Where is the bus?

As I sit in my car on another hot, rush-hour afternoon, I wonder this: How does a city of 60,000 have the traffic issues of cities like New York or Los Angeles? Then I realize that is unfair to the larger cities, as in both those places you still feel a sense of actually arriving at your destination before breakfast the following morning. The real question I should be asking is, why is there no form of public transportation in this city, or, for that matter, no effective public transportation in most small-to mid-sized cities, and many large cities, in our country? It seems to me that everyone gripes about the same transportation-related issues: heavy traffic, rising fuel costs, and the effect of carbon emissions on the environment. You would think a simple, well-proven concept such as public transportation would have arisen by now in most of the country. What to do about this?

I believe it comes down to two factors: the local governments (by this I mean the city, county, and to a certain extent, state-level governments), and, of course, the local populace.

Now, some places I have lived in or visited have leaders that contend that, well, there IS public transportation! Didn't you see that bus that drove by here about 45 minutes ago? It'll take you from the city recreation center to the car dealership at the edge of town! Or what about our second bus, that goes from the military base to the mall and back? What else could I possibly ask for?!?!

One of the biggest reasons public transportation in most areas doesn't work is because it really is so much more convenient to just drive yourself. In my city, there is no bus to take you to the beach (a 20 minute drive), the mini-golf course (15 minutes), the supermarket (5 minutes), or the nearest restaurant (15 minutes). In fact, if you wanted to get to the Wal-Mart, you'd still have to walk about 1.5 miles once you got dropped off at the mall! This is also an issue of sprawl, but we'll get to that some other time. A transit system needs to be better planned by choosing stops at locations not only where a large number of people need and want to go, but also a location that people can easily access from their homes. This can be done following the example I have seen in the Chicago-area. Downtown areas should have designated stops every 3-4 blocks from each other. This would minimize the walking distances from stops to ultimate destinations, hereby making the transit system more attractive and convenient. You could even designate the right-most lane a bus-only lane, but in this city's case I would not suggest that without drastically improving the infrastructure so already-heavy traffic can be diverted. Alternate the stops and times by transit lines, so there won't be too much crowding and it will reduce the chances of someone getting on the wrong bus (I must admit it has happened to me once or thrice). Then, in the suburban areas, spread out the stops a bit more, but provide a parking area, so residents that don't live too terribly close can leave their cars and ride. I think a stop every 2 miles or so should be sufficient. Divide the transit lines by direction of residential areas, in other words, by north, south, east, and west. Finally, add a 5th line that stops by attractions outside the city, such as the state park or the beach. Utilizing multiple stop passes, a rider can go from the complete other end of the city, make 2 changes, and get to the beach.

Why go through all this trouble? Well, the reduction in traffic issue is pretty obvious. I think most people would agree that, if they new it would take them at least 20 minutes to go from point A to B in their own car, knowing they could be longer due to traffic, and will eventually have to pay for a full tank of gas, or they could take a bus and get there in a pretty reliable 15 minutes (what with the bus lanes and all), and not have to worry about paying for gas and the stress traffic induces, they would seriously consider the bus option. Fewer cars on the road, less congestion, less gas expenses, and you can even read the funny papers on your way to work (what would you do in your car, listen to Britney?)

Then there's the environmental effects. Fewer drivers, again, means less gas consumption, which means less carbon emissions (I love easy math). With modern technology, we have more fuel efficient buses, which don't spew out that ugly cloud of dark smoke so much anymore.

How to pay for this? OK, well most people won't like this part of the plan, but it would take either cutting some other programs, or a rise in taxes. I would recommend a combination of a small increase in the local sales tax, and an increase in the gasoline tax. Before you turn red, if you take the bus you won't be paying the tax! And enough people will still drive cars that the tax will still generate revenue. This is one of the parts the local populace is responsible for. Another part is to wean off their car dependence and accept public transportation. Many people just don't want to ride in a bus. For those of you that this applies to, drop me a line... let's talk carpooling... Now, if you'll excuse me, time to make my proposal to the city. I'm not expecting much, they still haven't decided to put in sidewalks yet.