Are you tired of traffic jams and the high costs of car ownership? Do you dream of a city where getting around is easy, efficient, and environmentally friendly? While the car has long been king in many parts of the United States, a growing number of cities are recognizing the immense benefits of robust public transportation systems. Investing in and utilizing public transit isn’t just about reducing your carbon footprint; it’s about creating more livable, equitable, and economically vibrant urban centers.
Many Americans might not immediately think of public transportation as a desirable solution to their daily commutes. Perhaps you’ve experienced overcrowded buses or infrequent train schedules. However, the reality is that well-developed public transportation is something we all actually benefit from, even if we don’t use it every day. The advantages extend far beyond personal convenience, impacting the environment, the economy, and the overall quality of life in a city. Interestingly, those who might perceive themselves as least reliant on public transit, the very wealthy, also stand to gain from reduced congestion and improved urban environments that effective public transportation provides.
Having witnessed firsthand the challenges of inadequate public transportation in my hometown of Hanoi, Vietnam, I understand the frustration of relying on personal vehicles. While Hanoi’s public transportation is developing, the overwhelming prevalence of motorcycles highlights the difficulties of navigating the city without a personal vehicle.
Commuting in Hanoi often involves navigating dense motorcycle traffic, underscoring the need for efficient public transportation to alleviate congestion and improve urban mobility.
Growing up in Hanoi, I experienced both sides of the transportation coin. Living in a densely populated area allowed me to walk to school, bike to friends’ houses, and occasionally use the bus. However, moving to a more suburban-style area, inspired by US urban planning, drastically changed my experience. Suddenly, simple errands became major expeditions, and spontaneity was replaced with pre-planned car trips. The city felt less accessible, and it wasn’t until acquiring a motorcycle that I regained a sense of freedom and mobility. This personal experience underscores a crucial point: urban design profoundly impacts our transportation choices and overall quality of life. Imagine if suburban areas were designed with people in mind, prioritizing pedestrian access, bicycle infrastructure, and readily available public transportation. Personal vehicles might become a choice, not a necessity.
Cities like Amsterdam and Singapore offer compelling examples of this vision in action. They have prioritized infrastructure that supports car-free living, such as extensive bike path networks (Amsterdam) and comprehensive rapid transit systems (Singapore). This approach allows for the restriction of cars in city centers while ensuring everyone can move around efficiently.
Unfortunately, many U.S. cities have historically prioritized car-centric development. Similar to Hanoi’s motorcycle dependence, many American cities suffer from car dependency. Shockingly, parking lots and garages consume about one-third of the land in U.S. cities, as reported by Fast Company. Furthermore, the U.S. ranks poorly in international comparisons of transit use and walkability, as highlighted by Smart Cities Dive, citing a National Geographic study. Suburban sprawl, often lacking basic pedestrian infrastructure like sidewalks, contributes to this problem and increases the risk of vehicle-pedestrian accidents. It’s no surprise that many Americans feel a car is essential; in many U.S. cities, it truly is. This car-dependent culture is deeply ingrained, with cars often symbolizing freedom, independence, and success, as noted by Scientific American. However, cities like Amsterdam, Singapore, Hong Kong, Seoul, London, and New York City demonstrate that a different model is possible – one where cities are designed for people, not just cars.
Consider the sheer inefficiency of a system where tons of steel and gallons of gasoline are used daily to transport single individuals. Multiply this by the millions of Americans who commute by car, and the scale of inefficiency becomes staggering. Passenger rail in the U.S., despite its current limitations, is already significantly more energy-efficient than car travel, as The Conversation reports. If passenger rail were more widely adopted and utilized, the efficiency gap would widen dramatically. In fact, with typical car occupancy rates in the U.S., automobile travel approaches the energy intensity of air travel on a per-passenger-mile basis. Despite these inefficiencies, many U.S. cities continue to prioritize highway expansion and car-centric infrastructure, a strategy that often leads to increased traffic congestion in the long run.
Beyond efficiency, car-dependent cities often suffer from reduced liveability. Issues range from pedestrian unfriendliness and air and noise pollution to a lack of green spaces, inefficient land use, and longer commute times. Even the concept of “freedom,” often associated with car ownership, is worth reconsidering. In a city designed solely around cars, the freedom to choose cycling, walking, or public transit is actually diminished.
This discussion is not intended as an attack on cars themselves. Cars serve valuable purposes, especially for long-distance travel and group trips. In fact, for those who enjoy driving, fewer cars on the road, a consequence of robust public transportation, would likely make driving a more pleasant experience. The issue lies in car-dependent city infrastructure that makes driving a necessity for everyone.
Amsterdam’s remarkable transformation from a car-dependent city in 1971 to a bicycle-centric city in 2020 showcases the potential for urban redesign and a shift towards sustainable transportation.
For those who argue that U.S. cities are inherently car-dependent and change is impossible, the example of Amsterdam provides a powerful counterpoint. Amsterdam, now a global cycling capital, was once also dominated by cars. This transformation begs the question: what prevents U.S. cities from undergoing a similar evolution?
The answer involves complex factors, including the influence of the automobile industry and a perceived lack of public demand for significant urban reforms. While the former is a systemic challenge, the latter can be addressed by demonstrating the clear need and benefits of investing in public transportation. Even small-scale improvements, such as enhancing bus stop accessibility, can make a significant difference.
This discussion has primarily focused on the personal and societal benefits of public transportation. However, the environmental advantages are equally compelling, including reduced carbon emissions, lower resource consumption in vehicle manufacturing, and decreased waste production. Furthermore, cities with strong public transportation networks and pedestrian-friendly design tend to experience fewer traffic fatalities and accidents. Finally, a truly effective transportation system must be accessible to everyone, including those who are unable to drive due to age or disability.
To delve deeper into the world of urban planning and public transportation, resources like the YouTube channel “Not Just Bikes,” which explores Dutch city planning principles, are highly recommended. Additionally, academic journals such as the Agora Journal and resources from institutions like the Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University of Michigan offer valuable insights. Local initiatives, such as the City of Ann Arbor’s transportation and carbon neutrality plans, also provide opportunities to stay informed and engaged in shaping more sustainable transportation systems in your own community.
