Comments on: Transit Use Boom, but in Some Surprising Cities http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/ Clean Tech News & Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. & More. Sat, 26 May 2012 05:12:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: zach http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-8419 zach Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:34:28 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-8419 David, it is a good question. There is a history that follows your thoughts a bit. The book Street Smart (http://reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports/394), as well as others on this topic, go through the history of how streetcars and other mass transit were rooted out of American transportation, largely by auto industry leaders as you suggest. There are even gleeful pictures of some such industry leaders burning the last streetcars in major cities. Streetcars used to be all over the US, looking like thick spiderwebs on a map. Now, I think the issue is more complicated, because we have an infrastructure built for cars now. So, there are such industry leaders pushing for auto-oriented cities and suburbs, but also other private interests (i.e. suburban developers, real estate agencies, builders, etc.) who are invested in this style of development. Also, the public is used to it in many places now. Additionally, we have the chicken & egg story. Many governments and private agencies cannot (or are unwilling to) add better public transport if there isn't demonstrated ridership, but there can't be demonstrated ridership in that place without better transport! So, which needs to come first? Neither the private individual nor the governments or agencies are willing (or perhaps able) to go first in many cases (some exceptions being Charlotte and Portland, Oregon, where the governments were forward thinking and invested in these systems and are seeing the great benefits of them now -- i.e. 4:1 revenue to investment ratios for streetcar systems). So, now, we are stuck with more complicated situations. However, experiences show how some cities can act proactively and be models of success. These are also the places becoming increasingly more popular to live in -- topping the country's liveability and desirability lists. David, it is a good question. There is a history that follows your thoughts a bit. The book Street Smart (http://reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports/394), as well as others on this topic, go through the history of how streetcars and other mass transit were rooted out of American transportation, largely by auto industry leaders as you suggest. There are even gleeful pictures of some such industry leaders burning the last streetcars in major cities. Streetcars used to be all over the US, looking like thick spiderwebs on a map.

Now, I think the issue is more complicated, because we have an infrastructure built for cars now. So, there are such industry leaders pushing for auto-oriented cities and suburbs, but also other private interests (i.e. suburban developers, real estate agencies, builders, etc.) who are invested in this style of development. Also, the public is used to it in many places now.

Additionally, we have the chicken & egg story. Many governments and private agencies cannot (or are unwilling to) add better public transport if there isn’t demonstrated ridership, but there can’t be demonstrated ridership in that place without better transport! So, which needs to come first? Neither the private individual nor the governments or agencies are willing (or perhaps able) to go first in many cases (some exceptions being Charlotte and Portland, Oregon, where the governments were forward thinking and invested in these systems and are seeing the great benefits of them now — i.e. 4:1 revenue to investment ratios for streetcar systems).

So, now, we are stuck with more complicated situations. However, experiences show how some cities can act proactively and be models of success. These are also the places becoming increasingly more popular to live in — topping the country’s liveability and desirability lists.

]]> By: zach http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-25140 zach Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:34:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-25140 David, it is a good question. There is a history that follows your thoughts a bit. The book Street Smart (http://reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports/394), as well as others on this topic, go through the history of how streetcars and other mass transit were rooted out of American transportation, largely by auto industry leaders as you suggest. There are even gleeful pictures of some such industry leaders burning the last streetcars in major cities. Streetcars used to be all over the US, looking like thick spiderwebs on a map. Now, I think the issue is more complicated, because we have an infrastructure built for cars now. So, there are such industry leaders pushing for auto-oriented cities and suburbs, but also other private interests (i.e. suburban developers, real estate agencies, builders, etc.) who are invested in this style of development. Also, the public is used to it in many places now. Additionally, we have the chicken & egg story. Many governments and private agencies cannot (or are unwilling to) add better public transport if there isn't demonstrated ridership, but there can't be demonstrated ridership in that place without better transport! So, which needs to come first? Neither the private individual nor the governments or agencies are willing (or perhaps able) to go first in many cases (some exceptions being Charlotte and Portland, Oregon, where the governments were forward thinking and invested in these systems and are seeing the great benefits of them now -- i.e. 4:1 revenue to investment ratios for streetcar systems). So, now, we are stuck with more complicated situations. However, experiences show how some cities can act proactively and be models of success. These are also the places becoming increasingly more popular to live in -- topping the country's liveability and desirability lists. David, it is a good question. There is a history that follows your thoughts a bit. The book Street Smart (http://reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports/394), as well as others on this topic, go through the history of how streetcars and other mass transit were rooted out of American transportation, largely by auto industry leaders as you suggest. There are even gleeful pictures of some such industry leaders burning the last streetcars in major cities. Streetcars used to be all over the US, looking like thick spiderwebs on a map.

Now, I think the issue is more complicated, because we have an infrastructure built for cars now. So, there are such industry leaders pushing for auto-oriented cities and suburbs, but also other private interests (i.e. suburban developers, real estate agencies, builders, etc.) who are invested in this style of development. Also, the public is used to it in many places now.

Additionally, we have the chicken & egg story. Many governments and private agencies cannot (or are unwilling to) add better public transport if there isn’t demonstrated ridership, but there can’t be demonstrated ridership in that place without better transport! So, which needs to come first? Neither the private individual nor the governments or agencies are willing (or perhaps able) to go first in many cases (some exceptions being Charlotte and Portland, Oregon, where the governments were forward thinking and invested in these systems and are seeing the great benefits of them now — i.e. 4:1 revenue to investment ratios for streetcar systems).

So, now, we are stuck with more complicated situations. However, experiences show how some cities can act proactively and be models of success. These are also the places becoming increasingly more popular to live in — topping the country’s liveability and desirability lists.

]]> By: zach http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-25141 zach Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:34:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-25141 David, it is a good question. There is a history that follows your thoughts a bit. The book Street Smart (http://reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports/394), as well as others on this topic, go through the history of how streetcars and other mass transit were rooted out of American transportation, largely by auto industry leaders as you suggest. There are even gleeful pictures of some such industry leaders burning the last streetcars in major cities. Streetcars used to be all over the US, looking like thick spiderwebs on a map. Now, I think the issue is more complicated, because we have an infrastructure built for cars now. So, there are such industry leaders pushing for auto-oriented cities and suburbs, but also other private interests (i.e. suburban developers, real estate agencies, builders, etc.) who are invested in this style of development. Also, the public is used to it in many places now. Additionally, we have the chicken & egg story. Many governments and private agencies cannot (or are unwilling to) add better public transport if there isn't demonstrated ridership, but there can't be demonstrated ridership in that place without better transport! So, which needs to come first? Neither the private individual nor the governments or agencies are willing (or perhaps able) to go first in many cases (some exceptions being Charlotte and Portland, Oregon, where the governments were forward thinking and invested in these systems and are seeing the great benefits of them now -- i.e. 4:1 revenue to investment ratios for streetcar systems). So, now, we are stuck with more complicated situations. However, experiences show how some cities can act proactively and be models of success. These are also the places becoming increasingly more popular to live in -- topping the country's liveability and desirability lists. David, it is a good question. There is a history that follows your thoughts a bit. The book Street Smart (http://reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports/394), as well as others on this topic, go through the history of how streetcars and other mass transit were rooted out of American transportation, largely by auto industry leaders as you suggest. There are even gleeful pictures of some such industry leaders burning the last streetcars in major cities. Streetcars used to be all over the US, looking like thick spiderwebs on a map.

Now, I think the issue is more complicated, because we have an infrastructure built for cars now. So, there are such industry leaders pushing for auto-oriented cities and suburbs, but also other private interests (i.e. suburban developers, real estate agencies, builders, etc.) who are invested in this style of development. Also, the public is used to it in many places now.

Additionally, we have the chicken & egg story. Many governments and private agencies cannot (or are unwilling to) add better public transport if there isn’t demonstrated ridership, but there can’t be demonstrated ridership in that place without better transport! So, which needs to come first? Neither the private individual nor the governments or agencies are willing (or perhaps able) to go first in many cases (some exceptions being Charlotte and Portland, Oregon, where the governments were forward thinking and invested in these systems and are seeing the great benefits of them now — i.e. 4:1 revenue to investment ratios for streetcar systems).

So, now, we are stuck with more complicated situations. However, experiences show how some cities can act proactively and be models of success. These are also the places becoming increasingly more popular to live in — topping the country’s liveability and desirability lists.

]]> By: David http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-8418 David Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:05:42 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-8418 Why do u think more large cities (I.e. Houston, TX) don't use more mass transit??? I often get the feeling we are discouraged from doing so by big business ( oil, gas, tire & car, mechanics, road construction co., etc.). It is not in their best interest, therefore we do not get what we should have ( lightrail to all reaches of Houston or other large cities, better bus routes that connect to more areas). Why doesn't a major metropolitan city have a decent lightrail system? If we did, I would love to take it to work every day instead of sitting in traffic for 30 or 45 min. stressing out, wasting gas and adding carbon emissions to our air. But we don't have it, and so I can't. Why do u think more large cities (I.e. Houston, TX) don’t use more mass transit??? I often get the feeling we are discouraged from doing so by big business ( oil, gas, tire & car, mechanics, road construction co., etc.). It is not in their best interest, therefore we do not get what we should have ( lightrail to all reaches of Houston or other large cities, better bus routes that connect to more areas). Why doesn’t a major metropolitan city have a decent lightrail system? If we did, I would love to take it to work every day instead of sitting in traffic for 30 or 45 min. stressing out, wasting gas and adding carbon emissions to our air. But we don’t have it, and so I can’t.

]]> By: David http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-25139 David Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:05:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-25139 Why do u think more large cities (I.e. Houston, TX) don't use more mass transit??? I often get the feeling we are discouraged from doing so by big business ( oil, gas, tire & car, mechanics, road construction co., etc.). It is not in their best interest, therefore we do not get what we should have ( lightrail to all reaches of Houston or other large cities, better bus routes that connect to more areas). Why doesn't a major metropolitan city have a decent lightrail system? If we did, I would love to take it to work every day instead of sitting in traffic for 30 or 45 min. stressing out, wasting gas and adding carbon emissions to our air. But we don't have it, and so I can't. Why do u think more large cities (I.e. Houston, TX) don’t use more mass transit??? I often get the feeling we are discouraged from doing so by big business ( oil, gas, tire & car, mechanics, road construction co., etc.). It is not in their best interest, therefore we do not get what we should have ( lightrail to all reaches of Houston or other large cities, better bus routes that connect to more areas). Why doesn’t a major metropolitan city have a decent lightrail system? If we did, I would love to take it to work every day instead of sitting in traffic for 30 or 45 min. stressing out, wasting gas and adding carbon emissions to our air. But we don’t have it, and so I can’t.

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-25137 Susan Kraemer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:14:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-25137 Wow. Those are some really staggering changes! Here in the SF BAy Area one big improvement is "smart" bus stops on express routes now tell you with live updated electronic news exactly when your next bus is really due - so you don't get that abandoned feeling. It is actually more efficient and faster to go some places by bus than drive with bus rightofways and express buses. Wow. Those are some really staggering changes!

Here in the SF BAy Area one big improvement is “smart” bus stops on express routes now tell you with live updated electronic news exactly when your next bus is really due – so you don’t get that abandoned feeling.

It is actually more efficient and faster to go some places by bus than drive with bus rightofways and express buses.

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-25138 Susan Kraemer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:14:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-25138 Wow. Those are some really staggering changes! Here in the SF BAy Area one big improvement is "smart" bus stops on express routes now tell you with live updated electronic news exactly when your next bus is really due - so you don't get that abandoned feeling. It is actually more efficient and faster to go some places by bus than drive with bus rightofways and express buses. Wow. Those are some really staggering changes!

Here in the SF BAy Area one big improvement is “smart” bus stops on express routes now tell you with live updated electronic news exactly when your next bus is really due – so you don’t get that abandoned feeling.

It is actually more efficient and faster to go some places by bus than drive with bus rightofways and express buses.

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/22/transit-use-boom-but-in-some-surprising-cities/#comment-8417 Susan Kraemer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:14:27 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=4014#comment-8417 Wow. Those are some really staggering changes! Here in the SF BAy Area one big improvement is "smart" bus stops on express routes now tell you with live updated electronic news exactly when your next bus is really due - so you don't get that abandoned feeling. It is actually more efficient and faster to go some places by bus than drive with bus rightofways and express buses. Wow. Those are some really staggering changes!

Here in the SF BAy Area one big improvement is “smart” bus stops on express routes now tell you with live updated electronic news exactly when your next bus is really due – so you don’t get that abandoned feeling.

It is actually more efficient and faster to go some places by bus than drive with bus rightofways and express buses.

]]>