Comments on: Taking the Tokyo Train http://www.toppa.com/nothing-but-words/all-things-japanese/japan-2007/taking-the-tokyo-train Project Advisor - Business Analyst - Technology Advisor - Methodologist - Solutions Advisor Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:49:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: JR http://www.toppa.com/nothing-but-words/all-things-japanese/japan-2007/taking-the-tokyo-train#comment-4338 JR Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:58:28 +0000 http://www.toppa.com/travel/japan-2007/515#comment-4338 I agree that ridership might be increased by basic things like improved fare collection, cleaner trains, better routing, etc. etc. But, in my opinion there are only a few things that would double or triple ridership. Make it really expensive to drive. This means not only taxing gas but also changing parking in the city and possibly (although this would not work in Philly) a congestion fee for driving in the city. Make it really expensive to develop sprawl. Every time a developer wants to do greenfield development, they should pay for it. All of a sudden infill development might be more attractive. Portland has had mixed success with this model, aka. the urban growth boundary. Get the weight of the Federal government behind this. If left to their own measures, most regions like Philly will not choose the path that leads to increased transit ridership. Unfortunately, there must be top down leadership on this issue. For example, New York had $500 million Federal dollars dangling in its face to put together a congestion fee plan and the jokers in Albany almost killed it (it appears to be somewhat back on track now). If New York can't find the political courage to tackle these issues places like Philly are seriously doomed. I agree that ridership might be increased by basic things like improved fare collection, cleaner trains, better routing, etc. etc. But, in my opinion there are only a few things that would double or triple ridership.

Make it really expensive to drive. This means not only taxing gas but also changing parking in the city and possibly (although this would not work in Philly) a congestion fee for driving in the city.

Make it really expensive to develop sprawl. Every time a developer wants to do greenfield development, they should pay for it. All of a sudden infill development might be more attractive. Portland has had mixed success with this model, aka. the urban growth boundary.

Get the weight of the Federal government behind this. If left to their own measures, most regions like Philly will not choose the path that leads to increased transit ridership. Unfortunately, there must be top down leadership on this issue. For example, New York had $500 million Federal dollars dangling in its face to put together a congestion fee plan and the jokers in Albany almost killed it (it appears to be somewhat back on track now). If New York can’t find the political courage to tackle these issues places like Philly are seriously doomed.

]]> By: Mike http://www.toppa.com/nothing-but-words/all-things-japanese/japan-2007/taking-the-tokyo-train#comment-4339 Mike Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:12:31 +0000 http://www.toppa.com/travel/japan-2007/515#comment-4339 Thanks JR - your point about urbanization is absolutely correct. Living in Tokyo, you don't need a car, not only because of the ubiquity of the trains, but vital services like grocery stores are almost always within a short walking distance of anywhere you might live in the city. A few months back I wrote a post on <a href="http://www.toppa.com/travel/japan-2007/475" rel="nofollow">Jusco</a>, which is an Asian department store chain. In Tokyo they run their own fleet of shuttle buses (one of which came within 2 blocks of our apartment building), so even when you want a "big box store" shopping experience, you still don't need a car. You're right that Philly and its surrounding suburbs can't sustain a dense network of train lines, given the low population density. But that doesn't mean substantial improvements can't be made. If SEPTA could address the main things I complained about in my post - old and dirty trains, lack of modern technology and conveniences, lack of shared stations between lines, and unduly disruptive shutdowns - they could probably double or triple their ridership. Simply put, if the current system could be made clean, comfortable, and reliable, that would go a very long way in persuading people to use it. We'll never get to Tokyo's levels of mass transit use, but we can do a lot better than we are now. Unfortunately, you're probably right that the political will (and therefore the money) isn't there to make it happen. Thanks JR - your point about urbanization is absolutely correct. Living in Tokyo, you don’t need a car, not only because of the ubiquity of the trains, but vital services like grocery stores are almost always within a short walking distance of anywhere you might live in the city. A few months back I wrote a post on Jusco, which is an Asian department store chain. In Tokyo they run their own fleet of shuttle buses (one of which came within 2 blocks of our apartment building), so even when you want a “big box store” shopping experience, you still don’t need a car.

You’re right that Philly and its surrounding suburbs can’t sustain a dense network of train lines, given the low population density. But that doesn’t mean substantial improvements can’t be made. If SEPTA could address the main things I complained about in my post - old and dirty trains, lack of modern technology and conveniences, lack of shared stations between lines, and unduly disruptive shutdowns - they could probably double or triple their ridership. Simply put, if the current system could be made clean, comfortable, and reliable, that would go a very long way in persuading people to use it. We’ll never get to Tokyo’s levels of mass transit use, but we can do a lot better than we are now. Unfortunately, you’re probably right that the political will (and therefore the money) isn’t there to make it happen.

]]> By: JR http://www.toppa.com/nothing-but-words/all-things-japanese/japan-2007/taking-the-tokyo-train#comment-4340 JR Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:06:48 +0000 http://www.toppa.com/travel/japan-2007/515#comment-4340 I really appreciated reading your post. I found it via the blog Septawatch. But, I thought in your analysis and critique of the current state of our public transit systems (and praise of that in Japan), you neglected to mention a few important differences between the US and Japan or Europe (or even many cities in South America). Those places are all highly URBANIZED. We are (to quote Andreas Duany) a "Suburban Nation". Public transit does not function very well in the suburbs because of the low density settlement and employment patterns. If you look at the regional commuting patterns for most metropolitan regions you will find that over 50% of job commutes today are from suburb to suburb. This leaves public transit systems in a tough spot. The traditional role of transit has been to facilitate movement in and into cities. Even if you figure out some way to solve the perennial funding problems, the problems with the unions, and the mismanagement of transit, you still have not addressed the one fundamental problem that transit faces today: How do we build a public transit system that serves a suburban nation? What's the point of spending billions on fancy trains zipping into and through the city when all the housing and jobs are being built on former farms 30 miles outside the city? Even more than you I would love to see Philadelphia and many other cities revitalize their public transit systems. Just try and convince the majority of Americans that its a good idea. I really appreciated reading your post. I found it via the blog Septawatch. But, I thought in your analysis and critique of the current state of our public transit systems (and praise of that in Japan), you neglected to mention a few important differences between the US and Japan or Europe (or even many cities in South America). Those places are all highly URBANIZED. We are (to quote Andreas Duany) a “Suburban Nation”. Public transit does not function very well in the suburbs because of the low density settlement and employment patterns. If you look at the regional commuting patterns for most metropolitan regions you will find that over 50% of job commutes today are from suburb to suburb. This leaves public transit systems in a tough spot. The traditional role of transit has been to facilitate movement in and into cities. Even if you figure out some way to solve the perennial funding problems, the problems with the unions, and the mismanagement of transit, you still have not addressed the one fundamental problem that transit faces today: How do we build a public transit system that serves a suburban nation? What’s the point of spending billions on fancy trains zipping into and through the city when all the housing and jobs are being built on former farms 30 miles outside the city?

Even more than you I would love to see Philadelphia and many other cities revitalize their public transit systems. Just try and convince the majority of Americans that its a good idea.

]]>