I don't - never did - drive, so P and R services are outside my ken. I don't know what level of utilization they have / had or whether they fulfilled their purpose. The commuter rail systems are a sort of park and ride -- in the AM you drive to the station, park (or are dropped off), and get on a heavy rail train into town, and do the reverse in the PM.

Yes light rail...my closest big city is Minneapolis Minnesota. Some short underground sections by the airport.

The thing with rail is physical limits. Things like curves and grades that don't work everywhere.

Based on my experience of growing up in a rural county, I'd say there is no practical way of providing regular transit service. On-demand rides could certainly be done -- I think are done in some rural areas on a limited basis. There is a real need, though. Many people in rural areas are elderly and would prefer to have a practical option to driving themselves everywhere.

Example of rural transit: The Mayo Clinic is located in Rochester, MN - a town of 121,000 people. It employs a large number of people from at least 3 surrounding counties. In order to cut down on traffic and parking costs, and to keep from annoying citizens more than they already do, Mayo organized a transit system for its employees, collecting 1 or two bus loads of people each in small towns up to 50 miles out, and dropping them off at the buildings in which they work. In the evening the routes are traveled in the opposite direction. Several thousand workers get to work this way.

There used to be intercity or interstate bus service in some of these towns, but that died out decades ago.

I live a ways outside Minneapolis so I know the area.
The Northstar line is the heavy rail line for commuters and somewhat under used but could be coming back. From Minneapolis there is a light rail line to St Paul and one to the main airport. Another line is under construction, way over budget, and behind schedule.

That covers most of Minneapolis transit for those who don't know. Good bus service in most areas.

So that's at least two of us in MN. I live in the Longfellow neighborhood of Minneapolis.

You mentioned Boston's transit. I've seen a number of Youtube videos critical of the MBTA -- primarily long-deferred maintenance. Design is itself a problem -- the oldest parts of the system were built about 124 years ago. Corners are tighter than would now be designed, less space was allocated. Old and newer elements within the MBTA are sometimes not quite compatible.

I lived in Boston in 1968/9, and I thought the subway, elevated trains, and buses were just wonderful.

Here's a pretty good Youtube video about the problems of the MBTA.

I have some family in the Boston area but only get there every ten years or so. I like Boston.

I used to bike a lot in Minneapolis. There are about 500 miles of off road trails in the metro area so one of the best biking cities in the US.
The Grand Rounds was set up by the parks board way back as the area was developed but the trail system has been built out in the last few decades.

I haven't ridden the Grand Rounds since... the 1980s? For a while in 92 I was training for 2 century rides (100 miles) and did maybe 50 or 60 miles 3 times a week, riding east into Washington County. The first century was Minneapolis, down highway 52 to Fountain. Rest break for a couple of days. Then Fountain to LaCrosse and up the trail to Trempeleau, about another 100. Next day, Trempeleau to Red Wing, maybe 80. Next day, a very hard ride from Red Wing to St. Paul, 60 miles, by which time every turn of the wheel got harder and harder. The August weather was great. I wouldn't think of riding out of town on 52 now; it'd feel too suicidal, with the heavier traffic.

Minneapolis is a pretty good place to bike around, as long as one stays off heavy traffic streets, with dedicated bicycle lanes or not. 28th St. has a well marked bike lane, but there is just too much traffic on the one way, and the Greenway runs parallel with it 1 block away.

I'm getting too old (77) for long rides, so mostly I just bike to the store and back.

Why did they not drive downtown? Because there are scary unpleasant things downtown, like one way streets, parking meters, the dreaded cultural diversity, no enclosed shopping centers, parking lots charging money to enter, busses all over, too many stop lights... It's a nightmare! — BC

Then light rail for them! What you say here really just advocates for better lightrail. However, I see it as part of the problem too? Why? Because light rails are often built to allow for suburbanites to park their cars and go to something like a sporting event downtown and back. It's never made with the mind for REAL daily commuting. In other words, it doesn't have lines that go INTO the neighborhoods to allow for people to walk easily and not have to "park and ride", which I saw you discussed earlier.

I know what you mean about picking your bike routes carefully. The Midtown Greenway you mentioned is one of those places. It's great in the daytime. It's a little sketchy at night.

You know about it but it's an old rail line converted to bike trail that runs below street level so has an overhead bridge at every street crossing.
It runs for a few miles that way in a straight line.
It's an interesting feature of Minneapolis you might not see unless you bike.

I saw an old vacuum cleaner thrown off one of the bridges onto the bike trail. Things like that.
So things happen.

Biking is dangerous. Street riding is the worst.
Things like getting 'doored' by a parked cars, storm drains, uneven curbs and gutters, potholes, cracks can ruin your day. I would think biking on known routes in your own neighborhood would be the safest. I did bike a few times in freezing weather and wouldn't recommend it. Ice patches and it's very hard to regulate your body temperature so if you stop biking you will be wet and freeze. And some trails might get groomed for skiing not biking in the winter.

I got started biking because a Sam's Club I shopped at was on a bike trail. I could do my shopping and spend an evening on the bike trails.

There are people who look for apartments on these trails just to get around on bikes but I doubt it works year round in Minnesota. Busing and biking would work if you are young.

If you lived in Minneapolis in August 2007 you remember the I-35W Mississippi river bridge collapse. I guess we are known for that. Bad bridge bearings that were frozen (locked up) and heavy materials stored on the bridge deck plus hot weather.

13 people died and more injured. The evil of cars.

I did bike a few times in freezing weather and wouldn't recommend it. Ice patches and it's very hard to regulate your body temperature so if you stop biking you will be wet and freeze — Mark Nyquist

The cure for ice is studded tires. I bought a pair several years ago and they really help. BUT studded tires do nothing for snow that is more than a couple inches deep. This has been a good year for winter bike riding. Not a normal winter.

I used to run all year round and liked running in the cold. But true enough, if you are sweating, you have to keep moving. The trick for winter riding or running (say, for an hour) is to not dress too warmly and suck up a certain amount of discomfort. You'll feel so virtuous!

Studded tires...okay.

There is always walking too. A normal walking pace for me is 4 miles per hour. It's good to know your rate if you are in a pinch. So you can walk a mile in 15 minutes if you really need to.

One of the things that dissuades me that light rail is the all-purpose cure is the cost / benefit. The Green Line extension into western Hennepin County from downtown Minneapolis (a 10 +/- mile line) has risen to $3 billion and it has taken years to not being finished yet. Its stations can not be close to nearly enough people to produce decent ridership levels.

Mass transit in suburban areas is up against the low density that those cities were predicated on. True, fixed rail systems could be built out like so many branching arteries and capillaries. Better, it seems to me, IF we were going to force suburbanites to use transit (possibly by pointing a gun at their heads and ordering them to ride) would be many small electric buses that could use the already installed concrete and asphalt roads. These could be both on-demand or on-schedule.

As practical as a light rail network to every cul de sac in America would be to compress the suburbs into denser communities. Expropriate the properties, recycle the McMansions, tear up the excessive mileage of roads, and replace it with dense housing closer to the core. Return the once fertile suburban land to trees or turnip fields.

This draconian solution might be beyond even the Chinese Communist Party's enforcement apparatus, however.

I wonder about the automobile as an actual object or a symbolic one. I have never driven a car and am not sure that my eyesight or concentration would be up to it. So, I do feel that the automobile is seen as essential to life, such as the demand for driving licenses, and as a symbol of human functioning. In particular, I don't drive an automobile, and wonder to what extent this means that I am a 'failure', or something else, especially in challenging the norms of driving, and environmental concerns.

It's amazing how often people will drive to store that is 1/2 mile away to get a small bag of groceries--this is the city where there are wide sidewalks everywhere, no prowling wolf packs, only 1.3 gun-toting criminals per mile, and nice wether during much of the year.

I'm not sure how long studded bike tires have been around--probably not too long. You can get them with more or fewer studs; more is decidedly better. I've used them when the streets had a lot of packed snow/ice, and felt pretty secure from having the bike slide sideways out from under me.

One drawback is that they are fairly expensive, but they're good for at least several seasons.

I also have always had poor vision and have never been a driver. Yes. this is outside the 'normal' American experience where car ownership and the 'freedom of the road' has been an essential -- obligatory -- part of experience. In much of this very large country, not driving is a decided disadvantage.

I don't drive an automobile, and wonder to what extent this means that I am a 'failure', or something else, especially in challenging the norms of driving, and environmental concerns. — Jack Cummins

Do you rely on public transit? Relatives? Don't leave your house?

As practical as a light rail network to every cul de sac in America would be to compress the suburbs into denser communities. Expropriate the properties, recycle the McMansions, tear up the excessive mileage of roads, and replace it with dense housing closer to the core. Return the once fertile suburban land to trees or turnip fields.

This draconian solution might be beyond even the Chinese Communist Party's enforcement apparatus, however. — BC

I think the biking and walking conversation will drive some here crazy. They probably want more of the grand projects that governments do.

The thing is we need some exercise anyway so why not walk 10 or 20 minutes a day? Like you say a nice walk to get a bag of groceries.

Also your area looks like a sweet spot for transportation options compared to me being a ways out of town.

I am a bit perplexed about how the idea of automobiles may be seen in terms of philosophy. In some ways, it may be about practical ends, even with those who are unable to drive, for possible medical reasons, being seen as 'dysfunctional.'. I rely on public transport and walking. So, the worst possibility which I used in philosophy is of those who are not able to drive, for medical and other reasons, being discriminated against in a harsh way.

I travel on busses and am not sure how your philosophy adds up to such possibilities. One aspect which may be significant is the ecological aspects, and public as opposed to private transport may be important here..

Nevertheless, there are so many aspects of personal and public aspects of travel and transport, making it such an area of ethical concern, witn no simplistic conclusions. So, thinking about automobiles may involve juggling so much about life and travel in the material world and its consequent philosophy.

World wide car fatalities are 1.35 million per year.
West Virginia has an especially high fatality rate in the US. Mountain roads maybe.

Maybe some mental philosophy about the risks of driving can keep us out of some of the mayhem accidents that happen in ice, snow, fog. Too many people get locked into schedules that can kill.

The alternatives have their risks too.

In order to cut down on traffic and parking costs, and to keep from annoying citizens more than they already do, Mayo organized a transit system for its employees, collecting 1 or two bus loads of people each in small towns up to 50 miles out, and dropping them off at the buildings in which they work. In the evening the routes are traveled in the opposite direction. Several thousand workers get to work this way. — BC

Wow! That actually sounds doable. If employers in the cities provide a benefit like that, I think that is a happy medium between convenience, not having to drive, and relinquishing some freedom from driving yourself.

In other words, it doesn't have lines that go INTO the neighborhoods to allow for people to walk easily and not have to "park and ride", which I saw you discussed earlier. — schopenhauer1

Yeah, the rail is very limited when it comes to "customization" of travel. Commuters go to the rails, not the other way around. And this poses a problem still, because you have to have a car to go to the ride. That's why buses, as BC has been talking about, are the way to go because they can drop off the travelers to every corner of the roads.
(I'm saying this as if I'm the department of transportation, :lol: )

The thing with rail is physical limits. Things like curves and grades that don't work everywhere. — Mark Nyquist

Absolutely! And the rails don't come to the people also. It's where the planning commission could plant them.

Lots of transit riders have stood or sat for several lifetimes waiting for a bus to arrive. The traffic whizzes by, 1 person per car mostly, maybe 2. Maybe a dog rides along. Time after time. We begin to wonder, "Why does the community in which I live and contribute value my time so little?" It has spent millions of dollars making sure drivers have a good road. A little money, a million here, a million there -- it never seems to add up to real money -- is spent on buses.

Here am I, on a Sunday afternoon, traveling 10 miles to downtown and my favorite gay bar. It took me 10 minutes to get to the bus stop, and the bus I was aiming for zoomed past when I was 1/2 block away. It will be 30 minutes before the next bus arrives -- and this won't get me downtown, It will get me to a transfer point where I will have to wait for another bus to finish the trip. Between 60 and 90 minutes later, I arrive.

The trip back is going to take just as long, because evening buses are less frequent and the whole service ends about the same time the bars close.

On Monday morning, there are more buses, certainly, but it still takes 10 minutes to get to the bus stop. The bus will probably be crowded and many people will be standing as the bus lurches this way and that. Still a transfer to be made. Another crowded bus, moving slowly down the street -- average speed is about what a bicycle can do, or less.

I have an ICE car and drive routinely, BUT I drive less than half of the average number of miles per year in my state. So my carbon footprint is probably on par with electric vehicles, with less risk of accidents, injuries etc.

Ice car

Internal Combustion Engine. I didn't get it either.

Internal Combustion Engine. I didn't get it either. — BC

Runs on fuel. A conventional car.

BUT I drive less than half of the average number of miles per year in my state. So my carbon footprint is probably on par with electric vehicles, with less risk of accidents, injuries etc. — LuckyR

So drive less, is what you're saying.

Here am I, on a Sunday afternoon, traveling 10 miles to downtown and my favorite gay bar. It took me 10 minutes to get to the bus stop, and the bus I was aiming for zoomed past when I was 1/2 block away. It will be 30 minutes before the next bus arrives -- and this won't get me downtown, It will get me to a transfer point where I will have to wait for another bus to finish the trip. Between 60 and 90 minutes later, I arrive. — BC

Time is the biggest objection against the public transit, I think. What could take a 15 minute drive, would take an hour or more on a bus. So, if you're taking the bus to work, you would need to add at least a couple of hours more to your time of the day. That's a lot of hours that you would need to add to your working life each day,

45" to an hour each way on transit from house to office is par for the course, and for carless people with young children, it gets much more complicated.

It makes total sense to me that workers who were told to work from home don't want to go back to their former offices. It isn't the office -- it's the commute.

Many Americans could drive less. I don't really expect people to walk 2 miles to a supermarket and then carry 30 pounds of groceries back home. They could bike, but biking requires a reasonably safe street, and there are a lot of places in the suburbs which are hard to get to while remaining safe on the street.

Many people do, however, live reasonably close to drugstores and supermarkets, and could get there on foot or bike with little risk. It is more work, sure. But the labor of shopping and schlepping one's stuff home saves a trip to the gym.

Driving less worked (works) for me. I lived about 20 minutes from work and we don't take car trip vacations. I don't have a problem with electric vehicles, especially when they nail the batteries (which they should by next generation, with solid state versions). But for me, electric would a less fun, expensive, inconvenient alternative with negligible carbon improvement.