few blocks total of walking for the entire trip. He's just an average guy, and it works.
You say they are unreliable. Do you have specifics to back up that assertion? I have asked my Dad what his experience has been and he states that they are consistently on-time. Never more than 1-2 min. early or 3-4 min. late. Sounds pretty acceptable to me.
The bus is not design for use in a city. It's for long distance hauling of many people. Like Greyhound. Trying to shoehorn the bus into a city transportation scheme is just nuts. Studies have been done and found that the city bus, the ones that are designed to carry 50 people, on average carries only 7 passengers at a time. This doesn't even include the dead-head routes that these big white elephants must make throughout the day. And all at 5 mpgs. Talk about a waste of fuel. Come on. Why are we even discussing this?
Some buses, maybe. But have you ever ridden the Grand bus? On the stretch between Arsenal and Delmar it's packed, standing-room only. Same for the Kingshighway, the Taylor in the morning, and probably some other lines as well.
No, although I'll put it on my “to do” list. Thanks for the suggestion. Quite frankly, the bus is bogus. The cost to put a new bus in service is over 300k. The maintenance over a 10-year period is prohibitive. Add in the cost of insurance, general cleaning, storage…where does it end? Plus the already stretched taxpayer is forced to fork over thousands of dollars year after year to the many hundreds of former bus drivers who demand a pension for 20 or 30 years.
A bus is like any other tool – you need to use the right one for the task at hand. Buses come in all shapes and sizes, and yes, Metro could be more surgical in both their acquisition and utilization. But much like how buses have to spend a fair amount of their time underutilized, most automobiles spend the vast majority of their time parked, waiting their owners' return, consuming vast quantities of real estate . . .
Most of the buses I ride are the smaller ones, not designed for 50 passengers. But think about the math. If a bus gets 5 mpg, then it only takes 5 passengers to be getting 25 mpg per person. The average US fleet mpg for all cars and light trucks is 19.8 mpg. Since most passenger vehicles are single occupant vehicles, that big “lumbering” bus with only 5 passengers is getting better gas mileage than the average single occupant car. Hardly a white elephant.
And unlike private vehicles, the better transit we have, the more people will be riding them, and the mpg per person will come down.
Congestion is another matter. We only need to imagine 25 people lined up on the road in 25 single occupant vehicles, and compare the congestion with those same 25 people in one bus and you can see which causes more congestion.
The private automobile has had a devastating impact on land development, wildlife habitat, air, and climate. Most of the time the the bus is not more convenient, although sometimes it is. But those who can give up a little convenience should make the effort and ride the bus for the sake of a better, healthier world.
At any rate, the extra convenience of the private automobile is not sustainable and we won't have this option looking into the future.
I ride the bus and or the MetroLink nearly daily for all of my commuting needs in inclement weather. I usually by the monthly pass from October to April. I would be unable to do so if not for Google Maps and an Iphone. I rode on 4 different bus routes yesterday to get to church, eat out with friends and meetings. Coordinating all of that via printed maps would be impossible for me. The online help from Metro is great, but not when you are on the go. Mobile apps are a must.
I am buying a commuter bike this week and will find out for myself about the racks. I have never used the racks on the busses. I have brought my bike on-board the MetroLink, however.
The busses still have too many stops to be efficient. I recommend a stop every 3-4 blocks. More shelters would help in bad weather as well. I was caught out yesterday without an umbrella and used 7 stops that have no shelter. Of course they were all on the Northside, which probably has the largest ridership and most ignored infrastructure. Oh well.
I share all of my commuting stories on my blog “My year without a car”.
Bus shelters are not without cost, and in a system like ours, with severe budget constraints, are likely to be a very low priority. Beyond the intial capital/construction cost, there are significant maintenance costs, as well, including emptying the trash and power washing each one every week or two. And, unfortunately, in many poorer neighboroods, they are also the focus of significant (and costly to repair) vandalism – no transit agency can afford to essentially replace shelters every six months.
The most effective “solution” is also the most problematic from an urban design standpoint – shelters with advertising. (Google “bus shelter advertising” for images.) In exchange for maintaining bus shelters, private companies are allowed to post advertising in them, aimed not at the transit riders, but at passing motorists. The larger question is whether or not it's “worth it” to trade more street-level visual pollution for more protection for bus riders?
I find the biggest reason why I did not, and for many who still do not ride the bus is the difficulty in understanding the routes and schedules. Google Maps helps with that.
The MetroLink is predictable routes, stops and timetable. The Busses are not any of these.
I think this is a bigger issue than the “racist” argument
BTW, While I support a tax base for the Metro, and am encouraging my friends in the STL County to vote yes for Prop A, I would rather see a less regressive form of financing for a public system.
Perhaps both financing and incentivize the use of the Metro system could be accomplished by tearing down some parking lots and putting up a treed park. Or a tax/user-fee up-charge for parking spaces with the charge going to public transit. Or a gasoline tax. Or toll roads into the city. 🙂 Mostly tongue in cheek, of course.
If you're nervous about using the bike rack, check out this hip hop video that TARC put together demonstrating the use of bike racks. It made me smile. http://www.nextstopstl.org/910/tarc-drops-a-bea…
As for the discussion re: the bus network, I think we have to keep in mind that when we judge Metro's system – both bus and light rail – against cities like Chicago or Portland, you can't compare an incomplete system like St. Louis to a complete network like in Portland or Chicago. You can cover a lot bigger area more densely & more frequently in a place where taxpayer support per capita is 2x (Denver, Portland) or 2.5x (Baltimore) what is supported in St. Louis.
That said, I agree that if you don't live/work in the right place here, the bus network may not be very convenient. Personally, my relocation decisions are driven in part by access to transit. That's just a choice I make because I believe in planning ahead, and I don't want to be stuck driving two-three hours a day when gas creeps up over $4/gallon next time.
in chicago and other larger cities you see EVERYONE riding the bus. from the poor single mom with bags full of groceries, to doctor's and lawyers. In st louis (and kansas city), the only people willing to ride the bus are those who have no other options-mostly poor, and mostly minorities. it's very disheartening. I actually love riding the bus, you have to give yourself a little extra time, but i find it far superior to the stress that can sometimes come with driving.
As I do not have a car, I take the bus and MetroLink everywhere. I'm fortunate that I on a major line (the 40 Broadway) that stops a block or so from my apartment in Carondelet. Then I take a train from the Scottrade Center to Fifth and Missouri in East St. Louis and then get on a Madison County Transit (the 5 Tri-City) to get to the place I work at.
You have to time it so you meet the bus on time going to and from but if you know the routes and schedules by heart it can actually be pretty easy. I try to get a weekly or monthly pass when I can but generally I make sure to budget $5.50 for the daily round trip to and from.
The big thing I have with it is the commuting time; I have to leave by 9.45 am and don't get home until around 10 pm, which pretty much means the day is shot. But I'd rather have a good public transit system in place than not. I haven't had many problems with people on the bus and train fortunately.