It’s always more economical for a city to have a transit bus system rather than a light rail or subway, but allegedly riders prefer rails because it makes the system seem more permanent/reliable, even when buses are just as quick and dependable.
It’s not just riders. It’s not possible to build transit oriented development around buses because no one will have confidence the route will still be there in 5 years. People also aren’t willing to rent a place when they have to plan around a bus route that may not be around.
2 Likes
There’s also a stigma against people who use public transport in America that they’re poor or do it because they can’t afford a car. Too many people view public transport as a handout to the poor rather than a net positive for the economy and environment.
There’s also a love of cars that tends to not be as prevalent in Europe as it is in America.
6 Likes
Admitedly I have only lived in two medium sized red state cities but bus service in both of them is terrible. I guess I assumed it was like this everywhere?
It is kind of a societal shame thing too. Was it The Wire that talked about bus windows being huge to shame the people riding it? I occasionally have clients who try to get to me via bus and their tales make it sound like it would only be usable if you were desperate. It takes forever, isn’t on time and requires skill to even figure out where to get on/off to get anywhere.
In short it might be more economical but a huge percentage of the population doesn’t even consider it as an option because of how horrible it is. Meanwhile my experience in Euro cities is everyone uses the subway or equivalent. It gets you places quickly and with minimal hassle even if you have to switch lines a couple times.
I nag my brother sometimes to use transit to get from a close in Chicago suburb to downtown. It would involve a bus or ferry from the terminal, but he’d rather leave at 6AM to beat the traffic and pay $20/day to park. There are a lot of people who won’t expose themselves to an environment that isn’t carefully controlled.
I spent a lot of time on city busses in my teen years through early 20s. They’re for poor people. So late they are early.
Obviously no one who can afford a car is going to volunteer for losing the ability to travel freely and have travel take 3-4x as long unless it goes perfectly somehow.
The only busses I ever saw get any kind of could afford a car ridership were always express busses to downtown.
2 Likes
Yeah, riding a bus sucks compared to riding a metro, not sure why. Probably just social stigma.
2 Likes
Unless someone is in an area with frequent gridlock and no dedicated bus lanes, there’s no reason why buses couldn’t be as reliable or as socially acceptable as rail.
It’s all about the Benjamins.
My impression is that light rail here in Utah has become very popular. People were dubious when it was first proposed. Similarly in Arizona in Phoenix/Tempe/Mesa. Bus service has expanded to supplement it. It may not be close to European standards but the system seems to work.
After doing zero research, I confidently say 90% of people in SLC wouldn’t need both hands to count their light rail trips. The Chicago L is packed on rush hour too, but transit is still less than 20% of trips.
It’s funny how people get on board with public transit when they city is super white.
For reference here is the OKC bus route map. The city limits actually extend past the map in every direction. I live in the far NW portion of the map with the nearest bus stop 2 miles away. From what I can tell probably 40% of the city isn’t reachable by public transit at all. Although that may be intentional.
It’s nearly impossible for a bus to be faster than a car. You’ve got to get to the bus station, wait for the bus, most likely take an indirect route/transfer to where you are going w/ a bunch of stops and you are w/ alot of other people the whole time. Very best case scenario, the bus gets to use an express lane, is somewhat direct to where you are going and it’s about the same as a driving yourself with the annoyance of other people trading off for not having to park.
Subways get to use magic underground tunnels that skip all the traffic so in crowded cities they can be faster than sitting in traffic and are often about the same amount of time. When I was in NYC, had to get somewhere fast and money wasn’t a concern, still had to check Google Maps to see whether a taxi would even be faster than the subway. Often wasn’t.
2 Likes
Buses here are just too complicated. Metro/subway is simple.
I’ve lived here for almost 10 years (without a car for the past ~7). In that time I’ve taken a few thousand Metro trips and exactly one bus trip (and that was just because we were walking up the street and it started to rain and we happened to catch a bus for a few stops). The few times I’ve researched the bus network it’s been nearly impossible to figure out and my trips would involve multiple transfers, so I didn’t bother.
3 Likes
Apparently the bus window thing was said by Ludacris in the movie Crash.
2 Likes
Weird. I don’t think I would have guessed that given 100 tries although the quote has stuck with me.
These two points are related
3 Likes
Of course it’s intentional. It’s not like there are huge infrastructure costs to setting up a new bus line (e.g. sign posts, benches/shelters, printing new maps, etc.).
The main costs are buses and drivers to cover the new lines.
Indy incorporated a rapid transit bus line right before the pandemic started. It was supposed to consist of 5 lines that go to every major part of the city including the airport. The Red Line completed in 2019 and I road it a couples of times instead of Ubering while out drinking. Of course they had logistical issues at the start and now the funding for the additional 4 lines are in doubt. Going with a rapid bus system was insanely conservative in the grand plan of better public transit.
