How America Killed Transit
citylab.com
How America Killed Transit
1–10 of 99 posts
Re: How America Killed Transit
#2I'd think safety (or lack of the same) might be a factor too.
Re: How America Killed Transit
#3In the Seattle area, the local government insists on ripping up the tracks to create urban "trails".
Re: How America Killed Transit
#4I'd think safety (or lack of the same) might be a factor too.
cars kill ~3x as many people per year as gun crime.
Public transit is orders of magnitude safer than personal transit.
crime excludes suicide. total gun deaths per year is about the same as vehicle deaths per year.
Re: How America Killed Transit
#5That comparison to Toronto is absurd. It’s a metro area with many times the population and density of the other cities listed. And what the hell is this?
“Below is a set of maps that show the present-day network rail and bus lines operating at least every 30 minutes, all day to midnight, seven days a week”
This effectively excludes every bus line, because there is no reason for bus lines to run the same route all day long. This is one of the major advantages of buses.
Re: How America Killed Transit
#6That comparison to Toronto is absurd. It’s a metro area with many times the population and density of the other cities listed. And what the hell is this? “Below is a set of maps that show the present-day network rail and bus lines operating at least every 30 minutes, all day to midnight, seven days a week” This effectively excludes every bus line, because there is no reason for bus lines to run the same route all day…
"Being able to rely on buses as a piece of infrastructure" is the reason. Because you don't want to buy a car for two parties a year that run late. Just as you wouldn't want a disused sidewalk or a country road or a bridge to close completely during periods when they're not being worked to capacity.
This isn't a major advantage of buses, it's a major cost: They're so expensive to run that you only get to deploy them for peak periods.
If you _do_ have to buy a car for two parties a year that run late, well then why not use the car for the daily commute?
If everyone made that choice, it would destroy the city.
The availability of Uber et al is a massive public good for a city, because it can patch over failures like this in our public transportation system in a demand-responsive way without inducing a lot of additional traffic.
Re: How America Killed Transit
#7That comparison to Toronto is absurd. It’s a metro area with many times the population and density of the other cities listed. And what the hell is this? “Below is a set of maps that show the present-day network rail and bus lines operating at least every 30 minutes, all day to midnight, seven days a week” This effectively excludes every bus line, because there is no reason for bus lines to run the same route all day…
>This effectively excludes every bus line, because there is no reason for bus lines to run the same route all day long. This is one of the major advantages of buses.
I can't think of a single bus line in my city that actually changes it's route throughout the day. Sure there's some that don't go as far into the suburbs after a certain time, but the part in the city would still qualify as "all day" by that definition. And as a rider, I would hate to use a bus that goes by one neighborhood in the morning and another in the afternoon. That's what different route numbers are for, there's no reason to have the confusion.
Re: How America Killed Transit
#8In the Seattle area, the local government insists on ripping up the tracks to create urban "trails".
My armchair perspective of this is that rails-to-trails is a federally-sanctioned move and adding transit use to those rails is both difficult and politically hard.
It is difficult because leaving the rails as-is means small rail operators like Ballard Terminal will insist on still being able to run one freight train a week so that means transit has to compete for time slots and the operating agency has to buy FRA mixed-use compatible train sets (expensive, slow, noisy) or plead for a waiver like Denton’s DCTA got (not gonna happen in this administration).
It is politically hard because, to pick on Kirkland, people get very cranky about rail near neighborhoods and they insist that it brings “the wrong people” and the idyllic pictures of fit people walking and jogging and cycling with their kids along a leafy path...not that “terrible” transit that will “destroy” quality of life.
So trails move on and transit has to fight some other time.
Re: How America Killed Transit
#9In the Seattle area, the local government insists on ripping up the tracks to create urban "trails".
In the Seattle area, you have no clue what you're talking about.
Re: How America Killed Transit
#10In the Seattle area, the local government insists on ripping up the tracks to create urban "trails".
Why the heck is trails in quotes?
Do you not understand what a trail is? Or are you pissed that you can't drive your car down the "trail" and it enrages you're entitled persona?