Comments

1
It's the dramatically increased percentage of income dedicated to cost of home and transportation that is pushing the change.
2
I'm surprised that the figures aren't quite a bit more, considering how long the recession has lasted.
3
Based on when we started, we should now have elevated LINK trains all the way out to the suburbs.

We don't.

4
But then where would Ford/Shell/GM/Exxon send their campaign contributions?

And really, the Republicans bread and butter has never been and will never be cities. They will always have a supply of middle-of-nowhere low information voters to propel them back into power, especially with the gerrymandering and electoral college.
5
Statistically speaking, I suspect most population-based stix increase in most calendar years.

As for Vehicle Miles Traveled, here's a pretty picture. Somebody jog my memory ... when did that Great Recession start?

I'll admit to being surprised there were more transit riders in the mid-1950s than there are now, with roughly half today's population and the baby boom in full swing.
6
#5

That plus infill.

It used to be that you had to drive to The City to get a job.

Now there are good jobs all over the region.

But it's only recently that good regional transit has been implemented.

Also the amenities like shops and restaurants in the suburbs have improved immensely so you don't always have to go to a downtown to get the good stuff. Sometimes it's right there at Redmond Towne Center or Kent Station.
7
As a person who has spent my entire life in the suburbs, I look forward to getting an apartment in or near downtown along good mass transit service. My current living arrangements make owning a car a necessity, and everything requiring a 10 minute drive gets old rapidly.
8
I think you mean to say "everyone except old white folks who vote Red Whig Party" are getting sick of cars & love transit, bikes, & walking.
9
The Census reports that in 2009 105 million workers drove to work alone and about 7 million commuted by public transportation. That alone would translate into 52 billion auto trips versus 3.5 billion public transportation trips.

If it scales (for population increase and percentage of non-work trips) we'd be comparing 10 billion plus public transportation trips to 150 billion automobile trips. Which hardly spells the end of the automobile hegemony.

I'd love to see more public transportation, but we have to figure out how to make substantial gains versus solo vehicles.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-…
10
What if I drive AND/OR use public transportation, depending on what I or my spouse are doing on a given day?

THIS DICHOTOMY IS TEARING ME APART INSIDE
11
In the 1950s, lower-middle class -- or middle class -- families often only had one car.

Mom was stuck at home, or Dad carpooled or took public transportation, and the kids were ferried by school buses.
12
@9: Your point is a good one. Those of us who ride transit are still a vast minority when you take the country as a whole, even in most urban areas. The number of cities with anything approaching a comprehensive, convenient transit system is shockingly small.
13
Looks like a good time to raise transit fares then.
14
Can this stop being a cars OR transit thing? Cars are great, you just don't have to use them all the time.
15
@6 Perhaps, but most of the IT at Kent Station is of the "sh" prefixed variety.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.