3 ms·

The solution applicable almost everywhere with some dozens of thousands of population is multimodal. Public transportation supported by infrastructure for cycli

by piva00 3y ago

The solution applicable almost everywhere with some dozens of thousands of population is multimodal. Public transportation supported by infrastructure for cycling and cars relegated to their place in a multimodal system: inconvenient for shorter/regular trips, accessible for when it's needed. Stockholm doesn't have mild weather all year long, it's not flat, and still people will use public transportation or a bike. Oslo is definitely not flat, definitely not mild year round and even there people take public transportation, bike, etc.

pxtail 3y ago
And again, as examples you provide two capital cities of two richest countries in the world - capital cities are rich, can easily afford building public infra and also population density is big enough to make public transportation almost profitable - but not everybody lives in a capital city. https://lovetransit.substack.com/p/most-profitable-public-transportation https://lovetransit.substack.com/p/most-profitable-public-tr...
- piva00 3y ago
  Those are just examples of two cities I'm closely familiar. People also bike everywhere in China, many Chinese cities have decent public transportation (much better than almost any non-big city in the USA). Small cities in the Netherlands are able to afford bus lines, and provide infrastructure for bikes which are much cheaper than roads for autos. Good public transportation is a net contributor to a city, it provides residents with ways to be more economically active without costing them much. You don't need underground metro, not even trams in most cases, a simple and reliable bus transit system can provide a lot if it's not delayed by traffic. You don't need to be rich to have decent and reliable public transportation, Southeast Asia has quite good examples of that.
- adrianN 3y ago
  Berlin is quite poor and it still has decent public transport and good walkability. Public transport is far from profitable in Berlin. It's entirely possible to raise a family without a having a car in Berlin.

by piva00 3y ago

pxtail 3y ago

And again, as examples you provide two capital cities of two richest countries in the world - capital cities are rich, can easily afford building public infra and also population density is big enough to make public transportation almost profitable - but not everybody lives in a capital city. https://lovetransit.substack.com/p/most-profitable-public-transportation https://lovetransit.substack.com/p/most-profitable-public-tr...

piva00 3y ago
Those are just examples of two cities I'm closely familiar. People also bike everywhere in China, many Chinese cities have decent public transportation (much better than almost any non-big city in the USA). Small cities in the Netherlands are able to afford bus lines, and provide infrastructure for bikes which are much cheaper than roads for autos. Good public transportation is a net contributor to a city, it provides residents with ways to be more economically active without costing them much. You don't need underground metro, not even trams in most cases, a simple and reliable bus transit system can provide a lot if it's not delayed by traffic. You don't need to be rich to have decent and reliable public transportation, Southeast Asia has quite good examples of that.
adrianN 3y ago
Berlin is quite poor and it still has decent public transport and good walkability. Public transport is far from profitable in Berlin. It's entirely possible to raise a family without a having a car in Berlin.