Sprawl Transit Systems

Bob Herring makes an eloquent case for expanded mass transit in Cincinnati. But before this can happen two issues need to be addressed.

The first is behavioral. People have moved "out" of town to avoid crime. They have already traded longer commutes in their automobiles for the perceived safety of the exurbs. Psychologically they see disturbing crime stories as a vindication of that choice. They do not want mass-transit arteries taking criminals to their doorstep, no matter how many times you inform them that even scholarly studies (PDF) suggest this won't happen. Unless exurbians are persuaded, no one should expect municipal approval or funding help.

The second issue can best be illustrated with a large bag of M&Ms and a length of string. Scatter the M&Ms all over the floor. Try to connect the most closely grouped Ms with the shortest length of string.

The same game can be played with a city map. Run a mass-transit system through any neighborhood that would be within walking distance, thereby negating the need for cars. The more people can walk to access it, the more beneficial the system, right? But the nettlesome corollary to this game is, the closer you get to densely-populated areas the more you will pay for the line, due to disruption to residential and commercial districts.

There may be answers that work hand-in-hand with transit. What about giving tax credits to developers who put up shopping or residential areas with more non-automotive access? What about rebuilding burned out strip malls instead of leaving them to waste?

Hat tip to Walk-In-Brain. Link to post and discussion.