What do you think?
Rate this book
Human Transit: How Clearer Thinking about Public Transit Can Enrich Our Communities and Our Lives
Public transit is a powerful tool for addressing a huge range of urban problems, including traffic congestion and economic development as well as climate change. But while many people support transit in the abstract, it's often hard to channel that support into good transit investments. Part of the problem is that transit debates attract many kinds of experts, who often talk past each other. Ordinary people listen to a little of this and decide that transit is impossible to figure out.
Jarrett Walker believes that transit can be simple, if we focus first on the underlying geometry that all transit technologies share. In Human Transit, Walker supplies the basic tools, the critical questions, and the means to make smarter decisions about designing and implementing transit services.
Human Transit explains the fundamental geometry of transit that shapes successful systems; the process for fitting technology to a particular community; and the local choices that lead to transit-friendly development. Whether you are in the field or simply a concerned citizen, here is an accessible guide to achieving successful public transit that will enrich any community.
Jarrett Walker believes that transit can be simple, if we focus first on the underlying geometry that all transit technologies share. In Human Transit, Walker supplies the basic tools, the critical questions, and the means to make smarter decisions about designing and implementing transit services.
Human Transit explains the fundamental geometry of transit that shapes successful systems; the process for fitting technology to a particular community; and the local choices that lead to transit-friendly development. Whether you are in the field or simply a concerned citizen, here is an accessible guide to achieving successful public transit that will enrich any community.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published December 14, 2011
109 people are currently reading
3429 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 103 reviews
June 18, 2017
I've read Jarrett Walker's blog on transit planning a number of times, and always found it insightful. He thinks deeply about transit and how to use to build great cities and communities. However, his experience and expertise (although quite broad) is limited to Western, developed countries.
The books has a number of different sections on various aspects of the passenger's experience of transit and how to improve them, what the pros and cons of various ideas are, and a fairly lucid explanation of how the layout and street network pattern of a city influences transit choices (he uses the term 'urban geometry'). While he says that 'density isn't destiny', I'm sure he'd agree that geometry is.
The book suffers from 2 primary failings -
1. He spends too little time going into how public transit is financed. This is crucial to understand because it answers questions of how much we should expect from transit, and why agencies are only able to run buses at the frequencies they do. In an Indian context, I would go further to say that it helps understand why we have such uncomfortable buses and routes that don't make much sense.
2. Walker mentions pedestrians often because, as he rightly points out, transit users are very likely to be pedestrians at one or both ends of their trip on a bus, train, or streetcar. Then why not address the fact that unless there is adequate pedestrian infrastructure, transit will always suffer from lower ridership than is strictly necessary? That transit's ability to shift people from cars depends heavily on people being able to hoof it to the bus stop? This was a glaring omission to me.
Finally, I really wish he had spent time in an Indian city, or any metropolis in the developing world. His ideas and notions are currently (as of when the book was written, 2011) are too steeped in the urban patterns of wealthy countries. With his insight into transit, he'd be an asset to any city planner and certainly the experience would enrich his views and make them less one-dimensional.
The books has a number of different sections on various aspects of the passenger's experience of transit and how to improve them, what the pros and cons of various ideas are, and a fairly lucid explanation of how the layout and street network pattern of a city influences transit choices (he uses the term 'urban geometry'). While he says that 'density isn't destiny', I'm sure he'd agree that geometry is.
The book suffers from 2 primary failings -
1. He spends too little time going into how public transit is financed. This is crucial to understand because it answers questions of how much we should expect from transit, and why agencies are only able to run buses at the frequencies they do. In an Indian context, I would go further to say that it helps understand why we have such uncomfortable buses and routes that don't make much sense.
2. Walker mentions pedestrians often because, as he rightly points out, transit users are very likely to be pedestrians at one or both ends of their trip on a bus, train, or streetcar. Then why not address the fact that unless there is adequate pedestrian infrastructure, transit will always suffer from lower ridership than is strictly necessary? That transit's ability to shift people from cars depends heavily on people being able to hoof it to the bus stop? This was a glaring omission to me.
Finally, I really wish he had spent time in an Indian city, or any metropolis in the developing world. His ideas and notions are currently (as of when the book was written, 2011) are too steeped in the urban patterns of wealthy countries. With his insight into transit, he'd be an asset to any city planner and certainly the experience would enrich his views and make them less one-dimensional.
June 3, 2014
Someone working on Google maps ought to read this book, and then make the following changes:
Once in transit directions mode, the map ought to show roads where there are high frequency buses as thicker or otherwise highlighted just as arterials and highways are highlighted for cars. If there is no transit service on a given road, de-emphasize it. Adjust for time of day as necessary. It should be possible to view this map even without having specific origins or destinations, just to see where one might easily travel without much planning.
Weight routes on high frequency buses more strongly than low, even if it requires a bit more time or walking. Secondly, make frequency appear in the route suggestions.
Mixed transit/bicycle directions are somewhat specialized but ought to be incorporated eventually also.
Some of the same suggestions could be made for walking, though they really need to get sidewalk data to do that adequately.
Once in transit directions mode, the map ought to show roads where there are high frequency buses as thicker or otherwise highlighted just as arterials and highways are highlighted for cars. If there is no transit service on a given road, de-emphasize it. Adjust for time of day as necessary. It should be possible to view this map even without having specific origins or destinations, just to see where one might easily travel without much planning.
Weight routes on high frequency buses more strongly than low, even if it requires a bit more time or walking. Secondly, make frequency appear in the route suggestions.
Mixed transit/bicycle directions are somewhat specialized but ought to be incorporated eventually also.
Some of the same suggestions could be made for walking, though they really need to get sidewalk data to do that adequately.
December 5, 2012
In my days of transit advocacy, I had wished a book like "Human Transit" were around. It would have made my route and service proposals easier to understand and implement.
By coincidence, I had incorporated many of Walker's theories -- direct, grid-based routes whenever possible and using frequency to attract ridership -- but have never attempted to explain my logic behind my proposals. Even if I did, I wouldn't be able to explain myself as concisely and sharply as Walker.
"Human Transit" doesn't have a magic explanation of the right type of transit service for your city, and it avoids taking sides in bus vs. rail or any other technology-of-choice debates, but it provides an even better function. It shows all readers how to think about service: coverage, productivity and route structure.
Walker uses the phrase "plumber's question" to come to trade-offs when it comes to questions about how to allocate resources. One is coverage vs. frequency. Should a transit system grant a minimum coverage span to all of its service area, or should it concentrate vehicles to where they will be used the most? There's no right answer to the question, and a transit system must incorporate elements of both.
Another facet to consider: Transit routes are a matter of geometry. Every transit system is a quilt of radii, diameters and vectors. First, there's access and destination. There's a certain radius where a bus stop or rail station draws and doesn't draw riders. Then, there is a matter of stop spacing. Put them close enough together, and two stops draw from a redundant area of riders. Spread them apart, there's less duplication but there's a greater chance that riders are pushed out of a convenient stop radius. Finally, there are routes. It's mathematically obvious that the fastest path between two points is a straight line -- and also the most time- and cost-efficient for route planning. However, it's not always possible to go straight. Sometimes, a line has to deviate away from a straight line, or even "dogleg" by leaving the straight line and doubling back.
If this sounds complicated, "Human Transit" makes it straightforward. It is handy for both professionals, to get an idea of how to plan routes around making them useful for riders' origins and destinations, and riders, to better articulate routes for themselves while getting an idea of what goes into service planning.
One fault of the book is for its relatively high cost -- I purchased it new for $35 -- for a rather small book and some illustrations that look rather crude. The information, though, is valuable. It comes from Walker, a professional transit planner with more than two decades of experience globally. Walker also adds more knowledge on his blog, "Human Transit, which was the foundation for the book.
By coincidence, I had incorporated many of Walker's theories -- direct, grid-based routes whenever possible and using frequency to attract ridership -- but have never attempted to explain my logic behind my proposals. Even if I did, I wouldn't be able to explain myself as concisely and sharply as Walker.
"Human Transit" doesn't have a magic explanation of the right type of transit service for your city, and it avoids taking sides in bus vs. rail or any other technology-of-choice debates, but it provides an even better function. It shows all readers how to think about service: coverage, productivity and route structure.
Walker uses the phrase "plumber's question" to come to trade-offs when it comes to questions about how to allocate resources. One is coverage vs. frequency. Should a transit system grant a minimum coverage span to all of its service area, or should it concentrate vehicles to where they will be used the most? There's no right answer to the question, and a transit system must incorporate elements of both.
Another facet to consider: Transit routes are a matter of geometry. Every transit system is a quilt of radii, diameters and vectors. First, there's access and destination. There's a certain radius where a bus stop or rail station draws and doesn't draw riders. Then, there is a matter of stop spacing. Put them close enough together, and two stops draw from a redundant area of riders. Spread them apart, there's less duplication but there's a greater chance that riders are pushed out of a convenient stop radius. Finally, there are routes. It's mathematically obvious that the fastest path between two points is a straight line -- and also the most time- and cost-efficient for route planning. However, it's not always possible to go straight. Sometimes, a line has to deviate away from a straight line, or even "dogleg" by leaving the straight line and doubling back.
If this sounds complicated, "Human Transit" makes it straightforward. It is handy for both professionals, to get an idea of how to plan routes around making them useful for riders' origins and destinations, and riders, to better articulate routes for themselves while getting an idea of what goes into service planning.
One fault of the book is for its relatively high cost -- I purchased it new for $35 -- for a rather small book and some illustrations that look rather crude. The information, though, is valuable. It comes from Walker, a professional transit planner with more than two decades of experience globally. Walker also adds more knowledge on his blog, "Human Transit, which was the foundation for the book.
September 26, 2023
The way this is a 200 page textbook, took me one month to read, and I gave up at the end
You don’t need to read this. I learned some fun facts but mostly I was so bored and transit is my passion so.
You don’t need to read this. I learned some fun facts but mostly I was so bored and transit is my passion so.
March 29, 2020
Brilliant, an accessible guidebook for understanding public transportation! Walker breaks down the main areas of concern for evaluating transit proposals and disambiguates the value questions (he calls these plumber's questions) from the engineering analysis. Throughout he takes a technology-agnostic approach, choosing to focus on the basic geometry of transit systems rather than the choice between bus, streetcar, rail, etc. This leads to the development of an intuitive toolkit of questions, heuristics, and common fallacies that any citizen can use to become a better transit advocate (and systems thinker!).
At times the book is a little repetitive (frequency was repeatedly stressed as the master characteristic), and occasionally the author's desire to build a theory of transit from the ground up leads to overly pedantic writing (yes, straight lines are the most direct path), but overall Walker manages to write in a clear and entertaining way. Would recommend to anyone who interacts with transit.
At times the book is a little repetitive (frequency was repeatedly stressed as the master characteristic), and occasionally the author's desire to build a theory of transit from the ground up leads to overly pedantic writing (yes, straight lines are the most direct path), but overall Walker manages to write in a clear and entertaining way. Would recommend to anyone who interacts with transit.
June 7, 2018
I am going to be generous and give this book three stars, because if you are a driver who is only just beginning to consider the concept of public transportation, this is probably a useful book. As someone who does not drive and is deeply engaged with transit, I found it patronizing and tedious. That doesn't mean Walker isn't right; it just means he's telling me a whole lot of things I already know, and phrasing them as though they should come as revelations.
February 10, 2016
Unbelievable book. This is the holy grail for any transit enthusiast when it comes to planning a system. People who are not interested in public transit and drive everywhere would probably find it boring, though.
February 26, 2023
the definitive (even if not comprehensive) book on how to think about public transit. it's one of the most perfect books on this topic -- every page is filled with unexpected and often counterintuitive insights, every trade-off is described fairly without necessarily promoting one or the other, very clear eyed about what already exists and how to improve it, and very realistic about how transit needs and possibilities can vary among different settings -- just because something should be doesn't mean it could be, and just because something bad exists doesn't mean it cannot be improved (case in point : the last chapter on suburban stroads -- deservedly much reviled in contemporary urbanist circles -- where the author nevertheless sees possibilities in terms of repurposing what already exists in the built environment to provide at least a minimum workable transit system that is realistic within that setting).
fantastic book overall, probably one of my top 5 reads in the last decade. if you want to talk about urbanism and transit with any authority, you should read this book as well.
fantastic book overall, probably one of my top 5 reads in the last decade. if you want to talk about urbanism and transit with any authority, you should read this book as well.
January 17, 2018
The book is written as a textbook for public transit. It breaks down transit planning into its fundamental tradeoffs, and takes an ostensibly neutral position in exploring them.
It explores the motivations behind public transit efforts, and implores you to hold them consciously and with an understanding of their impacts. e.g. If you want a system with full coverage for your community, that inherently comes at the expense of ridership, and so income. If you want to minimize connections you need to trade that off with the frequency of service along your lines and the simplicity of your network. etc.
The author stresses that many decisions which appear to disregard community input stem from requirements imposed by geometry, and these inherent tradeoffs.
A good primer to understanding transit decisions. I'd have enjoyed it more if it allowed itself to be opinionated.
It explores the motivations behind public transit efforts, and implores you to hold them consciously and with an understanding of their impacts. e.g. If you want a system with full coverage for your community, that inherently comes at the expense of ridership, and so income. If you want to minimize connections you need to trade that off with the frequency of service along your lines and the simplicity of your network. etc.
The author stresses that many decisions which appear to disregard community input stem from requirements imposed by geometry, and these inherent tradeoffs.
A good primer to understanding transit decisions. I'd have enjoyed it more if it allowed itself to be opinionated.
July 2, 2019
A good general overview of conceptual frameworks if you care about mass transit-- what transportation planners mean they say things like 'ridership,' 'coverage,' 'frequency,' 'connections,' as well as some of the geometric thinking that goes into maximizing the efficiency of transit systems.
Walker places too much faith in real estate interests, exists in a bit of scarcity mindset around funding and he's not thinking particularly critically about the role class and race play in zoning, housing and transit investment, but then, he's a private transit consultant. Considering the focus of the book is more on developing vocabulary and concepts so people can feel empowered to take an active role in transit planning, it largely succeeds at that goal.
Walker places too much faith in real estate interests, exists in a bit of scarcity mindset around funding and he's not thinking particularly critically about the role class and race play in zoning, housing and transit investment, but then, he's a private transit consultant. Considering the focus of the book is more on developing vocabulary and concepts so people can feel empowered to take an active role in transit planning, it largely succeeds at that goal.
February 13, 2018
I have just finished reading this book in advance of the Urban Milwaukee book discussion about it coming up soon. The author does a good job of communicating how the various local development choices that are always under consideration can be supported and enhanced by well designed transit. I have lived without a car for 10 years now and I found it fascinating to compare the changes I have seen in the Milwaukee County Transit System services in that time with the ideas discussed in this book. Highly recommended for anyone interested in the function and future of transit.
February 10, 2025
Loved the structure of the book and the emphasis on 1) how important geometry is 2) how the back-and-forth between agencies is valuable for transit planning. It’s really cool that this was written to be accessible to an average citizen!!
July 7, 2025
An informative, digestible introduction into the choices that define transit policy
June 11, 2014
Clarity. That's what Jarrett Walker's book promises in its subtitle: "How Clearer Thinking About Public Transit Can Enrich Our Communities and Our Lives" and clarity is what this book delivers. Public transport is a complex issue with many different considerations and interests at play. Walker breaks these issues down one by one and in simple, layman language, offers us different frames with which to analyse transport matters.
Chapter 2 breaks down the different (sometimes conflicting) demands placed on transit: the location of stops and stations; connectivity; frequency; efficiency; value for money (cost to the consumer); civility; reliability; and the ability to support spontaneity (through frequency and the legibility of the network).The rest of the book delves into each of these different demands in some detail and some of the trade-offs entailed. For instance, the trade off between minimising coverage gaps and minimising duplicate coverage areas when planning the placement of transit stops. And how "one of the most common mistakes in transit planning is to invent a new line, in response to some political initiative, without thinking about how it affects the existing lines that it may overlap....by creating duplicate coverage, it often leads to a less efficient network overall". Or viewing transit demands as "peak-first" (where peak service is the most fundamental product and the other times of the day are secondary/supplemental) vs "base-first". Or the trade off between ridership and coverage goals in determining service allocation, between system complexity or requiring more connections for passengers.
An aha moment comes about when someone reframes an issue for you. It doesn't necessarily stem from some brilliant insight. It's just that somebody shift the lens and offers you a new way to look at an issue. There were several of these moments for me reading Human Transit. Like:
"Frequency and span are the essence of freedom for a transit passenger. High-frequency, long-span service is there whenever you want to use it, even for spontaneous trips....Yet frequency and span are also oddly invisible....You see maps of the network or of certain transit proposals; you read descriptions of transit proposals in the newspaper, often accompanied by maps, always emphasising where the proposed service will operate; you see images of transit vehicles in film, television and music video, often used in ways that encourage you to generalise about the quality of the service and the types of people who use it....But nothing in any of those impressions shows you the impact of frequency,even though...frequency is the single most important variable in meeting our mobility desires...To be useful, transit must exist in both time and space"
And
"Transit debates suffer from the fact that today, in most of our cities, most of our decision makers are motorists...driving a car every day can shape your thinking in powerful, subconscious ways. For example, in most debates about proposed rapid transit lines, the speed of the proposed device gets more politics attention than how frequently it runs, even though frequency, which determines waiting time, often matters more then speed in determining how long your trip will take"
And
"Many transportation planners are trained in the work of evaluating lines. This process - including conceptualisation, design, and estimation of expected usage - tends to be peak-first. Classic highway engineering, for example, designs a road to handle the traffic that it will carry on the peak and isn't bothered by the fact that these roads will be relatively empty for the other 20 or more hours of the day. If you carry that view into transit planning, you'll design services and infrastructure for the peak as well" But what kinds of options will you provide during off-peak hours?
Walker's book doesn't offer any solutions. Because the best solution for any place will depend on the values that people want to see reflected in their public transport: coverage or ridership? system complexity or connections? etc etc. But what his book does do is to offer frames with which to unpack and discuss these issues. (I particularly liked Walker's suggestion of developing a consensus around a Service Allocation Policy, where there is a percentage split of resources between different goals, e.g. 55 percent of services allocated to the ridership goal and 45 percent to the coverage goal).
Chapter 2 breaks down the different (sometimes conflicting) demands placed on transit: the location of stops and stations; connectivity; frequency; efficiency; value for money (cost to the consumer); civility; reliability; and the ability to support spontaneity (through frequency and the legibility of the network).The rest of the book delves into each of these different demands in some detail and some of the trade-offs entailed. For instance, the trade off between minimising coverage gaps and minimising duplicate coverage areas when planning the placement of transit stops. And how "one of the most common mistakes in transit planning is to invent a new line, in response to some political initiative, without thinking about how it affects the existing lines that it may overlap....by creating duplicate coverage, it often leads to a less efficient network overall". Or viewing transit demands as "peak-first" (where peak service is the most fundamental product and the other times of the day are secondary/supplemental) vs "base-first". Or the trade off between ridership and coverage goals in determining service allocation, between system complexity or requiring more connections for passengers.
An aha moment comes about when someone reframes an issue for you. It doesn't necessarily stem from some brilliant insight. It's just that somebody shift the lens and offers you a new way to look at an issue. There were several of these moments for me reading Human Transit. Like:
"Frequency and span are the essence of freedom for a transit passenger. High-frequency, long-span service is there whenever you want to use it, even for spontaneous trips....Yet frequency and span are also oddly invisible....You see maps of the network or of certain transit proposals; you read descriptions of transit proposals in the newspaper, often accompanied by maps, always emphasising where the proposed service will operate; you see images of transit vehicles in film, television and music video, often used in ways that encourage you to generalise about the quality of the service and the types of people who use it....But nothing in any of those impressions shows you the impact of frequency,even though...frequency is the single most important variable in meeting our mobility desires...To be useful, transit must exist in both time and space"
And
"Transit debates suffer from the fact that today, in most of our cities, most of our decision makers are motorists...driving a car every day can shape your thinking in powerful, subconscious ways. For example, in most debates about proposed rapid transit lines, the speed of the proposed device gets more politics attention than how frequently it runs, even though frequency, which determines waiting time, often matters more then speed in determining how long your trip will take"
And
"Many transportation planners are trained in the work of evaluating lines. This process - including conceptualisation, design, and estimation of expected usage - tends to be peak-first. Classic highway engineering, for example, designs a road to handle the traffic that it will carry on the peak and isn't bothered by the fact that these roads will be relatively empty for the other 20 or more hours of the day. If you carry that view into transit planning, you'll design services and infrastructure for the peak as well" But what kinds of options will you provide during off-peak hours?
Walker's book doesn't offer any solutions. Because the best solution for any place will depend on the values that people want to see reflected in their public transport: coverage or ridership? system complexity or connections? etc etc. But what his book does do is to offer frames with which to unpack and discuss these issues. (I particularly liked Walker's suggestion of developing a consensus around a Service Allocation Policy, where there is a percentage split of resources between different goals, e.g. 55 percent of services allocated to the ridership goal and 45 percent to the coverage goal).
December 30, 2017
Placeholder review: this is a classic of the field of transportation planning and I'm really glad I have finally filled the gap. It's a classic for good reason. Walker gives a number of wonderful tools to evaluate transit options.
-----------------------------------
52 books in 52 weeks update:
book number: 47 / 52
scorecard (see below):
W: 23/26
NW: 18/26
NA: 18/20
D: 4/5
F: 22
NF: 21
-------
Notes: I'm trying to read 52 books this year. To make sure I'm getting a broad range, I'm tracking some metrics. Open to more if folks have suggestions. My goal is to read books that are:
at least half by women
at least half not by white people
at least 20 by non-americans
at least 5 that I don't think I'll like or agree with going in
I'll also go for about half fiction and half non-fiction
-----------------------------------
52 books in 52 weeks update:
book number: 47 / 52
scorecard (see below):
W: 23/26
NW: 18/26
NA: 18/20
D: 4/5
F: 22
NF: 21
-------
Notes: I'm trying to read 52 books this year. To make sure I'm getting a broad range, I'm tracking some metrics. Open to more if folks have suggestions. My goal is to read books that are:
at least half by women
at least half not by white people
at least 20 by non-americans
at least 5 that I don't think I'll like or agree with going in
I'll also go for about half fiction and half non-fiction
November 17, 2013
Not technical enough to give a very deep understanding of transit, but too pedantic to be enjoyable for a lay audience.
To the first point, for example, there is no math in the entire book. There are not even descriptions of the mathematical underpinnings. Instead, he gives hand-wavey arguments for stop spacing and network design. Then again, I'm a civil engineer currently working on my masters in transportation engineering, so my perspective might be a little skewed cf most readers.
To the second point: the author spends pages and pages trying to clarify ideas that any reader of this book should be familiar with. He spends two pages defining "public transit" and then defining the words he used to define "public transit". Sentences like "If a transit route is not direct, compared to the alternatives, we say it is circuitous" and "Transit planners say a network is peaked if it carries more riders during the peak commute period than in the midday, evening, and weekend periods" abound. In his effort to be precise, he forgets about the reader. Definitions are important, but put it in a footnote or a glossary.
He does do a good job of describing the tradeoffs and compromises that must be made when designing a network.
To the first point, for example, there is no math in the entire book. There are not even descriptions of the mathematical underpinnings. Instead, he gives hand-wavey arguments for stop spacing and network design. Then again, I'm a civil engineer currently working on my masters in transportation engineering, so my perspective might be a little skewed cf most readers.
To the second point: the author spends pages and pages trying to clarify ideas that any reader of this book should be familiar with. He spends two pages defining "public transit" and then defining the words he used to define "public transit". Sentences like "If a transit route is not direct, compared to the alternatives, we say it is circuitous" and "Transit planners say a network is peaked if it carries more riders during the peak commute period than in the midday, evening, and weekend periods" abound. In his effort to be precise, he forgets about the reader. Definitions are important, but put it in a footnote or a glossary.
He does do a good job of describing the tradeoffs and compromises that must be made when designing a network.
May 14, 2012
Transit services shapes our city and impact our daily life. Therefore many people may want to voice their opinion on the design and operation of transit system. But few people knows how to think about the working of a transit system systematically. Transit consultant Jarrett Walker's book provide excellent guidance to citizen and government alike to think about what they need from transit service. He explains the key points that makes transit useful. Then explores basic geometry and the implication of various routing options, and also the many trade off of coverage, speed, frequency and network complexity, etc. All these concepts are explained in simple layman's term. Yet it gives a holistic view to the problem without fixate any simple choice such as rail v.s. bus.
The book ends in an inspiring finale. Walker invite people to take a long view and think what their transit should be in 20 years. The biggest payoff will rest in strategic think.
This excellent does exactly what the subtitle promises, to guide clear thinking about public transit so as to enrich our communities and our lives.
The book ends in an inspiring finale. Walker invite people to take a long view and think what their transit should be in 20 years. The biggest payoff will rest in strategic think.
This excellent does exactly what the subtitle promises, to guide clear thinking about public transit so as to enrich our communities and our lives.
July 31, 2012
The book is easy for laymen, like me, to read. But it's no Suburban Nation (a book), so it won't change your world view on the built environment.
Still, I gave it five stars, because it addressed all the questions I had. Questions like, why does transit work well (when it does) and how does it fail the transit user when it doesn't? What makes people want to use transit? If you live in an community with older residents, why would your transit system be different than the one in a community with younger residents? What is more important, frequency or speed in transit? What mistakes do automobile travelers make when thinking about transit?
If you are a die-hard car fan, the book won't offend you. The book is most helpful for those thinking about transit options coming to their area or those thinking about making the switch from automobile-travel to public transit.
Still, I gave it five stars, because it addressed all the questions I had. Questions like, why does transit work well (when it does) and how does it fail the transit user when it doesn't? What makes people want to use transit? If you live in an community with older residents, why would your transit system be different than the one in a community with younger residents? What is more important, frequency or speed in transit? What mistakes do automobile travelers make when thinking about transit?
If you are a die-hard car fan, the book won't offend you. The book is most helpful for those thinking about transit options coming to their area or those thinking about making the switch from automobile-travel to public transit.
October 30, 2013
Human Transit is not about why we should build transit, it's about how to build effective transit. It deals mostly with the geometry of systems, where to place transit lines, and has interesting discussions over whether it is more important to go for coverage goals or ridership goals (or somewhere in between). I was hoping it would go into a little more detail of the merits of buses and when it's time to consider upgrading to rail from high frequency bus lines. Regardless, it still is a great book over a topic that interests me greatly, and I learned a few things that I didn't know before.
August 10, 2013
I thought I already had a clear picture of the options for transit, but this book did a great job of laying out the terms and tradeoffs really clearly, and I can see a number of the choices in Vancouver much better now. Our city is doing a pretty good job... it would be nice if all the debates could be so rational.
February 10, 2017
I'm giving this five stars, but for the record, you'll only enjoy this if you're a huge nerd who enjoys transport policy or engineering. If you are one of those people, this book if the best I've ever read on the subject.
November 12, 2014
A good, wonkish book. It explains issues with mass transit dispassionately. While pro-transit, it doesn't demonize development that is not transit friendly - it just states that we shouldn't expect such development to be well-served by transit.
May 5, 2012
Excellent book if you are interested in urban design and the way transit systems work. Easy to read with good examples.
March 21, 2013
A practical book for practical thinking.
May 24, 2014
Very preachy, and very insistent it isn't preachy. Which, as a choir member, I was okay with. Still, I could have used a little more substance.
August 17, 2017
I would rate the book higher if I read it sooner. A great book for those who want to explore how the transit systems work.
March 5, 2018
Basically a textbook. 3.5 stars.
Read
June 30, 2020For the month of March, I read the book Human Transit. The book discusses the most important considerations when evaluating public transit systems. I think it is important for us as citizens to be aware of these considerations and how they impact our communities. Even if you don't use transit yourself, it is good to know what to think about when transit proposals are presented to your community as well as when it comes time to cast your vote of how your tax dollars will be spent. Many of us in CTEP rely on public transit or at least have clients who do. The freedom experienced by those who rely on transit is largely based upon the frequency (how often does the bus come) and span (when does the bus run) of service. If transit service is too infrequent or only runs for a limited time, it will force citizens to plan their lives around transit schedules or even steer clear of it altogether if they have the choice. It is only when transit has a large span and a high frequency that someone can make spontaneous trips with the confidence that the bus or train will be coming soon and it will be there to bring them home, too.
When the average Joe is evaluating transit, too much emphasis is given to speed. The reason for this is because the average person is still largely a car owner, and the time required to make a trip is weighted heavily on the speed you can travel. However, it is different for transit. As previously mentioned, frequency is very important when it comes to trip duration. For example, express buses that take the highway can make quick trips, however, if the bus only comes once per hour, it may add up to an hour to your trip duration depending on when you arrive to the bus stop. A slower bus that makes all of the stops running every 10 minutes may have a shorter average trip duration depending on the nature of the riders.
There are many other factors affecting trip duration, but another major one is called the "class" of transit. The class of transit determines how much of an affect that traffic delay can have on trip duration. Class C transit shares lanes with traffic and is represented by typical buses. It is the most economical choice, but also could be the slowest due to traffic delays. Class B makes things better by giving the bus a dedicated lane. However, the class B transit still has to stop at intersections leading to some delay. Class C transit operates above or below the grade of traffic allowing it to completely avoid traffic delays. While Class C has the potential to be the fastest, it is also the most costly and may not always be practical to create new lines, especially for dense cities that are already highly developed.
Cities must also decide what their goal is for transit. The goals are seen on a spectrum from ridership (generating the most trips completed) to coverage (providing access to the most people). Rarely would a city's goal be purely ridership or coverage, there will usually be more weight on one over the other. Due to limited budgets and practicality, you can't have both. A ridership goal would be represented by providing high frequency, round the clock service in high density corridors with lots of active riders. It would take the most cars off of the road and generate the highest fare revenue, but it would exclude many people from service. This goal is favored by fiscal conservatives (due to efficient use of funds) and environmentalists (due to the greatest reduction in resource usage and pollution). On the opposite end of the spectrum, a coverage goal would attempt to provide service to everyone in the city. This feat, however, means big sacrifices in frequency and span because we can only afford to purchase so many transit vehicles and they will be spread thinly throughout the city. This goal, of course, does not mean that people everywhere are using transit, just that it is available to them. This will probably lead to nearly empty buses in some areas and overly crowded buses in main corridors. It is a very inefficient use of resources. Despite the downfalls of a coverage goal, some level of coverage is still necessary to make sure people who cannot get around otherwise still have options.
Access to transit is important, but as I mentioned, 100% coverage isn't realistic. That means that where people live dictates their access to transit. Because of this the concerns of affordable housing and access to transportation are closely linked, but sometimes inversely so. Lower income households need affordable housing and are less likely to own a car, but transit access can also increase land values and ultimately the cost of rents in the best served areas. In the Twin Cities, for example, downtown Minneapolis is among the best served areas by transit, but the demand for affordable housing far outweighs the supply so most lower income households won't even have this as an option. I'm very interested in how all of this comes together and I will be looking at these types of situations when I start grad school in the fall.
When the average Joe is evaluating transit, too much emphasis is given to speed. The reason for this is because the average person is still largely a car owner, and the time required to make a trip is weighted heavily on the speed you can travel. However, it is different for transit. As previously mentioned, frequency is very important when it comes to trip duration. For example, express buses that take the highway can make quick trips, however, if the bus only comes once per hour, it may add up to an hour to your trip duration depending on when you arrive to the bus stop. A slower bus that makes all of the stops running every 10 minutes may have a shorter average trip duration depending on the nature of the riders.
There are many other factors affecting trip duration, but another major one is called the "class" of transit. The class of transit determines how much of an affect that traffic delay can have on trip duration. Class C transit shares lanes with traffic and is represented by typical buses. It is the most economical choice, but also could be the slowest due to traffic delays. Class B makes things better by giving the bus a dedicated lane. However, the class B transit still has to stop at intersections leading to some delay. Class C transit operates above or below the grade of traffic allowing it to completely avoid traffic delays. While Class C has the potential to be the fastest, it is also the most costly and may not always be practical to create new lines, especially for dense cities that are already highly developed.
Cities must also decide what their goal is for transit. The goals are seen on a spectrum from ridership (generating the most trips completed) to coverage (providing access to the most people). Rarely would a city's goal be purely ridership or coverage, there will usually be more weight on one over the other. Due to limited budgets and practicality, you can't have both. A ridership goal would be represented by providing high frequency, round the clock service in high density corridors with lots of active riders. It would take the most cars off of the road and generate the highest fare revenue, but it would exclude many people from service. This goal is favored by fiscal conservatives (due to efficient use of funds) and environmentalists (due to the greatest reduction in resource usage and pollution). On the opposite end of the spectrum, a coverage goal would attempt to provide service to everyone in the city. This feat, however, means big sacrifices in frequency and span because we can only afford to purchase so many transit vehicles and they will be spread thinly throughout the city. This goal, of course, does not mean that people everywhere are using transit, just that it is available to them. This will probably lead to nearly empty buses in some areas and overly crowded buses in main corridors. It is a very inefficient use of resources. Despite the downfalls of a coverage goal, some level of coverage is still necessary to make sure people who cannot get around otherwise still have options.
Access to transit is important, but as I mentioned, 100% coverage isn't realistic. That means that where people live dictates their access to transit. Because of this the concerns of affordable housing and access to transportation are closely linked, but sometimes inversely so. Lower income households need affordable housing and are less likely to own a car, but transit access can also increase land values and ultimately the cost of rents in the best served areas. In the Twin Cities, for example, downtown Minneapolis is among the best served areas by transit, but the demand for affordable housing far outweighs the supply so most lower income households won't even have this as an option. I'm very interested in how all of this comes together and I will be looking at these types of situations when I start grad school in the fall.
February 4, 2018
This is a textbook for the curious but uniformed transit enthusiast. It lays out the skeleton structure for all the things that go into transit planning, how decisions are made, what are the inevitable trade-offs and how those choices are made in varying contexts. The ample use of case studies to draw out various scenarios of how different decisions have played out is extremely useful in both understanding how the options turned out in practice and why they failed or succeeded.
According to the author it is crucial to understand the influence of urban geometry in determining how transit is planned and the limitations it will face. Every other planning decision will be conditioned by the nature of a city’s geometry. The urban composition of the area including spread and population density are other important factors. The decisions that need to be made, some of the important trade-offs he highlights include that between ridership and coverage, planning for peak hours only versus all day service, direct service versus enabling connections, determining fares and the manner of collection etc.
After urban geometry, another key point the author stresses on is the importance of frequency of a given transit technology. Enabling greater frequency is key to reducing wait time and uncertainty about the service and it is important to focus on it rather than on speed to reduce the total travel time for a transit user. Effective transit can be provide freedom to the user by enhancing her/his mobility. By carrying a greater number of people in a given space, it is also more sustainable than a car.
My favorite chapter was the one titled “five paths to confusion”. He does a good job of establishing the causes for confusion, how they emerge, and what the ways to deal with them are. Giving an understanding of why they emerge helps one understand how to avoid a certain pattern of thinking that seems easy but may be erroneous.
Given that he says the physical form is key to determining how transit is planned, I wonder how that will work in a city that is growing organically and in a somewhat ad hoc manner. How do we increase access of these services to informal settlements that sprout up illegally and whose population is more often than not invisible in government records. Being population likely to be most dependent on transit, how do we accommodate their fares and access? While the author stressed upon the importance of pedestrian infrastructure to enable and increase transit users, there was little to no mention about safety within transit itself or of personal safety of women on the streets, the absence of which may be a deterrent to using their transit. He mentions the role of politics in influencing decisions a little too briefly. I hope a later edition of the book includes insights from transit in cities of developing countries in greater detail as opposed to a sprinkle here and there.
According to the author it is crucial to understand the influence of urban geometry in determining how transit is planned and the limitations it will face. Every other planning decision will be conditioned by the nature of a city’s geometry. The urban composition of the area including spread and population density are other important factors. The decisions that need to be made, some of the important trade-offs he highlights include that between ridership and coverage, planning for peak hours only versus all day service, direct service versus enabling connections, determining fares and the manner of collection etc.
After urban geometry, another key point the author stresses on is the importance of frequency of a given transit technology. Enabling greater frequency is key to reducing wait time and uncertainty about the service and it is important to focus on it rather than on speed to reduce the total travel time for a transit user. Effective transit can be provide freedom to the user by enhancing her/his mobility. By carrying a greater number of people in a given space, it is also more sustainable than a car.
My favorite chapter was the one titled “five paths to confusion”. He does a good job of establishing the causes for confusion, how they emerge, and what the ways to deal with them are. Giving an understanding of why they emerge helps one understand how to avoid a certain pattern of thinking that seems easy but may be erroneous.
Given that he says the physical form is key to determining how transit is planned, I wonder how that will work in a city that is growing organically and in a somewhat ad hoc manner. How do we increase access of these services to informal settlements that sprout up illegally and whose population is more often than not invisible in government records. Being population likely to be most dependent on transit, how do we accommodate their fares and access? While the author stressed upon the importance of pedestrian infrastructure to enable and increase transit users, there was little to no mention about safety within transit itself or of personal safety of women on the streets, the absence of which may be a deterrent to using their transit. He mentions the role of politics in influencing decisions a little too briefly. I hope a later edition of the book includes insights from transit in cities of developing countries in greater detail as opposed to a sprinkle here and there.
Read
July 12, 2025This is quite a good foundation in basic "how public transport works".
My favourite part was p.50-51, about barriers and chokepoints. I'd always thought of bridges etc as enormous obstacles, but this book has pointed out what should have been obvious: they are opportunities for connections.
I also enjoyed the following little factoid (p.175):
"A technologically required connection is sometimes the ghost of a political one. When the Berlin wall came down in 1989, authorities quickly reconnected the rapid rail transit network, restoring lines that had existed before the 1961 division of the city. Bus lines, too, were easily recombined. But during the years of division, West Berlin had ripped out its streetcars and replaced them with buses, while East Germany had kept its streetcars in place. Streetcar lines that once crossed the path of the wall, and which were severed when the wall was built, are still severed today because part of the line is still a streetcar and part is a bus. Today, you can still experience the Berlin Wall as an obstacle if you're traveling on local services. What was once a politically required connection remains as a technologically required one." (This book was published in 2012.)
The point of this book is to explain the current thinking in public transport as it is and outline the rulebook, but the author is not bringing anything interesting to the table. His writing style is also very condescending.
He hates loops, which is fun to read about at length because I also hate loops.
My favourite part was p.50-51, about barriers and chokepoints. I'd always thought of bridges etc as enormous obstacles, but this book has pointed out what should have been obvious: they are opportunities for connections.
I also enjoyed the following little factoid (p.175):
"A technologically required connection is sometimes the ghost of a political one. When the Berlin wall came down in 1989, authorities quickly reconnected the rapid rail transit network, restoring lines that had existed before the 1961 division of the city. Bus lines, too, were easily recombined. But during the years of division, West Berlin had ripped out its streetcars and replaced them with buses, while East Germany had kept its streetcars in place. Streetcar lines that once crossed the path of the wall, and which were severed when the wall was built, are still severed today because part of the line is still a streetcar and part is a bus. Today, you can still experience the Berlin Wall as an obstacle if you're traveling on local services. What was once a politically required connection remains as a technologically required one." (This book was published in 2012.)
The point of this book is to explain the current thinking in public transport as it is and outline the rulebook, but the author is not bringing anything interesting to the table. His writing style is also very condescending.
He hates loops, which is fun to read about at length because I also hate loops.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 103 reviews