Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:54 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
mos6507 wrote:
cube wrote:
My biggest beef against mainstream public transit advocates is they think we can all just continue to live in oversize homes and public transit can be made to work. ---> impossible
Why is it you don't think it's going to work?
Population density of suburbia is too low. If you built a train station anywhere in suburbia there is not enough people within walking distance to justify it. There have been several light rail schemes created and most were financial failures, the San Jose CA light rail being a good example (I used to live there). The place is technically a city with over 800,000 people but it's built like a suburb 2,000 sq ft single family homes on an average lot size of 4,000 sq ft. There is NO way a light rail /street car system can ever be viable if people are spaced that far apart.
mos6507 wrote:
Because the trolleys are supposed to drop you off right at your doorstep?
Even in San Jose which had a slightly higher density then new suburbs being built today the "service level" was not good enough to act as a serious replacement to the car. Buses only showed up every 20 minutes (peak times) and if you had to transfer to another bus that's 10 minutes wasted or more. No thanks. A bicycle was faster so that was my preferred mode of transport in my youth.
mos6507 wrote:
The Boston area where I grew up is a good example. You simply have ample parking at each stop. People need only travel the short distance from their home to the nearest station parking and commute in from there,....
I think I see what you're saying. You are talking about something completely different. That's specifically designed for commuting long distances between home and work. It's not something you'd use to go grocery shopping. We have the same thing in northern California called BART.
I do not think such public transit systems will be viable in a post PO world. They essentially exist to make it possible for people to live far away from work. In a way they "encourage" suburbia instead of creating walkable communities.
//
generally speaking there are 3 types of public transit and they can be categorized based on distance traveled
1) short range
2) medium - commuter range
3) long range
I think in a PO world most of the medium range public transit will die-off or contract.
Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:27 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
mos6507 wrote:
The trolleys in Boston are a cultural icon
Boston is NOT a "suburb".
"suburb" == single family homes on 4,000 sq ft lot sizes aka that's where 80% of Americans live.
Boston has a density of about half that of New York city so an argument can be made it's "dense enough" to have a viable public transit system. Even www.kunstler.com/ has a high opinion of Boston so you know it can NOT be the typical American city.
// add on
Both of these cities have a light rail / trolley system
San Jose, California --> Density 5,216.3/sq mi --> FAILURE
Boston, Massachusetts --> Density 12,327/sq mi --> heaviest LRT ridership in the USA
Most Americans live in "suburbia" aka population density of less than 4,000 people / sq mi.
I know of NO place on this planet that has successfully created a "viable" light rail transit system with such low population densities.
please show me 1 example if you can think of any.
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:20 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
cube wrote:
"suburb" == single family homes on 4,000 sq ft lot sizes aka that's where 80% of Americans live.
I am certain that 4000 sq ft would be considered low in most of the US. 10000 sq ft is probably more like the real number - 1/4 acre lots are very common in the NE, SE and the midwest. a 40 x 100 lot would only exist in cities or urban areas (even small for city standards in upstate NY). These smaller lots were in the original streetcar suburbs built after WWI and may be amenable to some form of transit again - not LRT but streetcar style (see Toronto).
Unfortunately most everything built in the last 70 years will not work with transit - it is all car scaled. Until WWII most areas had small industial mixed into neighbourhoods and retail along the main streets and intersections. These uses were separated since we had automobiles - no plan for transit - we would have to do some major infill densification and mixed use infill to get transit to work in most of the US.
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:25 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
+1 Canuk
Plus, I'd add that the hard infrastructure (streets, utilities) of modern suburbia is so contrived into fanciful forms like endless culs-de-sac and sinuous curves with no fundamental relationship to reality that retrofitting it, in any meaningful way at least, would prove costly and laborious.
It will be retrofitted, though, albeit in an ad-hoc way, e.g. the partitioning of 3,500 sf houses into tenement quarters, blacksmith shops run out of 3-car garages, and transverse dirt roads drawn through vacant lots formerly home to stripped and gutted tract houses, to facilitate direct access to residential areas from commercial and industrial ones. _________________ "It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:32 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
emersonbiggins wrote:
+1 Canuk
Plus, I'd add that the hard infrastructure (streets, utilities) of modern suburbia is so contrived into fanciful forms like endless culs-de-sac and sinuous curves with no fundamental relationship to reality that retrofitting it, in any meaningful way at least, would prove costly and laborious.
It will be retrofitted, though, albeit in an ad-hoc way, e.g. the partitioning of 3,500 sf houses into tenement quarters and blacksmith shops run out of 3-car garages.
Some surveys could be "gridded" with demolition but setbacks are also an issue in most new construction. The far distance from the road prevents oor service like mail delivery which is mostly automobile in the US - I guess communal boxes will be in the future. Infill of townhomes and retail clusters into pockets in surveys may provide the necessary density for some areas to get transit and allow a few that can stay in single homes nearby the ability to continue the suburban dream. I'm not sure that retrofitting to apartments will occur in most since there is no basis for the local economies (no office/retail/manufactuiring) so there would be no need or demand for this. I do like the blacksmith idea since I have seen some communities where the zoning is loose enough to allow work spaces in the survay and this would solve the transit issues - but for very few I suspect.
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 1:05 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
Canuk, agreed. I think live/work spaces are indeed the wave of the future, not in the home office sense (as most would desire), but rather a cottage industry sense, where trade skills will once again take precedence in a subsistence society.
The zoning and HOA restrictions against such developments will only be as effective as the teeth, i.e. "money," behind them; that is to say, not much at all. _________________ "It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
Canuk wrote:
......Unfortunately most everything built in the last 70 years will not work with transit - it is all car scaled. Until WWII most areas had small industial mixed into neighbourhoods and retail along the main streets and intersections. These uses were separated since we had automobiles - no plan for transit - we would have to do some major infill densification and mixed use infill to get transit to work in most of the US.
putting aside the density debate for now,
I also believe that a city must inherently be based on the "hub and spoke" system in order to be transit friendly. I do not think it was an accident that MOST major cities of the 19th century, before the advent of the automobile, was designed like this. A CBD (central business district) surrounded by residential. Public transit works best when it takes you from point A to B, not everywhere.
The advantageous of a car was not that it could take you from pt A to B but instead pt. A, B, C, D,.......Z. And this is how suburbia is set up. Once we combine this characteristic of suburbia with it's low population density it GUARANTEES that *trying* to implement a viable public transit system would be doomed for failure.
//
BTW how come the topic of a "car-free city" almost never gets mentioned on this website?
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:20 pm Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
cube wrote:
A CBD (central business district) surrounded by residential. Public transit works best when it takes you from point A to B, not everywhere.
The advantageous of a car was not that it could take you from pt A to B but instead pt. A, B, C, D,.......Z. And this is how suburbia is set up. Once we combine this characteristic of suburbia with it's low population density it GUARANTEES that *trying* to implement a viable public transit system would be doomed for failure.
//
BTW how come the topic of a "car-free city" almost never gets mentioned on this website?
Calthorpe approaches a solution for new development in the Next American Metropolis. Small Transit Oriented Development nodes with business/public districts contained in the center of the survey with a Transit stop mixed with mid density housing surrounded by lower density (with some mixed use and duplexes, etc. All pedestrian scaled and shorter distances to make each stop walking distance from home. Well worth a read though a little text book/thesis in format.
Car-Free Cities = The main fear of post peak oil ... Next thing you know you will suggest that people live in reasonable sized homes without swimming pools or hot-tubs and what about the servants...
Joined: Aug 03, 2007 Posts: 3140 Location: Boston Suburbs
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:35 am Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
cube wrote:
Boston is NOT a "suburb".
I'm not talking about Boston proper. I'm talking about the suburbs surrounding it to the west, which the light rail passes through. These are definitely suburbs. I don't consider them cities.
cube wrote:
so you know it can NOT be the typical American city.
So what?
cube wrote:
San Jose, California --> Density 5,216.3/sq mi --> FAILURE
I was just in San Jose last weekend and the light rail and buses going through there are a beautiful sight to see. Isn't it too early to claim it a failure? If gas keeps on going up you think ridership in San Jose won't go through the roof? They'll be damn grateful they built it. Cost of living is already crazy enough in that region.
cube wrote:
Most Americans live in "suburbia" aka population density of less than 4,000 people / sq mi.
...
I know of NO place on this planet that has successfully created a "viable" light rail transit system with such low population densities.
please show me 1 example if you can think of any.
The MBTA D line passes through Newton, MA which has a population density of 4,643 per mile circa 2000 census. When it first started decades ago it was surely much lower than that.
Also, the (diesel electric) commuter rail goes way out into the boonies. For instance, Fitchburg, with a population density of 1,408 per mile circa 2000, or Haverhill at 1,769. _________________ Peak oil is sort of like a mental Everlasting Gobstopper, except it tastes like ass and you can't get it out of your mouth.
Joined: Aug 03, 2007 Posts: 3140 Location: Boston Suburbs
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:59 am Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
cube wrote:
I think I see what you're saying. You are talking about something completely different. That's specifically designed for commuting long distances between home and work.
Which is what people need the most. They don't need to be shamed or pressured into cramming themselves like sardine cans into the city.
cube wrote:
I do not think such public transit systems will be viable in a post PO world. They essentially exist to make it possible for people to live far away from work. In a way they "encourage" suburbia instead of creating walkable communities.
People don't go out of their way to live far away from work. They live where they do because they are looking for the best quality of life at the best price they can afford. I'm sure most would love it if their employer just run the damn office in their home town, or they could telecommute. But the jobs are where they are. If they want to set down roots somewhere, they have to be prepared to commute to wherever their jobs are. As they change jobs, they are going to want to stay put if they can and not have to keep uprooting their lives to move next door to the office.
cube wrote:
I think in a PO world most of the medium range public transit will die-off or contract.
Time will tell. _________________ Peak oil is sort of like a mental Everlasting Gobstopper, except it tastes like ass and you can't get it out of your mouth.
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:52 am Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
mos6507 wrote:
I was just in San Jose last weekend and the light rail and buses going through there are a beautiful sight to see. Isn't it too early to claim it a failure?
To be honest (public relations wise) light rail is actually a success in San Jose! The people there love it, I should know I used to live there.
They view LRV as a "status enhancer" kind of like how a football stadium may give a city more prestige.
but.....
Daily Passenger Miles Per Route Mile
Boston 9,550
San Jose 1,087
USA average is about 4,000
source
OUCH!.....I think the numbers speak for themselves---->the San Jose LRV system is a failure.
mos6507 wrote:
The MBTA D line passes through Newton, MA which has a population density of 4,643 per mile circa 2000 census. When it first started decades ago it was surely much lower than that.
Also, the (diesel electric) commuter rail goes way out into the boonies. For instance, Fitchburg, with a population density of 1,408 per mile circa 2000, or Haverhill at 1,769.
Ohhh wonderful!
So the most "viable" public transit system in a low population density area is nothing more than a system that encourages long commutes aka suburbia. So this is what you were talking about all along. Now I understand.
Yeah I know what people are going to say. Come on cube!...anything that gets people out of their cars has to be good right?
I disagree.
In a post PO world I think 90% of society will NOT be commuting any further than 20 miles.
BTW here's a fare calculator for the commuter rail system in N California where I used to live. OUCH!....that's not cheap.
http://www.bart.gov/tickets/calculator/
Last edited by cube on Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:40 am Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
mos6507 wrote:
People don't go out of their way to live far away from work. They live where they do because they are looking for the best quality of life at the best price they can afford. I'm sure most would love it if their employer just run the damn office in their home town, or they could telecommute. But the jobs are where they are. If they want to set down roots somewhere, they have to be prepared to commute to wherever their jobs are. As they change jobs, they are going to want to stay put if they can and not have to keep uprooting their lives to move next door to the office.
Jobs are located predominately due to zoning laws and government subsidies we restrict the location of employment areas based on plans often drawn up shortly after WWII. If we had more mixed use zoning then long commutes might not be as prevalant.
The difficulty with adapting transit to post war developments is they were not designed with walking in mind - most planning codes are specifically designed around automobiles not transit. Many communities do not even have sidewalks or if they do the distance to destinations is very long. Large parking lots and long distances between destinations do not work well with transit as the amount of possible passengers is low and their destination mix too distributed.
Bus may suffice in low density areas (with patient people who have time to burn) but rail requires large amounts of passengers with destinations near the stops (read as density) or it becomes a glorified park'n'ride - which most areas already have.
Without designing around the pedestrian as the main mode of transportation to and from the transit system it is unlikely that transit will work. It cannot be just a replacement for the car but must be designed into the overall fabric of the community including the location of employment areas and the goods distribution for these employment areas.
Joined: Oct 13, 2004 Posts: 191 Location: Mahachai City
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:02 am Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
Mixed land use does make the city very decentralised but it requires a much more intensive mass transport system.
The way my city (bangkok) works is on 3 levels.
Level 1: Metro rail (BTS/MRT), Commuter rail SRT, major express Boat services. There aim is to provide fast long distance cross town route and to ease or beat the traffic in other areas. Time savings by taking advantage of these level 1 services can be upto 90 mins.
Level 1a: High speed Expressway Vans. These offer fast direct routes via the expressway system with limited stops. These re 15 seat converted cargo vans similar to what the post office uses in the western countries.
Level 2: Expressway and Normal metro buses. every main road has buses every 1 to 5 mins some main roads have buses as freqent as every 15 seconds. This is the backbone of the mass transport system close to 6 million people a day use these buses.
They offer service from 4am to 11pm 7 days a week city wide even as far as 50 km away from the innercity. There are 43 addional bus routes offering 24 hours services they roughly provide a 24 hour service on each main road.
Level 3: Truck - Buses, Boats, Motorbike taxis. These services provide the last mile coverage for the mass transport system.
The Truck - Buses provide service into small side roads often to narrow or too rough for large buses. These work on a hail and ride basis. Service is about every 10 mins from 4am to 11pm.
The motorbike taxis operate on a fixed fare for a short few km ride from a bus stop on the main road direct to your apartment building or townhouse. 24 hour service.
The Level 3 boats provide basic mass transport access to area with zero road access i.e. they are door to bus stop kind of service. Some are timetabled some are on demand fixed fare.
For people who are in a dire hurry there are 100000 NGV powered taxis around for these trips where it must happen now or there are a few of you travelling together.
The urban mass transport system seamlessly interconnects with the rural mass transport system at the outer suburban egde. This means a reasonable standard of mass transport still operates hundreds of kms away from the city. all be it less freq and shorter operation hours. Rural bus services are normally every 10 to 30 mins and operate from 4am to 9pm 7 days a week. some that operate on major roads are more frequent.
Even in a highly mixed density urban and suburban environment mass transport can still work and be close to door to door as a car but a bit slower. If the USA follows a similar 3 levels of service then they could offer a fast frequent service even into low density areas.
Joined: Sep 08, 2005 Posts: 604 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:17 am Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
gwmss15 wrote:
Mixed land use does make the city very decentralised but it requires a much more intensive mass transport system.
The way my city (bangkok) works is on 3 levels.
Level 1: Metro rail (BTS/MRT), Commuter rail SRT, major express Boat services. There aim is to provide fast long distance cross town route and to ease or beat the traffic in other areas. Time savings by taking advantage of these level 1 services can be upto 90 mins.
Level 1a: High speed Expressway Vans. These offer fast direct routes via the expressway system with limited stops. These re 15 seat converted cargo vans similar to what the post office uses in the western countries.
Level 2: Expressway and Normal metro buses. every main road has buses every 1 to 5 mins some main roads have buses as freqent as every 15 seconds. This is the backbone of the mass transport system close to 6 million people a day use these buses.
They offer service from 4am to 11pm 7 days a week city wide even as far as 50 km away from the innercity. There are 43 addional bus routes offering 24 hours services they roughly provide a 24 hour service on each main road.
Level 3: Truck - Buses, Boats, Motorbike taxis. These services provide the last mile coverage for the mass transport system.
The Truck - Buses provide service into small side roads often to narrow or too rough for large buses. These work on a hail and ride basis. Service is about every 10 mins from 4am to 11pm.
The motorbike taxis operate on a fixed fare for a short few km ride from a bus stop on the main road direct to your apartment building or townhouse. 24 hour service.
The Level 3 boats provide basic mass transport access to area with zero road access i.e. they are door to bus stop kind of service. Some are timetabled some are on demand fixed fare.
For people who are in a dire hurry there are 100000 NGV powered taxis around for these trips where it must happen now or there are a few of you travelling together.
The urban mass transport system seamlessly interconnects with the rural mass transport system at the outer suburban egde. This means a reasonable standard of mass transport still operates hundreds of kms away from the city. all be it less freq and shorter operation hours. Rural bus services are normally every 10 to 30 mins and operate from 4am to 9pm 7 days a week. some that operate on major roads are more frequent.
Even in a highly mixed density urban and suburban environment mass transport can still work and be close to door to door as a car but a bit slower. If the USA follows a similar 3 levels of service then they could offer a fast frequent service even into low density areas.
Wow...I am truly amazed at this level of public transit...I could only dream of having a system like that here in the States.
Before that could ever happen, though, I think we'd need a major attitude change concerning the use of private automobiles in this country...and it's going to take a bit more than costly gasoline to do it, IMO. I just wish everyone else hated driving cars as much as I do... _________________ Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide...
...and the meek shall inherit the Earth!
Joined: Aug 03, 2007 Posts: 3140 Location: Boston Suburbs
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:45 am Post subject: Re: Can Mass Transit and railways help us?
cube wrote:
So the most "viable" public transit system in a low population density area is nothing more than a system that encourages long commutes aka suburbia. So this is what you were talking about all along. Now I understand.
The highway system is generally considered to have been the original driver of suburbia, which replaced light rail. _________________ Peak oil is sort of like a mental Everlasting Gobstopper, except it tastes like ass and you can't get it out of your mouth.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
