The Age of the Suburb

 According to the New York Times, we live in the age of the suburb.  There are many good things to be said about this way of living and David Brooks says many of them.  He points out for example, that many of the hierarchical aspects of society have “turned granular” thanks, in large part, to the suburb.  However, even David would (I suspect) agree that the suburbs do not have the population density to support a fixed-route public transportation system.  And that, as a result, many suburbs—for all their benefits—are plagued by traffic congestion and pollution.  Further, parents who live in the suburbs (often because it’s safer for their kids) have all-too often become a kind of shuttle service for their offspring: taking them from school to soccer practice, to ballet, to their friend’s house, and back home again.  Clearly, what is needed is a public transportation system that fits the suburbs.  Elements of that system already exist.

Public Transportation for the Suburbs

Every time we take the airport shuttle, we are using a public transportation system that was designed for the suburbs.  This system has certain features:

• The shuttles are smaller than buses,
• You make a reservation for the vehicle using the Internet,
• You share the shuttle with other people who have likewise made reservations online, and
• You tell the driver where to stop. 

Of course the airport shuttle is not a public transportation “system” but a private service.  Nonetheless, these elements can be combined to create a full-blown system that would work in the suburbs.  Of course certain problems will have to be solved first:

• Because the shuttles are smaller than buses, more drivers will need to be hired;
• A lot of shuttles will need to be purchased;
• The prices would have to be lowered (currently I pay about $75 for the airport shuttle and that makes sense if you consider the cost of parking your car at the airport.  It makes a lot less sense if you use the shuttle to get around town)
• Each community will have to decide who owns the shuttles;
• The shuttles will have to get a recognizable brand;
• The community (or start-up company operating the smart paratransit) would have to invest a lot of money in information technology.

If those problems are resolved, however, we might be able to help the environment, cut down on congestion, and make more time for our families.

But Can It Work?

It’s already working.  Australia’s Hail and Ride is a great success and the North American Pick Up Pal is constantly gaining new members.  In fact, it’s become so successful that the Canadian bus company, Trentway, is suing Pick Up Pal.  Hotels have shuttles; car rental companies operate shuttles; and many big businesses and universities operate shuttles.  All of these are working.  And, of course the airport shuttle service, is (for me at least) a life-saver.

And yet the para-transit companies face many challenges as the Canadian lawsuit illustrates. These companies tend to be small, start-up businesses and, in short order, they find themselves competing with established, city-and region-backed monopolies on public transportation.  Take Para-transit, Inc. in Sacramento.  This company got started because the federal government requires that the elderly and people with disabilities be provided with mobility services.  Over time, Para-transit has developed the capabilities to serve all residents of the greater Sacramento Area but the local fixed-route public transportation system has been preventing it from doing so. 

So, yes, smart para-transit can work.  But in order to work, it requires the backing of the backing of the community and the local government.  Washington, D.C., for example, has thrown its support behind its Para-transit system and I have every confidence that their system will succeed.

Such a system, after all, is probably the only viable public transportation system for the age of the suburb.