Originally Posted by
Uninteresting
you can build it, but they won’t come. Dallas tried light rail years ago and very few ride it for a number of reasons, the least of which is trying to take away the keys to the suburban for a house wife with one kid.
Yes. That is because if all you build is a couple measly tiny lines, embedded in a huge landscape that is accommodating to cars but hostile to pedestrians, it won't be useful to that many people. You need to build out the system so that it actually takes you places. A transit system is only useful if it takes you where you need to go. A classic example is Detroit. Its a huge joke. They build their people mover and the Q line that literally goes nowhere and they point at the low ridership and say "seeeee! nobody uses transit. our American blood is just different." and it becomes a self defeating negative feedback loop. Yet in NYC there are 4 million daily riders and its the only city in the USA where car ownership is below 50%. As ****ty and old as the MTA system is, it takes people where they need to go, so they use it.
Usually making enough lines and stations is enough. I argue that should come first. But pedestrianizing and densifying the urban landscape needs to happen fist. Transit needs to connect walkable areas because you wont have a car. On top of that, car infrastructure, ESPECIALLY parking, makes everything farther apart. The parking makes everything farther apart, which then reinforces the need for cars.