INTRODUCTORY OVERVIEW
Transportation has major impacts on land use, economic activity, and the quality of life.
In recent decades, transportation policy has received less civic attention than other public policy
areas such as environment, foreign affairs, crime, etc. During these same decades, transportation
has deteriorated in many ways, but it is now beginning to receive more attention. This
Overview, together with the preceding Outline, is designed to help provide a broader perspective
on transportation in large metropolitan areas.
The historic role of transportation in the progress of civilization began with the
ability to walk – and was limited by the distances covered and by what could be carried.
Transportation and mobility increased with the horse and carriage, and with boats that were
rowed or sailed. Railroads and steamboats increased the speed of transporting people and goods.
Two hundred years ago travel was slow, uncomfortable, costly, and sometimes
dangerous. There was little travel except for that felt to be urgently necessary. Today, the
average person in an advanced nation has more and better mobility than did kings at that time.
During the past century, development of motor vehicles, aircraft, and technological
improvements in electronics and telecommunications have opened fresh new horizons in
mobility by land, sea, and air. These changes have consumed and will probably continue to
consume major investments in both public and private capital. As the quality of any sector of
life increases dramatically – as in the case of health care and other sectors as well as
transportation – that sector will tend to attract more resources from consumers, investors, and
governments.
Transportation is of basic importance to our present way of life. In the United States
the average breadwinner spends one to three hours a day in travel, and a large portion of family,
business, governmental and other budgets are spent on the transportation of persons and goods.
The price of almost everything is partly based on transportation costs.
Transportation is of special importance to our major metropolitan areas. It made
possible the development of these metropolitan areas, and it provides the life blood for the
survival, growth, and improvement of these areas. Very large parts of the nation’s population,
wealth, and significant activities are in these areas. Yet these areas are increasingly subject to
worsening traffic congestion which degrades both economic and personal activities.
Finally, transportation – freedom to travel – has been recognized as a human right.
Thus, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948 by the United Nations with
the concurrence of the United States, declares that “Everyone has the right to freedom of
movement . . .” (Art. 13). This does not spell out the quality of transportation, and it may also
have been aimed at governments that denied their citizens freedom to travel. Yet freedom of
movement is abridged when mobility is degraded. And for most Americans today, on most trips,
mobility means automobility.
Our focus is on the movement of persons within these metropolitan areas, but we
recognize that this is related to the movement of goods by truck, and to intercity movements of
both persons and goods by air and surface. A lively debate is in progress about transportation
problems in major metropolitan areas. This primer is designed to help illuminate that debate.
2
PART 1 – WHAT ARE THE CURRENT TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS IN
MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS, AND WHAT ARE THEIR CAUSES?
The PROBLEMS of transportation in major metropolitan areas fall under 6 headings:
(Most of the information below on these problems is from the U.S. Department of
Transportation.)
A. Congestion. This is the worst problem. From 1982 to 2000, delays by congestion
grew by 278 percent in 78 metropolitan areas, and the delays were worse in the larger ones.
Areas with over 3 million people had much worse delays than areas with under a half million.
The average person in the large areas lost 27 hours stuck in traffic in 2000; in Washington in
2001 it was 58 hours, plus much wasted fuel. Since one of the dimensions of life is time,
congestion results in wasting life. This occurs more starkly when congestion delays ambulances,
police cars, and fire engines. The cost of wasted time and fuel to businesses and individuals is in
the billions – money that could be shifted to meet other urgent public and private needs.
B. Environment. Despite an increase of 148% in vehicle miles traveled since 1970,
some pollutants have fallen sharply and others have risen slightly. Carbon dioxide has risen 19%
since 1990. (Carbon dioxide is not technically a pollutant -- it is created by breathing and is
removed by green plants -- but it is primarily caused by using fossil fuels, and it is implicated in
global warming.) In the Washington area, one of the nation’s most congested, the average
number of days per year with an unhealthy Air Quality Index has dropped from 29 in 1992-1994
to 24 in 1999-2001.
C. Cost. Transportation as a part of household expenses is second only to housing.
Transportation was under 10% of household budgets in 1935 but is almost 20% today. Most of
the cost is in owning and operating cars, including gasoline, sales and tag taxes, insurance,
repairs, parking, tolls, etc. For low-income Americans, transportation may take up to 40% of
their incomes. Transportation costs also include, indirectly, various factors in government
budgets such as health (emergency rooms) and police (highway patrols). Costs vary by area:
around Washington, with fair public transit, it’s about 15% of household budgets; around Tampa,
with less transit, it’s about 25%.
D. Accessibility (Financial and Physical). Access to public transportation (transit or
taxis) is a special problem for several groups: low income, persons with disabilities, travelers and
commuters from rural or distant homes, some of the elderly, and visitors arriving by plane or
train.
E. Safety. In general transportation is safer in metropolitan areas than in rural areas,
although pedestrians and bicyclists may be less safe. However, growing road congestion seems
to have exacerbated such problems such as aggressive driving, “road rage” and red light
running.
F. Sprawl and Other Problems. “Sprawl” is commonly used to describe (or to
criticize) building new homes, each usually on a fair-sized lot, further and further from the
center of a city. By causing longer commutes this increases traffic. This may also tend to
accelerate the decline of older, central-city neighborhoods, reducing their tax base and their
public services. In addition, as employment opportunities develop away from city centers, a new
commuting problem arises – suburb to suburb – because most transportation facilities were built
as radials (in and out of downtown). A further problem is increased density – more people per
acre – which also usually means more traffic. These problems are based largely on underlying
market forces. These forces include the motivation for farmers or speculators to sell open land at
3
higher prices, the tendency of many home buyers to favor more spacious houses and grounds,
and the desire of home builders to sell many homes. Since most home buyers are limited in what
they can pay, builders must keep down their costs, either by moving out for cheaper land or by
building more homes per acre or both.
A serious potential problem can be a large-scale emergency evacuation due to a terrorist
attack or the like. Such an event might overload surviving modes of transportation in and around
the affected area.
A recently recognized problem is obesity, which creates serious health risks. While
obesity also occurs in small towns and rural areas, the decline of walking in favor of driving,
especially by suburbanites, is believed to be one of the causes of obesity.
The main CAUSES for these problems include:
A.Population Shifts – the shifts of population from rural areas and small towns and from the
interior of the nation to large metropolitan areas, most of which are near the coasts. This is
largely a result of the movement of jobs, which in turn reflects the movement of businesses.
Businesses often move away from places that suffer declining inter-city transportation. During
the past half century most railroads ended their passenger services and some of their related
freight services. Airlines also, under deregulation, understandably provide less service to smaller
communities.
B.Population Increases – the result of increased longevity in the general population and legal
and illegal immigration.
C.Increased Affluence – improved standards of living that offers consumers larger houses on
larger lots, more resources for travel, and general improvements in automobile durability, in
greater ease of operation, and in comfort, resulting in almost universal ownership of cars.
D.Inefficient Use of Existing Facilities – including, for example, traffic lights that are poorly
timed and road work that could be shifted to off-peak traffic periods.
E.Failure to Expand Facilities – to keep pace with increased demands that result from the
population shifts, population increases, and growing affluence of the past half-century. During
that period, a large part of the planning to accommodate the increased travel demand in large
metropolitan areas has remained just in the planning stage. There has generally not been enough
political or financial support to bring about the development of actual facilities that would
accommodate the growth in our nation’s large metropolitan areas.
F.Finally, the two kinds of land development (“sprawl” and excessive density) that are referred
to above under the heading of “problems” in large metropolitan areas should also be recognized
as among the “causes” of traffic congestion.
4
PART 2 – WHAT ARE THE SIX MAIN FACTORS IN TRANSPORTATION
QUALITY AND VALUE?
History makes clear that when there is significant improvement in the quality of any sector
of the standard of living, people will probably demand and use more of it. Transportation
quality and value can be described under the following six headings:
A. Speed -determined as the total time from the point of origin, such as a home, to the
destination – not just the station-to-station time. Speed is a matter of both personal
satisfaction and economic benefits: “time is money”.
B.Safety– including both actual risk–the number of accidents or fatalities per million passenger
miles (or per trip or per capita) and the varying seriousness of accidents – and
perceived risk, which may be more or less than the actual risk. Perceived risk can
affect the potential traveler’s peace of mind as well as travel decisions. The volume
of accidents is largely a function of traffic volume, and the seriousness of accidents is
largely a function of road design, vehicle design and weight, and speed. Also,
transportation safety involves not only hazards in vehicles but also risks, such as
crime, in parking lots or transit stations.
C.Reliability – both ordinary and emergency. Ordinary reliability is degraded by adverse
weather, the tardiness of a given mode of transportation and the cancellation of
scheduled trips. Emergency reliability (in case of terrorist attacks or other disasters)
is also an element of quality in transportation. It may depend, at least in part, on the
number and diffusion of routes and mobile equipment, factors where roads and cars
have obvious advantages. On the other hand, numerous roads and cars present
difficulties in providing security against car bombs, except at a few sensitive
locations. Also, since many cities are next to navigable waters, the availability of
vessels to assist in evacuations might enhance emergency reliability.
D.Comfort – in seating, lighting, climate and noise control and, in some situations, the
availability of rest rooms in transit stations, on vehicles, and at bus stops. Some of
the factors that go into comfort and satisfaction may be psychological rather than
physical: the sense of control of power in driving; the status felt in driving an
impressive car; or a taste for being alone or for choosing one’s passengers, compared
to a gregarious interest in the variety of passengers in other forms of travel.
E.Convenience – which is many-faceted. Can the traveler bring a friend, children, or pets
without added cost? Can the traveler bring along large or heavy objects easily, as on
shopping trips, or when going to sport or musical practice? Can the traveler make
intermediate stops for pickup and delivery, to drop a child off at school or daycare, or
to attend a meeting, class or other activity? Can the traveler read a newspaper, or
listen to news, music, or books on tape – or use a cell phone enroute? Can the
traveler avoid the need to wear raingear or a heavy coat on walks to, or waits at, a
transit stop? Can the traveler start a trip, perhaps on impulse, or in case of emergency,
at any time? If the trip involves “intermodal” transportation (e.g., changes between
train and bus or some other mode), can the traveler, even if handicapped, count on a
smooth, quick, and reliable transfer?
5
F.Cost – While not strictly speaking an element of quality, cost is an adjunct to quality and
should be considered as affecting the consumer’s decision on whether and how to
travel. Cost may be important, but with distinct limitations. For the affluent traveler,
cost is less important. Some travel will be made regardless of cost – including trips to
and from work and to fulfill critical family obligations. For a car owner, the cost of a
trip is usually perceived as the added out-of-pocket expense, since cost of ownership
must be paid in any case.
PART 3 – WHAT OTHER DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL POLICY CONCERNS
ARE RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION POLICIES?
Transportation policy is significantly related to several other important areas of
public policy, chiefly:
(a) Environment, including land use and air quality (air quality covers both pollution
levels and greenhouse gases.) and Energy including the development,
conservation, reliability, and cost of various sources of energy
(b) Economic Vigor and Social Equity
(c) National Security and Foreign Relations .
Therefore, these areas of public policy must be considered in deciding to what extent –
and in what ways – transportation policy should improve our roads, vehicles, and public transit.
A. Environment and Energy: There is no doubt that more and better transportation,
whether by car or transit, like many other human activities, tends to place at least a potential
burden on both environmental and energy policies. Methods for minimizing these burdens are
well known, though not always used.
Economic and population growth leads to development, and development tends to go
where transportation is available, sometimes overburdening the transportation capacity. This is
true whether the development is “sprawl” (development further out) or an increase of density on
land already developed, e.g., tearing down farms or homes to build big apartments or big
employment or shopping structures. Proper land use policies (planning and zoning) can control
and channel growth to preserve the environment and ensure adequate public facilities, including
transportation. Also, congestion can be reduced if some of the traffic magnets, such as
employment locations, can be placed near the residential end of commuting routes.
B. Economic Vigor and Social Equity: Despite environmental and energy problems,
there is no doubt that more and better transportation tends to benefit both economic vigor and
social equity. The welfare parent with small children in day care who must spend over an hour
on the bus getting to a job and a similar time returning home, not to mention the problems of
other necessary trips, lives under a discouraging strain both as a worker and as a parent. The
average citizen, who can have a back yard, a garden, and a patio while building equity in his or
her home, probably would not enjoy these benefits were it not for more or less adequate travel,
typically by car, to work and to other destinations.
Social equity is not limited to welfare parents: the needs of the disabled and some of the
elderly may require costlier special attention, such as handicapped parking, vehicles that handle
wheelchairs and other assistance devices, such as kneeling buses, wheelchair-accessible paths,
6
and taxi or volunteer services. These can be encouraged by favorable tax and insurance
treatment.
C. National Security and Foreign Relations: Better transportation, unless done more
efficiently, increases our already excessive dependence on imported energy, much of it from the
unstable Middle East. In addition, our well known indulgence in ever-bigger and heavier gasguzzling
vehicles probably has some adverse effects on the way our country is viewed by most
other nations, both in turning people against us and in providing talking points for our
adversaries.
With these other policy factors influencing plans for better transportation, some experts
have called attention to two concepts that may restrain plans for improved transportation,
“induced traffic” and “demand management”. Both warrant consideration:
A. Induced Traffic – Improving transportation will tend to increase the demand for it.
When a better road or better public transit service is provided, more people will use it.
This is called “induced traffic.” Induced traffic is sometimes used as an argument
against any improvement, on the theory that increased traffic and congestion will
result. This may have validity in some situations. Yet, if roads and transit had not
been built and improved, people all over the world would still be using horses on
unpaved roads and taking rowboats to cross bodies of water. New schools are built
when the student population expands, and perhaps more transportation facilities need
to be provided as the traveling population expands. Almost anything that is improved
may induce more use – health care, food, clothing, shelter, entertainment – but that
must not be the controlling argument against improvement.
B. Demand Management – This suggests a number of ways to reduce congestion by
reducing the number and extent of trips that people make. These include
telecommunicating, staggering work hours, encouraging the use of car pools, and
developing land use policies to make it easier for people to live near their jobs and
near such frequent trip destinations as stores, schools, and entertainment centers.
Demand can also be discouraged by various kinds of tolls, taxes, or charges: toll
roads, peak-hour tolls, toll lanes, parking charges, high fuel taxes, etc. Such devices,
of course, present questions of public and political acceptability. They burden
socially useful travel as well as other trips, and they may not fully succeed in curing
congestion, which sometimes occurs even on toll bridges, toll tunnels, and toll
highways.
Such measures can help restrain the growth of traffic, but they are limited by what the
public, or parts of it, will accept. An imaginative campaign to encourage people to combine trips
and to ask “Is this trip necessary?” may be helpful. But such measures are also faced with
powerful forces of modern life which create more traffic: increasing population; improved
standards of living; technological improvements in the automobile and other transportation
vehicles; the movement of our population from the interior of the country to metropolitan areas
that are mainly near the coasts; the movement of population from central cities to suburbs and
even farther out, and local government policies and practices in zoning and related subjects.
A realistic answer to the challenge of the increasing demand for transportation in
metropolitan areas should be based on two groups of factors: 1) Public benefits of better
transportation and 2) Public needs that may require restraint.
7
1. Benefits – The benefits of better transportation are easy to summarize. These
include a greater choice of places to live, work, shop, and obtain health,
educational, and recreational services. The individual will have more time for
family, community, recreational or civic activities and will be able to spend more
time with friends. Transportation improvement will offer greater efficiency for
businesses and other productive institutions as well as greater opportunity to
reduce cultural isolation.
2. Needs – The restraining factors for which improved transportation might prove
detrimental, depending on how improvements are achieved, include (a) the need
to consider environmental issues such as pollution and global warming, while also
considering that traffic congestion increases pollution and global warming as
compared to the same amount of traffic moving smoothly; (b) the need to
consider and conserve supplies of energy and to reduce dependence on unreliable
sources, (c) the need for land use policies that preserve natural areas and
agricultural areas; and (d) the need for a proper balance in the allocation of the
nation’s financial resources between transportation and other sectors that affect
the standard of living.
These restraining factors can be given greater weight, over time, by improving technology,
population stability, and the building of a program of better citizen information to develop a
stronger sense of civic responsibility and civic participation. A first step might be laws creating
financial incentives to manufacture cars with greater fuel efficiency, using the savings in fuel
costs to pay for needed transportation improvements. This also means promoting hybrid engines
and developing vehicles powered by hydrogen that is produced by electricity made without
releasing carbon dioxide.
PART 4 - WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS FOR BETTER METROPOLITAN AREA
TRANSPORTATION?
To identify the options for better transportation, all modes of transportation should be
considered, bearing in mind that some trips use more than one mode. Below we summarize the
options for metropolitan area travel under 6 modes: walking, bicycles, cars, rail and bus
transit, taxis and jitneys, and other technologically newer modes.
[For what is meant by “better” transportation, please see Part 2 above. Also please note
that better transportation may present problems relating to other important public policies (see
Part 3) or relating to financing, technology, or management (see Part 7.)
(a) Walking: While a good form of exercise and free of harm to environmental or energy
policies, walking involves real limitations: slow speed, poor weather, risks of traffic and in some
places of crime, and limited capacity to bring parcels, children, etc. This capacity can be
increased with baby carriages, strollers, and personal shopping carts. The usefulness of walking
can also be increased by land development that puts homes within an easy walk of stores,
schools, jobs, etc., but such developments are uncommon in most suburbs. Larger shopping
centers, schools, or work places offer certain advantages over small ones, such as greater variety
and economies of scale, but they must be supported by larger areas, parts of which require long
walks. Even in walk-oriented developments, some trips to places beyond an easy walk would be
made by choice or by necessity. Walking also serves to get to transit stations and parking places:
8
possible improvements for such walks may include foot-bridges over major roads. There is
support for sidewalks near schools or other destinations, but many suburban streets lack
sidewalks, perhaps because residents see little need for them or have esthetic or financial
objections, or because elderly residents or those who travel frequently are concerned about laws
requiring them to remove snow and ice from sidewalks.
At busy intersections, “walk/don’t walk” signs that display the remaining seconds for
walking may help. In some places, better facilities for walking may also be utilized by a variety
of devices that benefit the handicapped or elderly as well as other persons. Curb cuts at corners,
pursuant to the Americans With Disabilities Act, can serve not only wheelchairs (some of them
powered) but also other devices: electric tricycles with 2 side-by-side seats, modified golf carts,
and a powered stabilized device resembling a scooter, known as a Segway, referred to under
“Other Modes”. Such devices, of course, will need space for movement and for parking.
(b) Bicycles (including motorcycles, mopeds, tricycles): Bicycles are much faster than walking
and can be adapted to carry small parcels or small children. They also offer good exercise with
no harm to environment or energy policies, but they are not well adapted to poor weather, are a
subject of safety concern (a collision that is only a fender bender for a driver can be far more
serious for a bicyclist), and are less useful in hilly places, or by travellers who are aged or infirm.
A recent government survey shows that bike paths or bike lanes improve bicyclists’ sense of
personal safety. Recreational bicyclists tend to prefer bike paths (separate from roads), while
bike commuters prefer lanes (part of roads). Motorcycles and mopeds offer speed advantages but
have similar disadvantages as to weather, safety, and older users; also motorcycles may be
noisy. Like walking, bicycles are useful to reach transit stops, especially ones with secure
bicycle parking. Bicycles would benefit from safe, locked, lighted storage racks at various
destinations to reduce thefts.
(c) Cars, carpools, and car rentals: Cars are an increasingly dominant mode of transporting
persons in advanced nations, for a variety of reasons that center generally on personal
convenience and utility. As an option for transportation, cars are dependent on roads and
parking places, but this is also true of buses and to a lesser extent of bicycles. As an option for
better transportation, cars in major metropolitan areas need three things: (a) better roads and
parking, (b) better safety, as discussed in Part 6 of this primer, and (c) better fuel efficiency, for
the reasons noted in Part 3 of this primer.
Carpools can reduce commuting traffic, but carpool members who are slow in the
morning, or sometimes have to work late, or need to stop enroute, or are simply not compatible
with the others, erode the viability of carpools. Carpools can be strengthened by carpool
information exchanges, by helping drivers give lifts to strangers, and by preferential parking.
Car rentals (a form of car-sharing) are chiefly used in connection with air travel, or to
substitute for cars being serviced. But car rentals can serve a further role, to reduce congestion
in urban areas such as New York, as a substitute for car ownership by persons who need cars
only occasionally, especially if rentals are offered by some convenient, pre-arranged, simplified
system.
For specifics on how to improve car travel, please see Part 6 of this primer.
9
(d) Rail and bus transit: These traditional forms of transit play a dominant role where
land use is very dense, as in lower and mid-town Manhattan. In addition, rail transit can be a
very useful supplement to cars in metropolitan areas where it has its own right-of-way, as in the
subways of New York, Washington and other cities, particularly if there is adequate parking and
bus service at the suburban stations. Rail services that share the right-of-way with road traffic –
trolleys – have operational problems and have gradually disappeared from most American cities.
However, “light rail”, a kind of hybrid between trolleys and regular rail such as New York’s or
Washington’s, may be making a limited comeback. In general, light rail is cheaper and quicker
to build; it either shares the road with cars or has its own lane which however intersects with
roads; it runs as one, or two, or more cars; and it tends to be a bit slower than regular rail transit.
Bus service generally shares roads with cars and trucks, and thus to improve bus services
in congested areas generally means, among other things, better roads, or possibly dedicated bus
lanes or HOV privileges.
For specifics on how to improve the options of bus and rail transit, please see Part 5 of
this primer.
(e) Taxicabs and jitneys: Taxicabs combine many of the advantages of both cars and transit.
Good taxi service approximates the “at any time, from any place to any other” utility and
convenience of cars, plus the ability to take children or parcels at little or no extra cost, all
without the burdens of car ownership, parking, and without the rigidities of fixed-route, fixedschedule
bus or rail transit. In addition, with the cooperation of taxis and their insurance
companies, taxi drivers can assist the handicapped or disabled between the taxi and building
entrances. On the other hand, taxis are not very cost efficient – they do not produce many
passenger-miles of service for each vehicle-mile of operating expense. Taxi service can be
enhanced by better communications (e.g., cell phones to hail cabs), by more consumer-oriented
regulation, including improved opportunities for competition, and by allowing cabs to pick up
additional passengers under proper conditions.
Better taxi service will mean better transportation and may help reduce congestion. To
reduce the cost of taxis, trips which serve health, education, or occupational purposes might
receive some degree of favorable tax treatment.
Jitneys are a hybrid between taxis and private autos, specializing in commuting service.
Car owners who are driving to work pick up commuters going the same way for a nominal
charge. Jitneys can provide quality service at low cost, but jitneys are vulnerable to legal and
legislative blockage by lawyers and lobbyists for transit companies, who regard jitneys as
dangerous competitors. Since transit services are heavily subsidized by governments, letting
jitneys divert transit revenues would tend to require additional subsidies, which may turn
governments against jitneys. Yet it seems obvious that jitneys offer an efficient, if limited,
potential to provide good service and reduce road congestion at low cost.
10
(f) Other Modes (Segways, maglev trains, monorails, monobeams, helicopters, moving
sidewalks, water taxis, etc.):
Exotics or experimental modes of transportation may offer exciting options for improvement.
They call for open-minded but guarded consideration. On the one hand, all present modes of
transportation originated as experiments, usually starting with many practical drawbacks. On
the other hand, some that were in regular service disappeared for various reasons: e.g., dirigibles,
electric interurban railroads and trolleys, and early automobiles that were propelled by steam or
electric batteries.
A Segway is a one-person powered and stabilized 2 wheel scooter with wheels at the
sides only, and with speeds up to 12 miles per hour, initially priced at about $5,000. Segways are
being introduced in some cities for rental to tourists, who receive 30 minutes of training in their
use. Monorails are often thought of as a Disney World attraction, but actually are used for public
transit in several cities in Europe, Asia, and even the United States: Seattle has a monorail
system which may be extended. A monobeam is a type of monorail which requires even less
space on the ground for its supporting structures. A 19-mile Maglev train (magnetic levitation,
i.e., magnetically propelled and supported) has opened for commercial service in Shanghai,
China using German technology, and it has a top speed of 267 miles per hour; reportedly it may
be extended 775 miles to Beijing. Other possibilities, such as helicopters, moving sidewalks,
water taxis, etc. may warrant consideration in particular situations.
The best chance for transportation improvement through innovative modes probably
depends on creativity, fortified by rigorous research and testing that considers user-friendliness
and public acceptance. A combination of public and private funding, which would include
studying progress in other nations, is a likely path to progress. And care must be taken to help
insure that existing transportation interests do not stifle progress from fear of competition.
PART 5 – HOW CAN TRANSIT BE MADE MORE ATTRACTIVE?
The answer to this question must be found largely in the reaction to transit services
of potential passengers of various ages, preferences, attitudes and needs.
A. Make transit faster – Not just between station and station, but between
passenger’s actual points of origin and destination. This means bus and rail stations that are a
short walk from homes, or a short drive away with good, quick, cheap, and reliable parking. It
also means frequent and reliable bus or train service with minimal waiting time at the stations.
Buses and trains should have enough doors to permit easy entrance and exit for the passengers.
B. Make transit more comfortable – With shelters at bus stops that have adequate
seats, or at least benches, and vehicles that are properly heated, cooled, ventilated, illuminated,
and reasonably quiet. All passengers should have comfortable seats, preferably with an outside
view. Clean safe rest rooms at transit stations are also desirable.
C. Make transit more affordable – Many passengers will have their own cars and
will judge the cost of a car trip as fuel and perhaps parking and tolls – not including the total
costs of ownership. Transit costs often involve the expense of driving to and parking at a transit
station. Free transit and/or free parking would be an added attraction, though this might not
outweigh the convenience of a car for some trips, such as those with several passengers, several
packages, or enroute stops.
11
D. Make transit more hassle-free –The fare structure should be simple to remember
and simple to pay. Fare and parking fee machines should be reliable and user-friendly, even for
infrequent users and strangers. Insure that bus drivers will make change, so far as practicable, or
develop change-making machines. Provide good clear route maps that plainly relate routes to
local streets, plus schedules that are easily read and up-to-date. The maps and schedules should
be available at bus and rail stations and other convenient places. Insure that phone calls from the
public are promptly, clearly, correctly, and politely answered at all hours, that the phone numbers
are well-publicized, and that maps and schedules will be mailed free upon a telephone request.
Provide good protection against rowdy youths or other threatening persons – not only in transit
vehicles but also in parking lots, especially after dark. Respect the right of passengers to
complain, however heatedly, about broken escalators or other problems. Make sure transit police
are well-trained, friendly, and exercise common sense. Provide free transfers and weekly and
monthly passes that can easily be purchased by phone and online and are good for all bus and rail
services in the metro area. Minimize service disruptions and delays due to breakdowns, labor
disputes, or other causes. Provide prompt emergency guidance and assistance to passengers in
case of service disruptions.
E. Make Transit more Accessible – Transit is more attractive for users who live,
work, shop, or play near transit stations. The number of such users can be increased by high
density, mixed-use development near transit stations.
F. Publicize the availability of transit more effectively.
The above kinds of improvements may require considerable effort and subsidy, but they
could go far toward counterbalancing the generally greater convenience of cars. They could also
help counterbalance the inherent detriments of transit, such as the rigidity of fixed route, fixed
schedule service and the occasional proximity to coughing, sneezing, contagious, or otherwise
fear-inspiring passengers.
PART 6 – WHAT REALISTIC CHANGES IN AUTOMOBILE TRAVEL
WOULD MAKE IT MORE DESIRABLE?
Changes that would make automobile travel more desirable are based on the
transportation goals of speed, safety, cost, and convenience. These are shaped by three
transportation elements—drivers, cars, and roads. (including parking).
A. Speed – Speed is an ambiguous term. We use it to mean reduced travel time, not the
highest miles per hour. In congested metropolitan areas, the goal of reduced travel time has little
to do with faster cars or drivers. Speed in traveling depends chiefly on more and better roads:
more lanes (by new roads or widening existing roads), center turning lanes for left turners, and
relief of bottleneck intersections through a variety of improvements, such as an overpass,
underpass or traffic circle. Speed also depends on better road use: for example (a) better timing
of traffic lights, to include more frequent and consistent switching to red and yellow flashing
lights during off-peak periods, (b) improved off-peak road maintenance, (c) rapid deployment of
assistance vehicles to help and clear roads at accidents and breakdowns; (d) continuous, wellpublicized
radio traffic and delay reports by zones; and (e) the availability of better, more
12
attractive public transit, including the construction of pull-off bays at bus stops to the extent
practicable. Recently attention has also been given to the idea of providing toll lanes on major
highways. Attention should also be given to providing by-passes for long-haul, intercity traffic
that now mixes with and aggravates local metropolitan traffic, to the detriment of both.
B. Safety – In contrast to speed, better safety depends on all three transportation
elements: drivers, cars, and roads, with unsafe driving the chief safety problem. Obvious
priorities include better, more comprehensive, and more universal training and testing for
teenage drivers, who are four times as likely as older drivers to be involved in a crash and three
times as likely to die in one. Teen crashes often involve speeding and alcohol, subjects that
demand more and better attention, as does the effectiveness of some driving schools. Other
priorities are more effective monitoring and enforcement of laws against all drivers who may be
drunk, drugged, distracted, fatigued, or experiencing health difficulties. Some elderly drivers
need to be regularly reminded about the risks to themselves and others that could result from
such conditions.
In addition, the general driving public needs to be encouraged to become more safetyconscious.
Insurance companies can help by counseling more about the dangers of such
distractions as the use of cell phones while driving. Training for drivers should include the
ability to read road signs in English. The greatest potential for safety improvement, however,
rests with law enforcement. The driving public should be reeducated to consider traffic police
as a source for protection rather than punishment. Major changes in both the day-to-day
operation and public relations attitude of traffic enforcement personnel could bring most drivers
to regard them as friendly and protective factors, rather than only sources of punishment, to be
avoided, because they seem to be more prone to write tickets for technical violations than for
truly dangerous driving.
Discourteous driving creates road rage which is a real hazard. This should be taught,
and learned, in driver education and if necessary in re-training. It is best taught by constant,
tactful, and imaginative methods, hopefully with media support, and with legal coercion as a fallback.
Training should emphasize that traffic congestion aggravates stresses which tend to
overcome courtesy, but also that even under stress courtesy is possible, and perhaps is even more
important: combat pilots gave friendly waves to enemy pilots in WWI but still did their stressful
jobs.
Law enforcement personnel could issue more warnings and fewer tickets; develop
traffic conferences and training courses for drivers as an attraction or a requirement rather than
as a punishment; and by example encourage courtesy in driving as a part of respectable,
responsible citizenship. They should be trained to sympathize when a driver is justifiably
angered at wasted time or poor facilities, and to avoid such comments as “calm down” when they
encounter a driver who is upset. The traffic officer and the driver should be reminded that
driving is not a “privilege” but a regulated right.
On the other hand, stronger enforcement effort should be aimed at the truly aggressive,
irresponsible driver – including the one who tailgates or weaves in and out excessively on
expressways. Such visible enforcement would be welcomed by most drivers. Road signs that
say “enforcement by aircraft” would receive more serious attention if small aircraft were actually
used, in conjunction with police cars, to apprehend the dangerous driver. They would prove
even more valuable if camcorders were employed to photograph these drivers, and if the films
were shown in court and on local television screens. The great human and financial cost of
traffic accidents merits consistent and urgent attention.
13
There is also room for safety improvements in cars and roads. For example, cars with a
high center of gravity, such as some SUVs, are more rollover-prone. Cars with too many
gadgets may distract drivers. Road signs and street signs are frequently inadequate -- too
small, hidden by foliage or even by other signs, or of insufficient contrast under certain light
conditions –thus confusing drivers or diverting their attention from collision avoidance to
navigation. Signs and signals should conform to uniform standards and be reasonable Red light
running and other intersection problems might be reduced by lights redesigned to show
graphically the remaining time before a change in color. Navigational signs on major roads
should allow for the less-than-perfect attention of many drivers. Therefore signs should give
advanced warning of decision points and other signs should label them clearly. For example,
“Exit” tells little beyond the obvious; “Exit 17” is better; and “Exit 17, Main Street” is better yet.
Shoulders and barriers are often inadequate or absent, resulting in collisions and the possible
dropping of heavy trucks from an overpass onto the traffic lanes below. Reflective white and
yellow stripes at the edges of lanes and pavements are also valuable, especially on rainy nights.
C. Cost – While keeping down costs is desirable in principle, cost savings that come at the
expense of quality may actually prove to be “penny wise and pound foolish.” Individuals can
personally control costs by their choice of a vehicle. Such costs as tolls and parking fees may be
burdensome, but customers, businesses, workers and residents will tend to move away from
places where costs are excessive. This, in effect, helps to explain the great modern shift from
cities to suburban areas. The cost of better roads to relieve congestion, traditionally funded by
some type of local, state, or federal tax, can be more than counterbalanced over time by the
benefits of choice, a better quality of life, time and lives saved, and other significant efficiencies.
The paradox of cost, however, is striking where road-building in major metropolitan
areas is concerned. The same person who will spend many thousands of dollars for a fine new
car may often be stuck in traffic behind the wheel of that car and yet be unwilling to support an
extra nickel or dime in gas tax to provide the better roads that are needed. This attitude
endangers the quality of life for that driver and for the many other drivers who could be using
those new, better roads.
A broader view of costs would also include costs that relate to environmental and energy
factors. Here, the trend to households of 2, 3, or even more cars per household may offer a good
opportunity, namely, the ownership and use of small fuel-efficient cars for commuting and short
trips, and of larger cars for family travel, longer trips, or larger loads. Over time, educational or
other measures may help encourage an affluent society to use the car that is best adapted for the
particular kind of use.
D. Convenience –Improvements in convenience will depend largely on the features of the
vehicle being used. For most people, cars are already the most convenient mode of travel. Yet,
some improvement is still possible. In some places parking is inconvenient, which also may
affect the speed and cost of travel. In addition, if commuters who park in the central urban area
all day could obtain such routine services as oil changes, tune-ups, and car washes at competitive
prices where they park, time would be saved for the commuter, and urban facilities would find
an additional source of revenue.
14
PART 7 – HOW CAN THE FINANCING, TECHNOLOGY, AND MANAGEMENT FOR
BETTER TRANSPORTATION BE MORE EFFECTIVELY OBTAINED?
The answers to this question must be based on the clear understanding that people
and governments will probably get no more effectiveness in transportation than they are
willing to pay for:
A. Financing – As people allocate resources, they are willing to spend quite a lot on vehicles -
securing a very high standard of performance and comfort – but not nearly as willing to pay,
in taxes, for the roadways and other facilities needed to carry these vehicles at a comparable
level of quality and safety.
Many citizens are also quite unwilling to pay the taxes needed to provide other
community services at the same levels of quality that characterize the privately produced
goods and services on which they spend most of their money. Thus, inadequate highways,
bridges and rail facilities are just one part of a more general phenomenon which people
tolerate with or without complaint. Yet historically, the construction, maintenance, and even
operation of transportation facilities have generally required some form of government
subsidy.
Adequate funding of transportation must be based on alerting citizens and government
officials to the need for allocating funds at local, state, and Federal levels. This means
sustained, adequate funding for construction of additional facilities, maintenance, services,
and especially forward-looking planning for future transportation needs.
It is generally cheaper to provide transportation in anticipation of population growth
than to catch up with needs after traffic congestion has worsened. A small increase in the gas
tax or tolls will support large improvements funded by bonds.
B.Technology –New transportation technology is hard to predict, but it seems likely that
communication technology will have significant effects on future metropolitan area transportation.
Recent communication developments are already reducing the importance of place in
human interactions, and thereby substantially cutting back on the need for people to travel
from place to place, especially for some kinds of work, education and entertainment. Nevertheless,
humans are mobile by nature, and both travel itself and the face-to-face exchanges it
facilitates seem to be not only necessary or useful but even enjoyable or psychologically
beneficial.
The gradual exhaustion of petroleum, and the uncertainty of foreign sources,
suggests more fuel-efficient cars, such as hybrids, with hydrogen power as a possible ultimate
answer. This will reduce air pollution but also reduce gas tax revenues.
Traffic engineering technology, in the form of informational road signs and devices
and systems for automatic collection of tolls, offers some potential. Other technology, such
as the movable footpaths in some airports, or the Segway (a powered scooter) may also be
helpful in providing more efficient “people movers” for dense urban centers. Additional
attention should also be given to monorails, monobeams, and light rail.
15
C. Management – Interpreted narrowly, the management of most transportation systems
seems to be in pretty good shape. There may be some loss of efficiency in highway
construction and maintenance because of preferential treatment to politically connected
contractors, but this is not as common as it used to be.
As to transit systems, the management of the rail system in the Washington, D.C. area,
for example, has been criticized for repeated failures of escalators, trains, rails, and other
equipment; for arresting women, children, and disabled passengers for minor violations or
uncouth language; and for shortages of service and parking spaces. Such problems may be partly
due to defects of design, funding, or to increased demand, and it is not known to what extent
these problems are common in other areas.
Coordination of planned highways crossing city, county, or state boundary lines can
be difficult, but Federal and state governments usually have the power to resolve such problems.
Citizens who live in one jurisdiction but work in another must depend on cooperation among
these levels of governments. Management of the flow of traffic to assure safety is a growing
problem, as ever-worsening congestion – and perhaps cultural changes – brings an increase in
the dangerous running of red lights, “road rage”, and aggressive behavior on the highways. (See
discussion of highway safety in Part 6.)
If management is interpreted more broadly – to include the management of traffic flows
to maximize throughput – a whole new field of inquiry is opened up. Devices such as by-passes,
tolls, center lanes for left-turns, better signs and signals and better intersections (such as traffic
circles, overpasses, or underpasses, like that at Dupont Circle in Washington), together with
more attention to the view of travelers, offer prospects for improvement. Management should
also plan for responses to terrorism or other emergencies, including effective communications
with the public.
In the case of major projects that will cause serious impacts on nearby communities
or on the traveling public, particularly during construction, it seems essential that
management devise and carry out timely and extensive programs of effective liaison with all
affected or concerned groups. For example, the Virginia Department of Transportation, in
embarking on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge replacement and on the Springfield Interchange (both
near Washington, D.C.), organized a Community Resources Board. This Board involved local
civic, business, women’s, minority and other sectors in exchanging information on all aspects of
the projects, and in mitigating problems such as congestion, safety, noise control, relocation, and
alternative travel options. A related activity was Bridge Bucks, which gave commuters $50 a
month for one year for the cost of alternative transportation.
16
PART 8 – WHAT CAN THE CITIZEN DO TO IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION?
The answer to this question has two parts: (1) which improvements should be chosen for
priority, and (2) how can those improvements be achieved.
A. Which improvements should be given priority? This depends, in turn, upon two
things: the relative merits of various improvements, and the relative acceptability of various
improvements to decision-makers and to those parts of the public which influence them.
The merits are based on the comparative costs and benefits of various improvements.
Acceptability is based on the comparative degree of support or opposition to be expected from
the public and from leaders.
In major metropolitan areas suffering from congestion, citizens seeking better
transportation would usually be well advised to support “balance” between better roads for autos
and better transit. These goals can be harmonized if transit is by bus, which like autos benefit
from better roads. Yet rail transit, although more costly in construction time and money, has
definite advantages, especially if ample, safe and free or low cost parking for cars and bicycles is
provided at stations, particularly in medium or low density residential areas. (Light rail should
be less costly than heavy rail.)
Deciding between bus and rail transit, or some mix of both, should depend on the costs
and benefits, both short and long range, of particular plans for bus or rail projects.
Improvements for walking, bicycles and handicapped travel, as well as emerging technologies,
should also be considered, to the extent practicable, and with an open mind. But realism
strongly indicates that, in view of established trends of long-term growth and affluence, the auto
with its intrinsic conveniences and other attractions, will continue to be the dominant mode of
travel for most trips, even including most commuting to work.
Decisions on which road and transit improvements to support should, of course, take into
account the views of qualified and disinterested experts, including professional people in
engineering, behavioral sciences and other specialties. Transportation plans should be made
before problems occur, and if possible should be carried out before problems become acute.
B. How can transportation improvements be achieved?
1. The concerned citizen can have some effect acting alone, for example by writing letters to
newspapers and contacting legislators. But it is usually more effective to work with others:
friends, work colleagues, and neighbors. If necessary, the individual could organize a small civic
committee to work for better transportation and persuade local governments to appoint a
Citizens’ Transportation Policy Report Task Force.
2. Citizens should be able to list – clearly and with specific illustrations – the many benefits of
better transportation and the many detriments of congestion. Citizens also should be prepared to
discuss methods of meeting the costs and other problems which transportation improvements
may involve. These matters are summarized in this primer.
3. Citizens should identify and coordinate with allies in working for better transportation.
These include businesses, chambers of commerce, some political leaders, some news media and
various transportation professionals. But in addition, the social, economic, and quality-of-life
benefits of better transportation should be brought to the attention of members of churches,
civic groups, and nonprofit agencies that work to assist the disadvantaged and handicapped.
Society as a whole benefits from better transportation.
17
4. Thought and attention should also be given to possible opposition groups.
Environmentalists can be educated to see that traffic congestion is a major cause of pollution,
which could be reduced by carefully developing better roads, better transit, and better
technology. Not in my back yard individuals (NIMBYs) often add environmental reasons for
their opposition. They should, of course, be given reasonable consideration, including
appropriate modifications of planned improvements, or possibly compensation. However, public
officials should not let NIMBY opposition override the interest of the general public. Rival
advocates for roads and transit can be brought together on major projects by reserving space for
transit in a highway median strip. Advocates and opponents of large projects can sometimes be
induced to support a compromise on smaller improvements. Taxpayers worried about the cost of
improvements can be reassured by sound methods of funding and cost control, and by pointing
out that the ongoing benefits of improvements will make them a bargain, to oppose which would
be “penny-wise and pound-foolish”. And if there are any persons or interests that fear economic
injury from improvements, they should be reassured, or given compensation where appropriate,
or be subordinated to the greater public interest.
5. A careful strategic plan should be developed, one which will withstand the light of day.
It should include obviously good features, such as greater safety and better fuel efficiency for
auto travel, and the alleviation of notorious local or regional bottlenecks that have bedeviled the
public. It should, of course, include proper timing and organization so that its messages are
heard, understood, and remembered. Effective organization should include liaison with the
various jurisdictions and interest groups in or near the affected area, to facilitate communication
and agreement. Concerned citizens might check how other metropolitan areas achieve such
coordination; see the discussion above, at the end of Part 7C. And the plan should include
preparation to counter the not uncommon fear that improvements will chiefly benefit developers
and land speculators, by providing and publicizing good planning and zoning controls, and by
clearly showing the specific benefits to the general public from improvements that will relieve
present congestion. Also, citizens should bear in mind that opponents of improvements
(NIMBYs or others) will typically be much more vocal at public hearings or in the media than
those who express the interests of the general public. This strongly suggests the importance of
presenting careful surveys of all affected persons. Finally, citizens must recognize that some
political leaders may feel insecure and thus hesitate to act in the public interest if they fear
serious opposition. In such cases, citizens can either support these leaders if they act in the
public interest, or find other leaders with more backbone.