In article , Alun
writes:

I think you should build the freeways, but mass transit should be
developped much more as well. I used to commute 23 miles each way into
London by train. I am now 27 miles by road from downtown Washington DC,
but I am 15 miles from the nearest station!!

As long as I have to drive half way there to get to the station I'm going
to drive all the way there. A system where the trains only run about 15
miles out from the middle of downtown is basically hopelessly crippled by
European standards, and doesn't really count as 'available' to most
people.

When most of the commuters live way, way beyond the end of the line it can
never live up to it's potential. Sure, we are more spread out in America,
but all that should mean is that I may have to drive across town to the
station. It should never mean that I have to drive to another town 15
miles away to catch a commuter train, but that's how it is now, and
needless to say, I don't do it.

Alun:

The situation you describe pretty much sums up the limitations that geography
imposes on public transit systems. A partial solution would be to utilize
demand-
response systems whereby busses travelling flexible routes on flexible
schedules can pick up commuters at their door, and transfer them to the nearest
fixed-route terminal. Once demand patterns are established, the system can be
re-scheduled at will to ensure maximum transit vehicle utilization without
inconveniencing passenger scheduling. This is done all the time in my own line
of work, which is Paratransit operations. The concept can be easily overlayed
on any other route structure, and there would be the advantage that most, if
not all, of the passengers would be able-bodied, and there would be no time
lost loading and securing wheelchairs or providing assistance to slow-moving
people who have difficulty in boarding the bus. The problem, of course, is
that adding such a service would come at a high cost. Would most commuters be
willing to pay the price of being to leave their cars home? A fare structure
which required the rider to pay the full, non-subsidized cost of the
demand-response portion of his transit service would mean forking over a fare
of up to $10-15 for that portion of the ride. Of course, some commuters pay
that much just to park their automobiles for the day. OTOH, they would not have
the option of making a trip to Home Depot on the way home.

The best solution would probably to simply arrange it so that more people were
able to work closer to where they live. Another is to adopt the European
paradigm of establishing communities with higher population density in
residential areas. That would mean more townhouses and condominium apartment
complexes, and fewer single-family homes surrounded by acres of grass and
concrete. When more people live closer together, it becomes much more
cost-effective to provide mass transit.

73 de Larry, K3LT