Book Review : The Transit Metropolis: A
Global Inquiry
by
C.Kenneth Orski
Innovation Briefs,
September/October 1998
Citation: Cervero, Robert, The
Transit Metropolis: A Global Inquiry, Island Press, September, 1998, 400 pp. (Table of
Contents available at barnesandnobel.com)
Throughout the industrialized world, public transit is
struggling to compete with the private automobile. This is particularly the case in the
United States, where transit's share of work trips has declined from 6.3% in 1980 to 3.5%
in 1995, and its share of all person trips is just 1.8%, down from 2.2% in 1983. But some
metropolitan areas outside the United States have managed to buck the trend of declining
transit usage. What sets these places apart? In a book entitled "The Transit
Metropolis," University of California's Robert Cervero, attempts to find the answers.
According to Cervero, cities where mass transit is
flourishing have one thing in common: adaptibility. Some of the successful transit
metropolises have adapted their settlement patterns and made them more conducive to
transit riding by concentrating offices, homes and shops around rail nodes in attractive
well-designed pedestrian-friendly communities. Other places have accepted low density,
spread out growth patterns but have adapted transit services and transit technologies to
better serve these market-driven land uses. Still other places have struck a middle
ground, shaping their urban landscapes so as to become more transit-supportive while at
the same time enhancing the quality of transit service by delivering customers closer to
their destinations, reducing transfers and minimizing waits. "Places that adapt to
changing times, finding harmony between their transit services and urban landscape...are
places where transit stands the best chance of competing with the car..." writes
Cervero.
The author defines a successful transit metropolis as
"a place where mass transit is a viable, respected mobility alternative to the
private automobile" -- not necessarily by largely replacing the automobile or even
capturing the majority of trips, but "where enough travelers opt for transit
riding...to place a region on a sustainable course." He divides these cities into
four classes and illustrates them with twelve case studies. All of the chosen examples
represent cities whose growth and transit development have occurred under free market
conditions during the past half-century of rapid motorization:
Adaptive cities.
These are cities that have invested in rail systems to guide urban growth to achieve
larger societal objectives, such as preserving open space and producing affordable
housing. Adaptive cities feature compact, mixed-use suburban communities and new towns
concentrated around rail nodes. The book's examples are Stockholm,
Copenhagen, Tokyo and Singapore.
Adaptive transit.
These are places that have largely accepted spread-out, low-density patterns of growth and
have sought to adapt transit services and employ new technologies to serve these land uses
in an efficient and effective manner. Examples include Karlsruhe
in Germany where a track-sharing arrangement between the municipal rail system and the
regional railways has made it possible to provide transfer-free trips from outlying
suburbs into the city center; Adelaide, Australia,
where track-guided buses perform a similar function by providing feeder and line-haul
functions in a single vehicle; and Mexico City, where
fleets of colectivos (jitneys) provide flexible, demand-responsive services.
Strong-core cities.
These cities -- Zurich and Melbourne
are cited as examples-- have used tramways (streetcars) or their modern-day version, light
rail transit, to provide convenient and environmentally-friendly means of circulation in
the city center and serve to strengthen or reinforce center city revitalization efforts.
Hybrids.
These cities have struck a balance between concentrating development along transit
corridors and adapting transit to efficiently serve spread-out suburbs. Munich, Ottawa and Curitiba
are cited as examples. Munich combines a
region-wide heavy rail system, a streetcar distribution system in the center city and a
network of suburban bus feeders, all coordinated through a regional transit authority.
Ottawa and Curitiba have introduced flexible transit on dedicated busways and encouraged
mixed-use development around busway stations to produce unusually high per capita
ridership rates.
What do the experiences of the twelve transit
metropolises teach us? Cervero draws several conclusions.
Vision and Visionaries
A successful transit metropolis evolves from a
well-articulated vision of the future. For example, Greater Stockholm's
early vision of the "pearls on a necklace" concept led to the patterns of
compact, mixed-use towns linked by regional rail service that is characteristic of the
Stockholm region today. Ottawa's 1974 master plan that
defined an east-west axis for channeling growth, planted the seeds for what eventually
would become North America's largest and most successful busway network. Most importantly,
notes Cervero, "in successful transit metropolises land use visions lead
transportation policies, not the other way around."
Visions, in turn, need visionaries who can articulate
the vision , win others over to their vision and translate the vision into reality. Many
successful transit metropolises have benefitted from inspired leadership, such as Sven
Markelius' stewardship of the Stockholm regional plan, or mayor Jaime Lerner's
20-year governance of Curitiba.
Efficient Institutions and Governance
Successful transit metropolises also owe much to their
efficient institutional structures and regional forms of governance that promote close
coordination of transportation and land use. One exemplary model is the Verkehrsverbund
found in Germany, Austria, Switzerland. These umbrella organizations ensure that problems
that commonly plague regional transit services such as a multitude of different
fares, uncoordinated timetables and excessive transfers are eliminated. They also
allow for economies of scale (e.g. in common maintenance facilities) and a better division
of operating responsibilities as between public and private providers.
Viable Centers
All successful transit metropolises maintain strong,
vibrant central business districts. Viable downtowns are not only important as transit
hubs and major transfer points. As destinations they generate the highest shares of
transit riders. In Stockholm, Copenhagen, Munich, Curitiba, Zurich and Karlsruhe,
center cities are the transit showcases that set the patterns for the rest of the urban
area.
Competition and Entrepreneurial Ethos
Elements of competition are found in many successful
transit metropolises. Competition not only contains costs and rewards efficiency , but
also spurs service innovations. Stockholm and Copenhagen contract out bus
service on a competitive basis and have begun doing likewise for suburban rail services.
In Munich, Karlsruhe, Curitiba and Adelaide, efficiencies have been achieved
by separating policy directions and asset ownership from service delivery. The public
sector retains control over how service is provided (level, quality, frequency, routing)
and leaves it to the market forces to determine at what price. Within the confines of
standards set by government sponsors, the lowest-cost provider delivers the service. Fixed
infrastructure belongs to the public sector. Rolling stock is provided by competitively
chosen operators, often from the private sector. In Mexico City, thousands of
independent paratransit owner-operators provide efficient minibus services linking
outlying neighborhoods with Mexico's regional metro system.
Giving Transit Priority and Discouraging
Automobile Use
Many transit metroplises go the extra distance to make
transit time-competitive with the private automobile. Ottawa and Zurich give
clear preference to transit vehicles. Copenhagen and Zurich have reassigned many
downtown streets to trams, buses and bicycles. These measures have been supplemented with
restraints on automobile use. In Singapore, Tokyo and Stockholm this has
mainly taken the form of punitive pricing steep surcharges on gasoline and
automobiles and expensive central city parking. Singapore has additionally introduced road
pricing to further discourage peak period driving in the city center. Mexico City's
alternating ban on car use, depending on vehicles' license plate numbers, has curbed
driving in the city as a pollution reduction strategy. Munich, Zurich and Curitiba
have slowed down and deterred automobile travel in residential neighborhoods through
physical design changes.
Urban Design: Cities Are for People
An overarching design philosophy of most transit
metropolises is that cities are for people, not cars. High quality transit is viewed as
consonant with this philosophy. In Copenhagen, Munich and Curitiba, large
parts of the historical core have been given over to pedestrians. In all of the European
case study cities, trams and light rail vehicles blend nicely with auto-free zones. Urban
design is every bit as important outside central cities. In the suburbs of Copenhagen
and Stockholm, transit stations are treated as community hubs. Rail stations and
the public spaces that surround them are often places where people congregate. Many civic
squares double up as open-air farmers markets and venues for concerts. Street furniture,
greenery, urban art and water fountains add comfort and visual aesthetics. Through
conscious design, transit is both physically and symbolically at the community's core.
C. Kenneth Orski may
be contacted by phone at: 202/338.9550; fax: 202/338.9555 Innovation Briefs
is published by URBAN MOBILITY CORPORATION, C. Kenneth Orski, Editor; 1634 I Street NW ·
Suite 500 · Washington, DC 20006-4003 http://www.itsonline.com/innobriefs/
Home
Last Modified: March 02, 1999