[sustran] Re: Thinking Outside the Bus

[Paul Barter]

Sorry for the delay in getting back to this discussion about
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/thinking-outside-the-bus/.

I didn't intend to sound disparaging about initiatives like the Brunswick
Explorer or the ITN rideshare exchange idea. [I don't want to talk about
the jitney issue today].

The Brunswick Explorer is a good approach in a situation that is extremely
infertile ground for public transport.  The ITN likewise (in a very
different way). The ITN barter system mentioned right at the end is indeed
an interesting innovation too (as Brendan says). I have no problem with
lauding these initiatives.

But I still think the article is misleading because it implies that these
two initiatives provide a damning criticism of mainstream public transport,
even for bigger cities where many more people can and should be served.

*Also, please don't dismiss "connective networks" so lightly. *

In my view, a more positive embrace of connections (or 'transfers' or
'changes') in public transport can have major benefits. I know many people
disagree with this but it is an important debate.

Paul Mees (in his two books) and Jarrett Walker of Human Transit (
http://www.humantransit.org/) and Vukan Vuchic in his various writings (and
many others, especially in the German speaking world and Scandinavia) argue
that better integration is a key to doing better with public transport in a
wide range of contexts. This applies even to surprisingly low-density
contexts (including North American and Australian metropolitan areas and
rural and semi-rural places near European cities). Paul Mees even argues
that it applies especially to low density places.

Maybe Brunswick is indeed too small and too auto-oriented but above some
threshold in city size and density, a simple time-pulse bus network could
probably serve the community well. Those smallish North American cities
that have halfway decent public transport all tend to have a timed-pulse
network. Rural Switzerland achieves good public transport using the same
trick. Unlike the Brunswick Explorer, such a connective network would have
a hope of scaling up as the city grows and of aiming to serve a wider range
of people.

Jarrett Walker has a particular talent for explaining integrated transit
network planning issues, so here are some links for those who want to learn
more about 'connective networks' in public transport:
http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html
http://www.humantransit.org/2010/02/the-power-and-pleasure-of-grids.html
http://www.humantransit.org/2011/07/los-angeles-deleting-some-lines-can-be-fair.html
http://www.humantransit.org/2010/12/basics-finding-your-pulse.html

But mistakes in network planning can indeed force too many transfers (as in
the case of Delhi's Metro for example)
http://www.humantransit.org/2011/02/basics-the-connection-count-test.html

I would highly recommend Jarrett's book, also named Human Transit. It
focuses on North America and Australia but the principles are universal and
hence relevant to our focus at sustran-discuss.

Paul