Why would 30 minutes by car become 1.30 hours by public transport.

My (European) experience is the opposite: it takes longer to go to work by car, you're sitting in traffic whereas subways and trains take a fraction of the time as they are not impacted at all.

I live in Rome, which isn't known for great public transport. Yet I've seen multiple times people going from Rome suburbs to Naples downtown (a completely different region, 150 miles away) than it took me by car to do 7 miles.

▲

wink 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Even cities with decent public transport have neighborhoods that aren't great for this.

I live in Munich and yet going by car is often the fastest, and only during rush hour it's worse. I generally use my bike though, which is so-so. If was 5min by foot from the subway station (and not 15) it would change drastically.

Also I mean it's not terrible, but 30-45 minutes to get somewhere by public transport is the norm. 5min to the bus stop, bus to the subway, subway then is quick. And by car this is often faster, also more reliable, and no walking in the rain.

▲

j1elo 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Why would 30 minutes by car become 1.30 hours by public transport.

My city has "great" public transport. It's been appraised multiple times, which I guess means that average public transport must be worse than what I've grown up with. I take 20 mins by car from home (in an outer neighborhood) to my workplace (in a central area), 55 mins otherwise. When you consider roundtrips, it adds up (and if we add a middle stop coming out from work to somewhere else for some shopping, the time counting goes out the roof).

The 30 mins vs 1h30 comparison was assuming a trip from a nearby dormitory city 25 kms away, which is the minimum (insisting: minimum) distance everyone nowadays is being pushed out in order to being able to buy any home at a reasonable price. For example: where my parents live to my work is further away 30 Km: that's 30 min by car and 1h10 by p.t., but that outer city had reasonable prices 15 years ago, not today, so nowadays you would go live somewhere farther than that.

I find that typically people talk about public transport benefits from the perspective of being able to buy a home within the centre that is well connected. Yeah, the subway is great here if you live in a 10 Km radius, but talking about it is out of scope for most.

▲

epolanski 3 days ago | parent [-]

How praised the public transport of your city is irrelevant. What matters is how close/connected you are to it, and it to your workplace.

Trains don't have stop lights nor traffic. They don't care about rush hour. They are always going to be the fastest connection to a city center.

I live 4 minutes by foot from the Colonna Galleria train station, in a village 30 kilometers outside Rome, Italy. The train to Termini (Rome central station) takes 28 minutes, and Termini is the crossway of the 2 main metro lines and the most important city bus lines.

It's 33 minutes at night with empty streets and it's 1:15 at rush hour. Leaving work at 5:30 can easily cost you 2 hours in your car.

But sure, put me 3 miles from the train station, put my office in a place that is just 10/15 more inconvenient from metro/termini and it's drammatically different.

	▲	j1elo 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> Leaving work at 5:30 can easily cost you 2 hours in your car. Woah yeah that changes the calculations, I had a similar situation before, andof course I preferred the subway by far. But you know, it depends. I work late into the evening and when getting out of the office, the streets are empty. So it's a hard sell for me to use a transport option that will cost me 1 hour of my already short free time before bed. But everyone's situation is different, that's why I am in favor of keeping all options open.

▲

h2zizzle 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Unfortunately, America exported our car-privileging planning and policies, so those places that accepted our "expertise" buffed car travel as much as possible - traffic catches up, of course, but that's when the nerfs to public transit come in. It can be a number of strategies come to bear, including poor access to transit nodes, long wait times between service, and disruptions (American trains often have to wait for commercial traffic on rails). I can't speak for London, but if you're unfortunate enough to not live close to certain Washington, DC Metro stops, you're limited to driving to and parking at them, or to commuter options. Both are not ideal, timewise, but save you parking costs and sitting in traffic behind the wheel.

▲

WalterBright 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

It took me 10 minutes to get from Liverpool Station to Paddington via the Elizabeth Line. Last year, I took a taxi, as the Line was on strike. That took maybe 30 minutes, or maybe the driver was just driving aimlessly around to push up the bill.

The London subway system is just wonderful.

	▲	michaelg7x 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The newer parts aren't all that bad. It's taken a while for us to catch up with other cities with properly functioning trains, for example...

▲

majormajor 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

So cars and their use are entirely American inventions now? That's some new levels of American Exceptionalism...