Matt Welch, an L.A. writer and erstwhile advocate for mass transit, finally actually tried to commute by train and discovered that it wasn't an acceptable option: "Why nobody, but nobody will ever take mass transit as long as they have a choice." Something to keep in mind before we make an irreversible decision to spend $157 billion on the fantasy that fixed rail will get a significant number of people "out of their cars".
And this:
People who can take their cars will take their cars, particularly if they're in a hurry or need to make multiple stops. As Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa explained his non-transit commuting to The Times in November 2006, "I'd like to do more, but my problem is I have to go all over the city. It's very tough because of my schedule." Sure. And it turns out many of us have hectic schedules as well.Sounds familiar. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 04, 2007 01:57 PM | Email This
Transit: "A way for poorer people to get around until they become rich enough to buy a car."
Posted by: Steve on October 4, 2007 02:34 PMTotally amazing pick-up on the story, Stefan. I wonder if any of the local writers will try the same thing in Seattle.
Buses appear to be a better solution at this point. And more flexible.
Posted by: swatter on October 4, 2007 02:34 PMThe bottom line: ultimately consumers, not planners, decide how they want to act and commute. Just because a new housing development is built near a train station doesn't mean the people will want to take the train on a regular basis. They may just like the development, or there may be property tax breaks.
A few key paragraphs:
>>>The region's transit system is limited, experts say, because it was built on two assumptions that have since proved untrue: that most traffic was generated by commuting trips and that most people worked downtown.
also
>>>Residents were more likely to use transit only if it took less time than driving, if they could walk to their destinations from the transit stop when they arrived, if they had flexible work hours and if they had limited access to a car.
Now we'll have light rail to take us to - downtown Seattle. The easiest place to get to now. Except with light rail, there are no Park & Ride lots. So I guess I'll keep that annual bus ride.
And I still can't get from Renton to Eastgate. Or Woodinville.
Posted by: Seabecker on October 4, 2007 03:05 PMCars are transit.
Say it again.
Cars, and the public roads, and the parking lots, and the garages constitute a transit system.
It is a multi-point, asynchronous, personal/public transit system.
Cars the most flexible, powerful, way for a community to travel during the day and night with quickness, precision to destination, carrying capacity (trunk).
You may not like cars (I ride my bike quite a bit and also drive)...but they are the most workable "transit" system for right now.
You can't go backwards to a linear system like Light Rail.
So, I ask you is the $12 per month for the additional light rail that big of issue to not fix the roads around here? Do you think there is a chance the RTID package can come back on its own at a future point (and get approved)? I think that is the real decision facing voters. Are you willing to risk not getting the chokepoints fixed at this point and hope the legislature or voters come through with different funding in the future to turn down the additional $12 per month in sales tax you would spend, which is probably high, since most of us probably don't spend $2000 a month on sales tax related items, which would be about 40% of a months budget for a family making $60K, after taxes).
Just questioning?????
Posted by: tc on October 4, 2007 03:44 PMOne thin line on an urban map is not a feasible route for more than a tiny fraction of the tangled spiderweb of the sum of everyone's daily commutes;
Anyone with normal errands between home and work will find light rail unfeasible for connecting those dots;
Anyone with luggage or items exceeding one briefcase or one bag of groceries will find said impediments deal-killers for riding light rail;
"Choice" must be extended beyond an individual's reproductive organs to recognize the routing and scheduling of one's daily travels. That means the automobile, and citizens of democracies should not be punished for thinking so.
-----
Yet the grinning idiots who provide media cheerleading for light rail each owns a gaping void in the noggin into which such considerations are shoveled to oblivion. Neither they nor the nest-feathering politicians and planners who would force light rail on the rest of us have ever addressed these subjects. Such comments are selectively omitted from notice and public coverage.
Matt Welch is dead on, but it'll take more than his common sense to stop the greedy transit-promoters in their mad rush to light-rail hell.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on October 4, 2007 03:59 PMSince the end of June I have experimented with the ST Express buses for trips to Sumner and Tacoma. Living in Seattle, vehicle travel to either destination averages 45 minutes, and can run to 90 depending on an occasional traffic problem. Taking the Express busses involves a minimum of 120, more closely averaging 150 minutes each way.
Now let's examine the new Sounder schedule. The trip embarks in the 2800 block of Western Avenue and concludes in the 1000 block of Tacoma's Center Street.
Here are the schedules:
Itinerary #1 Home to King Street Station
Walk 0.2 mile NE from 2800 WESTERN AVE to
Depart 2nd Ave & Broad St At 05:42 AM On Route MT 131 Highline Community College
Arrive 2nd Ave Ext S & S Jackson St At 05:51 AM Walk 0.1 mile S to KING STREET STATION
Depart KING STREET STATION At 06:10 AM On SOUNDER to Tacoma
Arrive TACOMA STATION At 07:10 AM
Itinerary #2 Tacoma Dome Station to Client
Depart Tacoma Dome Station - Zone D At 07:15 AM On Route PT 11 PT Defiance
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone E At 07:22 AM Walk 0.1 mile N to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone G At 07:32 AM On Route PT 45 Yakima Ave
Arrive S Center St & S J St At 07:43 AM
OR
Itinerary #2 Tacoma Dome Station to Client
Depart Tacoma Dome Station - Zone D At 07:23 AM On Route PT 1 Pac/6th Ave - Dwtn/TCC via TDS
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone G At 07:30 AM Transfer to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone G At 07:42 AM On Route PT 3 Lakewood
Arrive S Center St & S J St At 07:52 AM
Tacoma / Seattle
Itinerary #1 Client to Tacoma Dome Station
Depart S Center St & J St At 03:51 PM On Route PT 3 Downtown Tacoma
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone B At 04:05 PM Walk 0.1 mile S to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone C At 04:11 PM On Route PT 42 McKinley Ave
Arrive Puyallup Ave & E D St At 04:18 PM
OR
Itinerary #2 Client to Tacoma Dome Station
Depart S Center St & J St At 03:51 PM On Route PT 3 Downtown Tacoma
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone B At 04:05 PM Walk 0.1 mile S to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone D At 04:16 PM On Route ST 594 Seattle - Tacoma
Arrive Tacoma Dome Station - Zone B At 04:26 PM
Tacoma Dome Station to Seattle
Sounder 1510 4:45 p.m. 4:57 p.m. 5:02 p.m. 5:11 p.m. 5:19 p.m. 5:26 p.m. 5:45 p.m.
Itinerary #1 King Street Station to Home
Walk 0.1 mile N from KING STREET STATION to
Depart S Jackson St & 5th Ave S At 05:56 PM On Route MT 1 Kinnear
Arrive 1st Ave & Broad St At 06:14 PM
Walk 0.1 mile S to 2800 WESTERN AVE
Let's look at the numbers:
North-to-south travel time, excluding walking time: 122 minutes / 16.4%
Onsite client time: 479 minutes / 64.4%
South-to-north travel time, excluding walking time: 143 minutes / 19.2%
Total travel minutes 265 minutes / 35.6%
Total minutes 744 minutes / 35.6% travel / 64.4 % client
Now let's look at it from a productivity point of view:
Onsite w/client, 479 minutes 7.98 hours
Subtracting 1 hour lunch 6.98 hours
Total time commitment, 744 minutes 12.4 hours
Billable time w/client 56.3%
Non-billable travel time 43.7%
Now let's look at it with a liberal 60 minutes to and from travel time:
North-to-south travel time, excluding walking time: 60 minutes / 9.0%
Onsite client time: 540 minutes / 82.0%
South-to-north travel time, excluding walking time: 60 minutes / 9.0%
Total travel minutes 120 minutes / 18.0%
Total minutes 660 minutes / 18.0% travel / 82.0% client
And from a productivity point of view:
Onsite w/client, 540 minutes 9.00 hours
Subtracting 1 hour lunch 8.00 hours
Total time commitment, 660 minutes 11.0 hours
Billable time w/client 72.7%
Non-billable travel time 27.3%
By driving, I can leave later, spend more time with the client, and be home earlier. Plus, I can pick my arrival and departure time, and make side trips shopping, if desired.
Clearly, I'd be using mass transit to have less billable time available to pay the increased taxes while giving up more of my family time.
Which brings me to wonder, "Who is mass transit designed to accommodate?"
#3 above has it correct: "A way for poorer people to get around until they become rich enough to buy a car." - just like in China today, notably after the SARS outbreak in 2003 - people bailed out of the busses and subway to protect themselves, and they bought cars in record numbers as a result.
Posted by: TedS on October 4, 2007 04:13 PMAnd another latte for the new library and another latte for the new fire truck and another latter for new sewer, etc. etc.
And Bruce, how can you raise any question when you can't tell whether the head of the fighting forces in Iraq is a traitor or not?
Posted by: swatter on October 4, 2007 04:13 PMFirst that $12 per month is an ADDITIONAL $144/year over and above all that is being paid out now, PLUS another increase in my ninety dollar "$30 tabs".
Secondly, what am I risking? I was already told that everything is going to crumble and nothing wil get fixed unless I approved the gas tax increase last year. Guess what? It didn't matter. 520 is still gonna sink, the viaduct is gonna crash, and they still won't add lanes on 405 between 167 and I90. They'll find another excuse.
And what happened to all those extra buses they were supposed to add with last year's increase? As I continuously say, I still can't get from Renton to Bellevue Community College / Eastgate. If your destination is something other than downtown Seattle, good luck.
We need additional road capacity. Period. For cars and for buses. Instead we are piddling our money on projects that won't help congestion a bit. The least bang for the most buck is where we're at today. And as pointed out in an earlier comment, cars are transit.
So, my risk by voting against Prop 1 is minimal. Cars won't get relief either way. But if it fails, maybe there is hope that someone will wake up and propose something that makes sense.
Posted by: Seabecker on October 4, 2007 04:37 PMThis is just another example of "planner-itis"...where a group of pinheads who can't make it in the real world sit around and dream up ways to manipulate the public.
If sooooo many folks want this pipedream, where are all the voluntary contributions Bruce??
The only folks that will make out on this are:
Bureaucrats---it takes a shitload of 'em!
Contractors
Suppliers
Engineers
The writers must be from up here.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 4, 2007 05:41 PMMost supporters have visions of cute little trains rolling along with thousands of happy commuters inside. The truth is, if you want to piss away 2 - 3 hours of your day getting to and from work in cramped SRO conditions, then by all means vote of lightrail. If you are the other 98% of the sane people in this region, wake up, see the lies your politicians are feeding you and send this thing to its death.
Posted by: RJK on October 4, 2007 08:33 PMBush, Petraeus, et al betrayed us, but I wouldn't call them traitors. I would reserve that term for people who feign outrage over a political advertisement in an attempt to distract us from the horrible damage that this war has done to our nation.
Posted by: Bruce on October 4, 2007 11:53 PMMaybe we can invite the Muslims/Al Qaeda to ride the ST and blow it up and we'll be rid of the fringe left (read: middle left and further to port) and the Ahmadawhackjob types. j/k
Kill Al Qaeda.
Kill Light Rail.
Both are Un-American. No j/k!
Seabecker,
Note, under the Vote No scenario your additional Car Tabs tax (MVET) will continue to pay for Light Rail development and other ST projects. A Yes vote shifts the MVET to pay for RTID projects, which goes to roads and fixing road chokepoints. ST will then play smoke and mirrors with the sales tax portion and somehow pay for all their proposed projects,
In looking at all this, it is just a mess. I know the vote couldn't just be for the MVET part to pay for RTID projects because ST currently is assigned MVET dollars. It sure has made the decision on Yes/No messy. I guess that is why you have such strange bedfellows, like Sierra Club against Light Rail.
Posted by: tc on October 5, 2007 02:07 PMIf $100 goes out of my pocket, I don't really care if it is via a car tab tax, a sales tax, a use tax/toll, a property tax, or an armed robbery. The important thing, and only thing that matters, is that $100 went out of my pocket.