In the United States, public transit has struggled to gain the same political support it has garnered in the rest of the developed world. New infrastructure and increasing rail ridership seemed to be promising a bright future for American mass transit, but the onset of the coronavirus early this year exposed many of the flaws in the system. Now, fears of enclosed spaces and crowds have left many public transit services struggling to remain afloat. As an essential driver of greener urban environments and increased socioeconomic mobility, public transit cannot be left to flounder in the face of cratering ridership and mounting expenses; it would be detrimental for American cities and their residents to abandon the promise of mass mobility on transit as they work to build a cleaner, healthier and more equitable future.
Riding High
Before the arrival of coronavirus, the American public transit network appeared to be experiencing a surge in ridership and support. Ridership on these systems has increased substantially since 1995, growing 28% at the same time that the U.S. population grew only 23%. The increase in usage seemed to be promising a turn toward public transportation especially in growing urban areas. In the last decade, the U.S. has spent over $47 billion on transit projects that have added about 1,200 miles of new capacity to its systems. Around Washington, D.C., the Purple Line, a new ring of light rail in Maryland, and an extension of the Silver Line to Dulles International Airport are both under construction. New York City has also successfully implemented new bus rapid transit with dedicated bus routes, like the 14th Street Busway, and has plans to expand. Collectively, these projects have fueled bus, subway and rail system growth in an effort to support the urban population, which has risen from about 73% of the U.S. population in 1980 to over 82% today.
Additionally, transit-oriented development prior to the pandemic was booming in popularity as people were increasingly interested in living in walkable, dense neighborhoods. Young people, moving back to the city to access all the opportunities it has to offer, want to be able to live, shop, eat and work within easy access of public transit. This boom in demand for transit was driving investment in housing and transit simultaneously, evident in the growth of Boston suburbs like Somerville. This type of development has sprung up around the MBTA’s new Assembly stop, drawing people into the area for the restaurants, shopping and pedestrian spaces, and encouraging use of the MBTA system. These types of developments are flourishing in response to the increasing urbanization of the American population and proving that in many cities, access to transit has become more important than access to major roadways.
Even in the pandemic, there is hope for reclaiming space from automobile traffic. With the number of vehicles on the road severely depressed due to the pandemic situation, cities around the world have opted to take lanes from car travel and instead use them for buses, bikes and outdoor dining. Starting in July, New York City streets were closed to automobile traffic under its “Open Streets” program, returning space from drivers to pedestrians and cyclists. Many urbanists view these developments as promising; if people enjoy the benefits of reworked urban landscapes, perhaps they will continue to demand them even as the city returns to pre-pandemic business as usual. With less space dedicated to automobiles, there would be a lower demand for automobile funding in urban areas, and with that potentially more interest and investment in mass transit.
Breaking Down
This hopefulness overshadows many of the issues that plagued transit even before the pandemic hit. Despite the relative gains in ridership numbers, across the country ridership was actually declining, only buoyed by large gains in New York City and Washington, D.C. Frequent mechanical issues and closures have driven people away from using the systems. Mechanical failures rank among the top five reasons people do not use transit. For example, Boston’s MBTA Commuter Rail has suffered significant delays that can back up much of the system due to its unprecedented number of mechanical failures.
Additionally, the growth of ride-sharing services and personal mobility devices, such as electric scooters and bikes, have become much more accessible, efficient and cheap to use, draining riders from traditional modes of mass transit. The rapid growth of Uber and Lyft as feasible alternatives to driving has made car congestion worse as more people utilise their services. Nonetheless, these services are appealing because they allow people to move directly from their current location to their destination, without having to find their way to and from fixed public transit stations. It is clear that America’s public transportation system was struggling even before the pandemic, sagging under the weight of debt and a dearth of adequate investment — even as elected officials lavish money on the expansion of automobile infrastructure.
Derailed
The COVID-19 pandemic plunged the American public transit system into crisis, with ridership and revenue falling, debt mounting and services being cut. All of these problems tie into one another in a vicious circle, with crashing ridership causing revenue to fall, which in turn leads to service cuts and fare hikes that create barriers to usership and lead to even lower ridership.
Social distancing has cut the number of people that can safely fit into the buses and train cars that fill the nation’s public transit networks. In Seattle, buses that once carried between 50 and 100 commuters have cut capacity to around a dozen. Fears of transmission on public transit have contributed as well, despite evidence indicating that taking public transit does not increase the risk of contracting COVID-19. In fact, the pollution released by transferring trips from electrified transit to internal combustion vehicles on the roads could actually cause lung issues that would worsen the impact of the coronavirus. Ridership has plummeted nearly 80% since March when most lockdowns took effect, leaving most transit authorities reeling. Similar fears of densely populated urban areas have driven many wealthier residents out of cities, dragging down use and financial support of transit and its associated development.
These declines in ridership threaten to push many systems into a “death spiral,” in which budget shortfalls cause depressed service and lower ridership. In San Francisco, half of the bus lines have been eliminated and the agency predicts that it will see $568 million in lost revenue this year: an amount that calls into question the survivability of the network. The $25 billion that transit received in federal support has also dried up, removing what little ability the systems had to weather the enduring pandemic. At the same time, many of the essential and low-income workers who need to reach their jobs during the pandemic rely on mass transit systems. As much as 36% of the essential workforce depends on adequate public transportation, not to mention the nearly 21% of households in urban areas that do not own a vehicle and must also utilise transit options. It is both the most necessary and the most vulnerable populations that the lack of public transit imperils.
Getting Back up to Speed
Despite budgetary squeezes, abysmally low ridership numbers and concerns over the viability of mass transit in the future, now is not the time to disinvest in these systems. Instead, the federal government must support local and state governments in saving, improving and expanding the existing transit capacity. With ridership low and service already infrequent, closures for overhauls and extension of the networks would be less disruptive. Reduced roadway traffic could encourage a change in usage of the streetscape, paving the way for more bus and bike lanes, as well as pedestrian development. Paused fare collections offer a potential to begin the implementation of reduced or free fare schemes. The COVID-19-related shutdown should not spell the end of public transit, but rather offer an opportunity for its rebirth.
Initially, a federal relief package of the same magnitude as the $25 billion air travel industry payment is necessary to meet the budget shortfalls the system is facing. Among Democrats in Congress there has been some support for the $32 billion bailout that transit agencies have requested. With so much of the urban population dependent on transit — as much 62% in some areas rely on it for access to food and jobs — it is unthinkable to abandon it in the face of the already precarious situation.
The fare structure of public transportation is also in need of review. Not a single system can support itself on fare revenue alone, with most depending on subsidies and government support. With a disproportionate number of low-income riders, public transit must remain feasible for their use. A preliminary study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on the MBTA showed that individuals with reduced fares were able to take 30% more trips, with a marked increase in trips for medical and social services. Expanding these types of fare programs to the whole system would increase usage overall and help underserved communities access the social infrastructure they need.
With the currently limited service on many systems, now is the time for bold changes. In most American cities, the fixed point transit system — heavy and light rail, mostly — is built on a hub-and-spoke model, shuttling people from the suburbs into the urban core. The most successful systems, like New York City’s MTA and Seattle’s expanding network, heavily emphasize cross town movement as well as movement in and out of the downtown. The improvements in some cities to implement similar crosstown lines, like the Purple Line in Maryland around Washington, D.C., can improve efficiency by removing the need to go into the downtown and back out again. These types of developments are essential to having accessible and useful service, and can also help encourage residential density in other areas of the city and its suburbs with transit-oriented development.
All of these changes could help America reduce its reliance on automobiles and their infrastructure, which create more congestion, cut through downtowns, and emit pollutants into the atmosphere. Transit development, on the other hand, can catalyze economic growth and social mobility, limit greenhouse gas emissions and preserve existing neighborhoods, all while giving the city’s least privileged residents access to urban amenities and job opportunities. There is an environmental, social and moral mandate to invest in American public transit; the pandemic cannot be allowed to derail it.
Image by Colin Blenis is licensed under the Unsplash License.
