How To IMPROVE America's Bad Transit Networks
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ก.พ. 2022
- America's Transit Networks are currently really good at getting white-collar suburbanites to the downtown core, but fail to truly serve the low-income and minority communities that need it the most - and by extension, our networks are failing everybody. Work commutes only account for 20% of our commutes, so why are our public transportation networks so focused on downtown? Why are we making it so hard to conduct cross-town trips? Why don't we have comprehensive public transit networks? And more importantly, how do we fix that? Car dependency, climate change, and inequity are fights that require public transit use. But we NEED our transit networks to be accessible if we want to win those fights - particularly our Bus Rapid Transit, Light Rail Transit, and Subways. Building just for the suburbs won't make our public transportation any better. We need accessible public transit networks.
#UrbanPlanning #PublicTransit #PublicTransportation #TransportationEngineering
All footage was taken by me (AJ Tabura) or licensed from their respective sources.
Special thanks to:
The nice bus driver who let me film in the bus
My leather gloves for keeping me warm in sub-freezing cold
my roommate's cat
me
"Boredom: Our Public Spaces CRISIS" is out now! Give it aview!
th-cam.com/video/556d5Xy1l6c/w-d-xo.html
I think city planners in the US understood exactly one phrase from European city planners: "If you do not drive to work, you do not need a car." So they design the transit lines exclusively for the people who currently drive a car to work. The problem is that that phrase is only valid with walkable access to amenities and carsharing.
Very true. I think Park-and-Ride programs are important to some degree, but that shouldn't be our MAIN focus because it only serves current car drivers.
Any network worldwide is city centric, they bring people downtown. But this is not where people work, except for office jobs, and rich people in bank towers are the last ones using public transport. Industrial complexes with it's own railway station is often seen in the communist world, but hardly in the western.
Actually, the rush hour congestion is the most serious one so it needs to be relieved first, but still other demands like shopping and entertainment should be met later
More like "If you do not drive to work, you do not need two cars"
@@CyanideCarrot In Europe, you either live in an area that is so sparsely populated that you need your own car, or you live in an area where a shared car for one day a week costs half that of your own car.
I’ve lived in Tokyo for the last 3 years and I’ve been spoiled by an amazing public transportation system. I am so sad that I have to go back to America next year lol Houston’s public transportation system is a joke and I wish we’d spend money on stuff like more bus routes and metro rails than on the astrodome
Do you plan on living in Japan permanently some day? The public transportation in NYC sucks it’s smelly lots of crime and delays lol
@@anthonymolina7416 not permanently but semi permanent. I plan on coming back as a DoD contractor
Japan's population density supports public transport. It's just not the case in the US with everything so spread out. Unfortunately that's not going to change in any meaningful way. It's tough to even walk in many places because of lack of sidewalks etc even ifs only half mile away. I'd walk more places just for the exercise but really can't much in my area unless you're willing to walk in the street.
@@johniii8147 the low density of the US is not a factor for local or regional transit. The city bus does not care how far the next city is because it will never go there.
@@FranziskaNagel445 Population density and distance is ALWAYS a factor in transit options and what will work and what will not work.
I saw MARTA’s rail map and clicked so fast lol … I hate that city transits in America center everything around business and not the movement of people and the lives they want to build. London does a great job of connecting communities. We should be more like them…
Exactly! I want to ditch my car and live off transit, but to do that, I need to not only be able to get to work but also be able to get to the store, entertainment, my friends places, and also regional and national connections to travel.
Honestly, I think Chicago is doing pretty well. The L does cover most the city. All it needs to become top tier is to add a new circle line that intersects all the current lines. Other than that though, Chicago has regional rail and has pretty good Amtrak connections throughout the Midwest.
I'm moving there this year and I'm hoping I can totally ditch my car 🤞🏻
Totally agree, living in London, UK it is extremely easy to get around affordably without a car.
I can go to oxford circus (Touristy part of London) quite quickly using the central line, Jubilee Line etc.
I can also go to many parts of London within minutes using bus transport and train/metro lines.
America should learn from London and many other major cities like Singapore and implement the same sort of things.
Yup.
Great
I agree about the circle in Chicago, but that's just not going to happen. I would be way to expensive and much property would have to acquired and houses/business demolished to make it happen. It's been looked at but practically can't happen. They will have to fill in the gaps with buses.
@@johniii8147 make it a subway. Underground, no property loss.
Yes, we need transit all over our urban areas! Especially for those of us who don't drive 🙋♂️ But centering transit and especially rapid transit around downtowns is not a mistake or the big problem-enabling transfers between rapid transit and many frequent reliable bus routes is a lot more powerful than trying to connect as many places as possible directly. Network hubs work better when they're in dense areas that people live and work in anyway, and in Minnesota today that means downtowns more than anywhere else. And differently scaled cities call for different networks: for example, Chicago could really use a semicircular rail line away from downtown, while in Minneapolis-Saint Paul I can't see anything of the sort being useful anytime soon, if ever.
Learning how things work in different countries is revealing in a lot of ways: what Metro Transit calls "arterial BRT"-pay before boarding, wider spacing, better stops, priority and dedicated lanes here and there-in Europe can be *every* bus. We should demand more!
By the way: one of the main benefits of the Orange Line is exactly allowing more city to suburb travel, and that's been in mind the entire time!
This is why I think Denver's R and L lines are great initiatives. The R line connects the city of Aurora to the southern Denver suburbs and the A line to the airport. Aurora is the most diverse city in CO and has been traditionally underserved. Giving Aurora it's own rail line that doesn't directly connect to the cbd provides much more efficient local transport, and only 1 transfer will get you downtown. Same goes for the L line. Once fully completed, it will connect the cbd to the traditionally diverse area of five points to the growing RiNo arts district and ultimately to commuter rail. Our bus system is still atrocious though.
Great video! I'm going to be going to the twin cities for college later this year and I can't wait to see real-time improvement while I'm there. I'm not going to have a car, so I hope to have input on public transportation projects.
We need more people like you!! 👍🏻
Hi! I live in the Twin Cities and have been here for about 38 of my 55 years, and I am a transit enthusiast and historian. Kudos to you for publicizing this stuff! I think we need a bus from Burnsville to Minneapolis that goes via 35W but uses the Highway 121 cutoff and comes into the city on Lyndale, providing access to South Minneapolis and transfers. I also think the Red Line should be extended up Cedar into Minneapolis and going either Downtown or to the University of Minnesota.
I too am an urban policy enthusiast from the twin cities
Finally! Someone talked about it! These days, it's not just housing in the suburbs, but jobs as well. Many office and industrial parks aren't in the downtown core, but in the suburbs. Effectively, transit needs to be more of a grid or a web as opposed to a "hub and spoke" design, as there are a lot of places people need to go other than downtown!
Indeed. In most cities it's all suburban and not in the city center in the US. I had to take the bus for a few months a couple of years ago since my car was totalled and it was total pain in the ass. It took 1.5 to 2 hours to commute each way to work so leave at 6:30 am and lucky to be home by 8pm. The upside I guess though was I lost 15 pounds given the walking required along the commute. It's a huge time sucker to have to use transit in most cities. At least I was lucky it was even possible. In many cases it's not even a possibility.
The thing is those office and industrial parks have lots of parking. The only places in an urban area without much parking tend to be the central business districts, and that's why you tend to have transit lines leading there.
On the whole, I obviously agree with your sentiments regarding where we should be building transit infrastructure. I love how you clearly have a love for the twin cities, they deserve great transit, just like everywhere else!! But I do have some clarifications I'd like to make regarding Chicago, if you'd permit me. :) Chicago's train system is very old, and as a result does brank out from the core, yet there is hope. First, the bus system is too often left out of maps like this, the bus system itself actually has pretty great coverage of the city as a whole, especially in comparison to other U.S. cities (but BRT would be great!). Also, although it is happening far later than it should have, the red line is being extended to the far south side beyond 95th. Does the system have issues? Yes, this is America after all. We should have a 'semi-circle' L line connecting the branches far west and south ( #ChicagoSilverLine ) and there should be express service in directions other than north... But I think that the base criticism is slightly misplaced because of how old Chicago's system is in comparison to the other systems primarily featured. All this is to say, I still really like the video as a whole!
Love the insight! Thanks so much for sharing!
Also, we used to have streetcars called "surface lines" that actually worked and it was the dumbest thing that they tore it all up
I’m very proud of the up and coming rapid transit in the twin cities
Being old doesn’t really excuse the lack of circumferential high-capacity transit lines though. It’s true that the CTA has developed one of the best bus systems in the country, but there’s no reason it couldn’t have been expanding rapid transit at the same time. It’s not like Paris’ transit system is stuck where it was decades ago. Heck, even New York proves that to a much lesser degree. So we can’t excuse a faulty network just because it’s old…
And I know part of the criticism in this video is mainly about investments in suburb-CBD rapid transit, but doesn’t Chicago deserve more criticism for not making any expansion investments at all?
Good video, I originally clicked because I saw an Atlanta map (where I live) but had fun learning about Minneapolis. I think one think overlooked when mentioning that transit better serves rich people even though poor people use it more is that, since we are so transit starved, once new transit is built even in a poor neighborhood, because transit is so valuable that the neighborhood turns into a higher income neighborhood, so the problem of transit serving only rich people is kinda a self fulfilling prophecy.
I love that you are bringing attention to the twin cities! I love it here, and I’m glad that we are investing more in transit. As you pointed out, metro transit really misses some serious opportunities in order to appeal to suburbanites as opposed to serving major areas like uptown which would undoubtedly have MASSIVE ridership for a light rail line. It’s clear to me though that our leadership sees car dependent development as unsustainable, and they are trying to invest in new means of transportation.
Great video, sir. I subbed on your last video and I am pleased to say I have not been disappointed your content :).
I fully agree with you. As a twin cities resident myself there are several lines that aren’t under consideration that could majorly change connections in the twin cities. LRT along the midtown greenway and then along grand or summit to St. Paul, LRT along the southern 494 corridor, and the Dan Patch regional rail service would be huge in expanding suburb to suburb transit options. This should be done along with continue expansion of the arterial BRT network and would go a long ways towards building a truly comprehensive transit system.
Forget LRT build metro elevated rail
I like the video aand generally agree, but wanted to bring up two points. First is land use, for so many years downtowns and adjacent areas were restricted in what could be built there, meaning that stuff like grocery stores doctor's offices and department stores weren't really located there anymore. So maybe an equally useful thing to do is to really concentrate stuff near transit nodes, stuff like clinics, mid market retail, malls even meaning that more destinations that people need to get to are within easy reach of the highest quality transit. Secondly I think the priority of transit construction should be radial lines to downtown first, circumferential lines to other areas second. And I would say many agencies are following that pattern, its just that we're decades behind schedule.
Absolutely!
Agreed! Infill along transit lines is much more beneficial for increasing the effectiveness of existing public transit. Vancouver has taken this approach, and it's really transforming existing suburban areas into high density communities with lots of amenities.
I'm a firm believer in loop routes. Loop routes are always one of the most used routes because it fills this need. Moscow has 3. Beijing is building a 3rd. London has one, Tokyo has one. They fill a need. Chicago has one in Downtown, but this still requires a DT trip. Chicago could use a semi loop going from the Northside to the Southside that goes through the West side. Basically an Outer Chicago semi loop, Minneapolis could use a a full loop, so could Denver, so could Atlanta, so could DC, LA, etc.
I’m a Chicago resident and they have considered a semi circle but they have a lot of projects going on now and not enough funding
@@samuelmanteca8551 I believe a Semi circle will make Chicago metro incredible.
@@jdredwine7224 I agree completely and I hope one day it will be built
Singapore's Cross Island Line which is commencing construction behaves like a 2nd loop line connecting outer suburbs together but is more like a semi-circle instead as our downtown is surrounded by sea on the south. Actually in those suburbs the buses mostly go to other suburbs instead of downtown probably as the gov't thinks we'll find it'll take too long to go downtown by but & would thus more likely use rail instead
Aw hell yeah more videos about public transit. Also great timing on the opening shot, that's quality!
Love what you’re doing man, keep it up !
As a resident of Tallinn, Estonia, it's sad to see that the issue which plagues our public transportation system the most also exists in many American cities. We have free and high-quality network connecting every part of town to downtown, yet connections between different districts, though existent, fail to cover for the huge variety of trips made between these districts: usually you would simply have to go through downtown. One of the worst examples of this is the connection between my home and my middle school: it was only a 20-minute trip by car, yet by public transport the trip would take over an hour... It's sad to see that no changes have been made for all this time.
Great video, and you raise some excellent points. However, I think you may have missed a key issue. In many cities, those underserved areas don't have easy transit options by design. In my opinion, it's because the more affluent neighborhoods appreciate the isolation and segregation built in to the existing networks. I'm not saying it's right--I agree with your position--but it's a factor that needs to be taken into account.
That has been one of the big factors that has kept MARTA from extending their lines further outwards.
Ohh well let the power companies run transit again and increase taxes on suburbs
@@TheLewistownTrainspotter8102 give transit agencies lawsuit immunity with expansion and eliminate the public hearings make them all virtual
Great video. Having lived in Boston for a couple years now, it’s clear that the main subway mainly connects the center of the city with straight shots out of the city. While some bus lines do offer routes that run perpendicular to the subway lines, I’ve only rode the bus a handful of times, just because the routes are so difficult to understand. In Boston’s bus case, I think most people use the bus for commutes to work or to take regular routes, just because its so complicated to understand
To echo your point, just last night, I went from my apartment in Lexington to hang out with my friends down in Cambridge. It would have taken longer to take public transit to get there than to simply walk to my destination. Also, during my internship, I lived right next to Lechmere on the green line, and my workplace was near Kendall on the red line. It took the same amount of time to walk to work as it did to take the green line into central Boston and then go back out on the red line.
@@trawrtster6097 I worked near the Davis square red line stop but commuted from Ruggles on the Orange line. It was at least a 40 minute commute IF one of the trains wasn't broken. Even though it's crazy far, it would've taken the same amount of time or quicker to bike there
Great video. You bring up some great points about not just building lines servicing the downtown core. I live in DC and the system is pretty much designed to bring people into downtown. However they are actually finally building a beltway line in Maryland that loops around downtown and connects the different branch lines. It's a great project.
It's true. In Portland, the busiest bus line is the 72, which runs on the east side, north/south, mainly on 82nd Ave and it doesn't go anywhere near downtown. It gets more riders than some of the light rail lines that run downtown.
bruh your channel should get more subs. I'm and architecture student, doing my thesis project on Transit Oriented Developments in Dhaka. As someone who's completely new to this, your videos are helping a lot!
The bus couldn't pulled up at a better time 😂 great video!
I definitely agree that there is a lack of public transit access within the outskirts of the cities. If I want to go to Roseville or south Minneapolis from the umn campus, there is public transit access though but the time takes to get there; it takes an hour or two. Also I like how you wore an orange hoodie when you were at the orange line stops haha
This is the reason why we need high quality rail transit on the Midtown Greenway corridor (not a single track streetcar)
Pretty much sums up how I feel about public transit in the US. Living in Tokyo or Singapore, I am able to go anywhere in the city via train and bus. Living in LA taking public transit feels like I have to go out of my way and even then I can't go to key places outside of downtown or to a friend's house. As much as I like cars and driving I absolutely hate having to drive every where especially in places where winters are cold and snow is common. Good video, thanks for summarizing my thoughts on why public transit in the US sucks.
Great video man keep them up :)
good job with this video, I'm in New York which is probably the best example in the entire country and even we still have some work to do with connecting the dry parts
Fantastic video dude!
More transit youtubers. YAY! Subscribed
Incredible insights. I've produced my own extensive video on the Orange Line itself and will make the case that the Orange Line is one phase in Minnesota's bus rapid transit plans. The Orange Line is limited by its servicing to the downtown 35W corridor, but it was replacing the existing 535 express bus route. The Twin Cities are going to implement arterial bus rapid transit lines like on Lake Street, but also a branch line plan on American Boulevard to Mall of America which is sorely and desperately needed. Your point about needing circular transit lines is very true about American infrastructure, and could easily be done in the twin cities with the circumferential and pervasive existing freeway network that unfortunately got thrown into our cities. Inter suburban trips should be prioritized and rapid transit corridors should be built to make connections in every single underserved area.
The Orange Line is indeed just a step in the right direction and part of a greater plan of expansion. Mixed use Redevelopments on American Boulevard where the Orange Line now serves are proof enough of this. People want transit that serves the modern day, and not just downtown commuters.
Thanks for this content. It would be awesome to make a video collab on some Minnesota transit content :D
The orange line is an upgraded 535 bus
@@qjtvaddict absolutely correct! It's BRT built as an upgrade to the 535 Express bus, I did a whole video on it where I made a better explanation of the line than this comment
Cool video. Earned my follow. Also nice KSG poster.
Fellow Minnesotan! Hello from Alexandria. Subscribed.
I'm moving to Boston in a few months, and I have a metro stop within walking distance from my future apartment. Their whole metro system is actually very efficient, especially for a system that dates back to the late 1890s. I'm also close to an Amtrak/commuter rail station as well, so I won't need to own a car. Boston does transit right.
Awesome video!! Keep up the good work 😁!!
Very nice! Feels very professional from what I am seeing! Well done.
Totally agree, thats why I like the new interborough express in New York it really helps people that dont need to go to manhattan, but between brooklyn and queens
Very good discussion of the problems! In Hamburg, Germany, we also have the problem that most rail transit lines focus on the city center. Or authorities plan another underground line - U5 - which will cost 8 billions of Euro (i.e., 8 x 10^9). And this line will also lead to central station and back to outer quarters. Tangential connections or outer rings are only served by bus lines without priority lanes. So their average speed is much lower, compared to underground and suburban trains. This is not only a social question. We have got rather the problem that Hamburg central station is already handling much more traffic than it could handle reasonably - and in some years even more passengers will get there by the new underground line. On your maps I saw that Denver plans to build a circle on the eastern side of downtown, that seems a better approach from my point of view.
Great video! The city I’m from, Toronto, has a lot of sprawling single-family homes like many American cities, but has focused on a grid network. However, this may also be because of the strength of our urban core making transit more convenient. I think that we should focus on priority measures to help the busiest routes move faster, as we lack those right now.
I was in the bay area (San Francisco) a few times in the early 1970s. They were just starting to build the "BART" subway system. However there buses were more on a grid pattern and ran 10 minutes apart during rush hours and even ran one hour apart from about 10 PM to 6 AM. Transfers were free and the system was timed in such a way that the transfer bus was normally in sight when you got off the bus. The toll on the Bay Bridge was 50 cents Collected only on the Oakland side) and the bus was 25 cents but a trans bay ticket was only 55 cents. It carried you to the main bus terminal in San Francisco and for 25 cents you could literally get on ANY bus in the terminal, and it would carry you to the transfer stop. It was amazing.
You should keep posting videos! Your voice and format have the potential to make a difference.
Living in Houston, notorious for its car centric infrastructure, I can personally tell you that in order to bike to my nearest high school, I have to cross an INTERSTATE HIGHWAY with cars going upwards of 50 mph. As a nation we need to change
Nothing I love more than to see my home city's subway system in the thumbnail of a bad transit video.
I agree with your sentiments. A network with branches out of the core and radial/circular links is the ideal goal. All I would say is, you have to start somewhere! The U.S. is playing serious catch up at the moment. You can't make a network overnight. Starting with lines from the CBD to the suburbs is the first step, but it shouldn't stop there.
Have you seen Chinese cities pre 2008? It was hell on earth!!!!! Now look at em
Amazing video!
This is true. Transit that bypasses downtown can allow easy suburb-to-suburb travel. However, as funding transit takes time, there's still a need to help low-income families get around independently and reliability. Therefore, providing subsidies to own and maintain automobiles enables their mobility in the interim. Meanwhile, we could work on improving transit links for everybody. However, I know this approach is unpopular due to not reducing overall emissions immediately and the fact that it still supports automobility. Those are my two cents. Thank you, @AJTabura, for an insightful video on the case of public transit serving all places in the city to give people freedom of mobility.
I like you. You're a sensible ass person. Keep on keeping it real bro 💯😊
great video, you deserve a sub
You just gained a new subscriber.
Denver's light rail lines all rely heavily on existing corridors, in the more residential south it uses freeway corridors while in the industrial north heavier lines can use existing rail corridors. The problem is all these corridors funnel downtown with the exception of the I-225.
It's possible that if the freeways we're built around the city instead of straight through then Denver would have more suburb to suburb rail service.
Do you live around Denver? How do you feel about the direction transit is going there? A lot of the stats I pulled of Denver is from 2018 so I'd love to know if you had any more insight into the current state of things.
@@AJTabura I do live in the Metro Area. RTD (Denver's transit agency) has a lot infrastructure but not a lot of service, their bus services in particular sucks. It takes an hour to get to the nearest light rail station from the nearest bus stop(which is a 25-30 min walk from my house) compared to just around 15-20 minutes by car. The light rail service isn't bad in my experience but the stations are built with the bare minimum with mostly just a couple platforms and some ticket machines, however every station comes with a massive parking garage that commuters can park in for free(far as I know, I didn't have to pay for parking when I used the light rail)
@@AJTabura RTD has been on a downward spiral for a while, they're struggling to attract ridership and they're struggling to attract workers as well. Their plan for the future is literally just cutting services to save money. RTD has also been "working" on a rail line that goes from Denver to Boulder but isn't expected to be completed until the 2040s! The governor has been pressuring RTD to pick up the pace on building the line but without more funding RTD can't do anything.
Overall I'd say I'm cautiously optimistic, but with the state of things right now I'm definitely not holding my breath.
Yay! More urbanist TH-cam content!! My biggest issue with this video? The thumbnail, more specifically the thumbnail combined with the title. Was Chicago's train system designed to radiate of from the city center? Yes. Should there be an 'outer loop' and/ or more east/west train service? Also yes. BUT you have to keep in mind, while looking at a map it looks like all the system is good for us getting downtown, that is not all the VERY expansive system is good for. The majority of trips I take on the system are just a few stops up or down on the train line I live next to. And although I wish we had light rail 'trams', the bus system is very expensive. What about the 24 hour services? Is Chicago's system perfect? No, certainly not. But I don't like the implication (accidental or intentional) that the system is bad, more to the point, I don't like people getting introduced to the system as a whole as being bad transit.
Thanks for the response! you're not the first one to comment on Chicago, so I changed the thumbnail just for you! :D
@@AJTabura aww, that's a sweet gesture. I hope you don't think me rude, I really did like the video and I completely agree with your sentiments! Too often those in power think too much about the cost of public transit, but in so doing they ignore the cost of a lack of public transit! I could never afford a car doing the work that I do, and I am so grateful that I live in Chicago and have the CTA.
I was a long term public transit user for most of my life the system I used
1- was designed to only take people to the centre of the city and then only knowledge workers not people who bring tools at work
2- would not allow me to carry vary many groceries, so I could not take advantage of volume discounts
3- only ran frequently ( more then once an hour ) during 8-6 M-F so if you ere not a standard office worker it was almost unusable ( needing to transfer on busses that come every 90 minutes if the transfers are not perfect means spending hours go to and from work and requiring getting t work an hour or more early to ensure I am not late )
4-was actually remarkably expensive with a round trip cost of over $5 but not usable 24/7 and had many rules about what you could bring on the bus ( including tools I needed t work that might be perceived as dangerous )
5-was extremely unreliable with service being frequently suspended by storms or protests or other evens
SO now I have an ICE car and its all so much easier
That's where circle lines come in. But at the end of the day, the demand has to be there for them to justify it.
another upside is that it will lower pressure on the city centers. If all transit goes through the central city, that's where all the activity will be, and the housing there will be insanely expensive. But if public transit goes everywhere, then it reduces the demand to live in the center of a city. Because yes, some people love being in the center of a city, but others just live there because they want easy access to transit.
I think that you know you have done great work when rich people use public transport because its save enough. Ok I have a bit a different view to that as a Swiss with relatives in the USA.
Think that Zurich with its S-Bahn and Streetcar is an almost perfect example.
This is one of my new favorite channels. Your approach to city planning resonates a lot with me as a non-American who's been to the US a couple of times. I hope to see more of these incredible and in-depth videos from you!
Phoenix which has bad light rail, has a great bus system, since Phoenix is a grid, the bus lines are just one street, so you get almost anywhere without having to go into downtown, but they need to improve on the frequency that the buses come, which is definitely needed
Pleasantly surprised this vid involved the twin cities.
metro mobility does a good job- defiantly better than other cities in NA. I'm living in Denver rn and the only thing good they have here is their light rail, and even that I have to walk 45 minutes to get to the station from my campus. A lot of the time I miss mlps and our bike paths. I didn't take the bus often, but had countless friends that did, and my mom would take the orange line into work every day from south mlps.
That being said, I totally agree that the current system doesn't do enough to get everyone where they need to go. And sometimes its a two steps forward one step back sort of thing, like with the recent widening of 35w.
I love living in Minnesota but one problem that needs fixing in the twin cities is the amount of car centric urban sprawl in the cities, while we can’t get rid of the suburbs, we can make them better with better transit and more walkability. I am happy my home town of Apple Valley has a top notch transit station downtown but the one problem with Apple valley is the stroads but I think that can be fixed. I think one policy idea for urban policy is banning strip mallls and building mixed use public shopping centers with apartments above to make more density and if anything it will probably be welcomed to do this since it would make the suburbs nicer places to live by getting rid of these tacky places for shopping and making better places to enjoy the day at.
Many strip malls are going out of business anyway a ban would be meaningless
@@qjtvaddict it would still be a perfect opportunity to make more walkable and pleasant to the eye shopping locations and would make the suburbs a bit better.
Hi! We have same problem for Cebu BRT. The current transportation minister preferred building the BRT that caters only the business districts. The original brt route covers both the residential areas and business districts.
Current transpo lines from residential area to businnes districts takes 2 rides. The original brt shortens the trip to 1 ride. The new brt brings it back to 2 rides. Defeating the purpose of being convenient.
Excellent video! I think most of what you said easily applies to the transit in every Australian city except for maybe Sydney. We here in Perth definitely need more lines going from suburb to suburb instead of into the CBD.
Thankfully we’re already making some progress there with a rail link between two of our train lines.
Some people can’t drive because of visual or other disabilities. Public transit in suburbs would be just as valuable as large cities.
great video
I might be biased but I think philly (septa) does a good job of supplementing their regional rail lines that connect suburbs to the urban core with trolley and bus lines that connect suburbs and different parts of the city with each other
I think that America should take inspiration from Europe on this one, I mean look at Paris. Most of the time, driving a car is longer than taking the metro or tram or train or bus.
By the way ''le pass Navigo'' (a card that allows you to take any public transportation mean near Paris) is fabulous.
I know that everything is not perfect, but the least I can say is that the variety of transportation means is great when the mean that is chosen is adapted to people's needs. I think Paris transportation system is good at it.
RMTransport video on this topic explains it well. Anyway the video was nice. I hope American cities are gonna follow this path...
it's great that transit lines can take us to our jobs in downtown and stuff, means less cars during rush hour traffic, but... that's often times the only place the transit can take you, wanna go to the store? wanna go to a park in a different neighborhood, or to visit friends or to a nearby bar or something... sucks to be you, gotta own a car cos the bus doesn't go there. actually, why should I even have to take the bus to get groceries, that stuff should be at walking distance, but just in case the nearby store doesn't have what I need.
that's why I love loop lines.
4:36 actually you need to go to downtown for that trip. For that trip you can take the 21 to the A Line which don’t require you to go to downtown. I will say though that Minneapolis and St. Paul do need more crosstown lines, especially north of Lowry Avenue in north and northeast Minneapolis, south of 46th street in south Minneapolis and east of arcade street in east St. Paul and crosstown routes in west side(the neighborhood) in St. Paul
It seems the purpose of the branching transit lines is to assist people who commute from the suburbs to get to and from work in the city without having to deal with finding a parking spot downtown. The suburban stations tend to have a lot of parking, so people will usually just park there and go into work. Basically, it's for people who already have cars, the important people.
The thing about other activity centers outside the central business district is that they all still tend to have lots of parking available, so people will just drive their cars there. Yeah, some poor people will be left out, but so what? They tend to commit crimes, they don't have a lot of money to spend, and so they're just not that valued. A lot of people with cars would rather not have to deal with them, so why enable them to go to the activity centers people with cars like to go?
It’s centered on downtown area because that’s where the demand is and that’s where revenue is generated. To place somewhere where there is little foot traffic provides no value considering the millions it will cost to build a transit network and the maintenance.
I should also add that the purpose of the mass transit is to meet the needs of the masses and not each individuals needs. If we create a mass transit for each, image the traffic it will create with buses everywhere and frequent stops, the cost associated and the demand isn’t there for a city to take on such a project. what you are describing is not feasible and practical although I do understand your point.
This is a type of content within need more of
Follow my twitter page for more analysis about urban design 👀
twitter.com/AjTabura?t=U4KOLWnu6_4_To4A-OwZFg&s=09
As you know, Minneapolis was planned with many streetcar corridors kind of like a streetcar suburb, they should consider bringing back the streetcar lines on some of these historic corridors. Also, as a person from Apple Valley MN myself who has an interest in urban planning, I’m glad I found your channel.
The problem is that there probably is only minimal demand to go from any particular low density suburb to another particular low density suburb. So you hub and spoke the system through the highest demand area, downtown.
Bruh I recently moved to a new city and needed to ride the bus. This is exactly what I was thinking about. Transit system needs improvement.
Also, it's crazy how dead the office buildings in a big downtown are on the weekends. I experienced that visiting downtown LA on a sunday. Seems like a wasted economic opportunity to have those public transit lines and do nothing with the CBD area on weekends, like closing down some streets for farmer's markets or festivals.
I live west of Minneapolis, where another light rail line is being built. Currently, it's only four years behind schedule.
If that’s any consolation, here in Paris or London we’re only starting to connect suburban areas between them. And we’re the oldest transport systems in the world. So don’t despair you’re probably gonna get better service in 100 years 🥴
I have been advocating for "around the region" systems instead of/in addition to the suburb/downtown for years. I don't need to go to the city (Philadelphia) so I end up taking a 2 hour multi-segment bus or train trip.
I love that mic
awesome
We're starting to get connector bus routes in Nashville, so you don't have to go all the way downtown to go everywhere.
The only reason I'm able to live car free in Richmond is that I can afford to live in City Center where all the transit flows. But even with a prime location, I still have to supplement with occasional Uber rides to get where I'm going in a timely fashion, I cannot imagine living here in a less central area without wheels.
Thank you for this. All good points.
I notice from 6:21 to 6:49 the sign behind you seems to alternate quite rapidly such that one doesn't have the time to digest the departure data before the sign swaps. ¿Is that an artifact of your editing process? (I believe I noticed one edit - not a complaint - at about 6:50 but it didn't seem like that during the time span I mention) or ¿are they actually not giving customers long enough to read the signage? And ¿what does the "N" mean?
Transit systems must include local trips and people also need to understand they must connect to services at hubs and not a "one seat journey" like most cities. Our system could be much better but we have buses who compete with train services
What train services?
Where I live, rapid transit kind of creates gentrification. In Toronto, properties that were near or on transit lines have higher value than those outside, and thus kind of gentrifies the area... In the end it doesn't actually help the poor, it makes them move away
I'm in Chicago, and yep, housing near our CTA L stations is significantly more expensive than housing in comparable neighborhoods farther from a train stop
Yeah it's a huge issue that decision makers need to make sure they address. I hope to make a video talking about that exact issue, displacement is no joke.
Many transit lines were not built as transit lines. They were privately owned freight lines that had passenger lines of business. Starting the 50s and through the 70s these private roads stopped providing passenger service. Passenger service has always been a money loser. In steps the government to fill the gap and you get Amtrak (Federal) and your local commuter lines (State/City). Metra, MARC, SEPTA, and so on all operation on rail that was already there when they began. These lines all inherited rolling stock that the freight lines no longer needed and run with trackage rights (they own very little or no track). Profitable passenger lines in this country are almost certainly not going to happen. Private companies realized this shortly after WWII with the advent of the interstate highway. The infrastructure needs are too great. It's not just about building the track, it's about getting the right of way. Cities simply do not have the ability to make this happen. Buses however can simply run on existing roads. Buses are far more practical. Buses that are used M-F for the work rush can be repurposed after hours or on weekends for needed surges in traffic (sports events, concerts, holiday shopping). Trains must have tracks and stations. Buses can go anywhere there is a road and stop where they wish. Simply look at why short line rail roads exist. Lines like CSX, Norfolk Southern, BNSF, and others sell off low traffic lines. The cost of maintaining miles of track for very few customers doesn't make sense. Passengers are just freight. Governments will run commuters lines on existing track where the loss is manageable, but they will almost never take on the role of builder or full out owner.
That’s why Amtrak fails
good video
BRT/bRT in Minneapolis is a start, but it is still a bus. We can't and won't get people who don't already use Metro Transit to use these routes, since they're downright confusing and buses are inherently (and historically) not going to be reliable. There is a huge stigma that buses hold. LRT is for mass movement of the most amount of people possible, it acts like a highway for getting people in and out of our city asap. LRT is for suburbanites (and they cost laughably too much like the constantly inflated cost of the Green Line Extension or the still not built Blue Line Extension).
I live in Old Town and work in North Loop, though taking a bus just isn't realistic. I walk across the bridge, even when the air is so cold it hurts. The only way to get more people out of their cars or on foot is to make the streets safer to walk, and to make physical tracks for the transit lines, aka Streetcars. Our city was literally built because of streetcars, the built environment is still there. Streetcar networks are much better for local neighborhood routes, and show that high physical investment in our public streetscapes is important. BRT can never accomplish the same.
another huge issue in north american transit is that we are making everything BRT or LRT even when it makes no sense to do so even in the context of the lines created. north american cities are sprawling, and we need types of transit that can combat that, namely we need to see more high order transit, especially regional Rail and light (or sometimes heavy) metro.
Another important thing we often get wrong is zoning in general, not only do we of course have the massive issue of R1 zoning and suburbanism which leads to everything urban being located in downtown, but we often fail to create good transit oriented development which increases ridership and creates more destinations for people to go to and reduces dependence on downtown. from what Ive heard Minneapolis has been doing great work for zoning reform though.
One of the conversations were having in Denver around the long overdue plans to create an arterial BRT network is how to best implement it? The first project is on Colfax and is going to be a center running gold standard BRT, which is awesome! And there are two more corridors in the planning stages that are likely to be side running (federal and Colorado). There are a lot of advocates, pushing for a more quick build BRT lite for other arterials so we can reap the network effect benefits sooner instead of waiting for money to go full BRT. I’m on the fence because I worry about BRT creep and a subpar service not attracting riders. But it seems like Minneapolis is seeing excellent ridership on their arterial BRTs which aren’t gold standard for the most part. That makes me think getting more BRT implemented faster, even if they’re BRT lite can be a good strategy. Any thoughts?
Atlanta should expand it transit in areas where it’s already approved…. Fulton, Dekalb, and Clayton county…. It should’ve been a main heavy rail line around the entire 285…. Commuter rail down 75 to Macon….. and even a few branches around the interior of Atlanta….. BRT is great but I feel like in a few years they’ll be a need for something else. I also think also think alot of cities are going BRT right now because it’s easier to acquire the land then eventually those lines can be converted to light rail or heavy in some cities…. The DOT would already open the land the BRT routes run so converting them won’t be much of a hassle
Everyone in Atlanta is addicted to driving. Marta rail was built to serve the Atlanta Airport, stadium, and convention centers. Regional transportation isn't the focus for this system. The lack of rail service on the west line proves the mission is not about serving the communities.
@@truelife974 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority was built for the 5 Metropolitan area Fulton,Dekalb,Gwinnett,Cobb,Clayton
@@truelife974 Marta doesn't have government funding to expand heavy rail
I think it would help if you provide examples of international good transit network.
Do you think there will be good transit systems without first building up density in those areas? I feel like city planners won't prioritize those areas without density.
@@tiagofernandes412 Higher density requires a change in zoning regulations. A city with a good public transport must have higher density buildings mixed residential/commerce/office areas so you can also walk and bike for basic things. Once you do that and start getting denser areas you can ad a better transit system.
A good public transport system should start in the core - building a good and extensive network (not "downtown" area focused) in the central denser area - which must include good and wide walkable area and real bike lanes (and not what you call "sidewalks" and "bike lanes").
Once this is in place you start extending it outwards adding density to more areas while maintaining connections not only to the center but inside and between the outer areas.
Than you can build a good suburban rail network that connects not to one central location but to a series of stations with good connection to local transport.
In my city, like most cities in Europe, there is a "city center" but in all areas are a mix of residential/commerce/offices/light industry.
@Tiago Fernandes How can any transit you build change zoning and building height limits?
Sure, building a network is great, but there are other things that come along with this. In my city, the network idea is already a thing since the points of interest of the city are kind of exploded all over the place. My city faces multiple transit problems, several of which are of its own making.
The biggest is the numerous twists and turns that lines need to negotiate in order to get to their destinations. The city has allowed developers to build Americanised suburbs which only have a few exists on main thoroughfares and have with streets that twist and turn. The result is bus routes which are highly inefficient. The street network just does not lend itself to efficient public transit. Given just how bad some of the routes are, walking there, I can actually beat the bus to most of the locations I frequently visit... Yeah, it is really that bad.
The other major problem that my city has is that it used to have a clock face bus system. It abandoned that system sometime in the early 2000s. I do not have a vehicle. I used to ride the bus regularly. I no longer do. Having to check when the bus is going to be at the corner of the street every time I want to go somewhere is that little extra step which has pushed me off. I absolutely cannot be bothered to do that every time there is somewhere I want to be. I either find another way to get what I want, ask myself if I really need it, or just make due with what I have.
I am very fortunate to have a small grocery store within walking distance.
Switzerland: "You wann drive your truck which has non essential or time sensitive goods loaded through our country? HAHAHAHAHAAAAA Yea, no, not gonna happen your truck takes the train or you can leave"
USA: YOU GET A HIGHWAY LANE!! YOU GET A HIGHWA LANE. EVERYONE GETS A HIGHWAY LANE EACH!!!!!!!
Subscribing bro
I'd argue it may be more important to connect people from anywhere in the city to Amtrak, but that may be the Transport Fever player in me
By focusing on identities such as minorities and low income people you reinforce the belief that public transit doesn't concern most people, whereas the analysis should revolve around the long term cost-benefit analysis of public transit vs car infrastructure for the city (and country) as a whole.
As a blind person living in the US, I cherish time I am able to spend in Europe. American city planners and politicians fundamentally don't understand what it takes to build a city that is geneuinely interconnected. They route metro lines as if cars will be the last mile tool to your destination as opposed to a bike or walking. The DC area has a numbmer of Metro stations which are quite literally in the middle of nowhere off of large intersection. Theoretically someone *could* walk or bike from those stops, but they are designed imo to be intentionally inconvenient.