Metro, Sound Transit, monorails and streetcars, all consuming billions of our tax dollars. Can mass transit succeed in Seattle when the results range from a dismal failure to a qualified success in cities around the world?
To find the answer, we have to look at mass transit and its competition.
The commute to work statistics from the U.S. Department of Transportation for metropolitan areas of more than one million people reveals that 76 percent of us drive alone to work, 12 percent car pool, 4.73 percent take public transportation and the balance walk, bike or work at home.
This study includes New York, Atlanta, Philadelphia and Boston, all of which have public transportation systems. What makes us think that we will be any more successful in getting people out of their cars? The answer is that we may not unless we don't do something different.
What does mass transit promise? To eliminate the worry and expense of parking, along with freedom from the stress of traffic and manic drivers. It would seem an ideal choice for moving around a metropolitan area.
So why isn't it more successful? The answer can be summed up in one word: automobiles.
We love our cars and we love the sense of freedom they grant, even when we're stuck in a traffic jam on the freeway or in downtown Seattle.
Behind the wheel, we are in control of our destiny. We can look for alternate routes and are not at the mercy of an impersonal bus driver, trolley engineer or unseen light rail or monorail conductor.
A recent trip to Rome and Athens, cities with respectable transit systems, revealed streets clogged with cars carrying one occupant. In Rome, a taxi driver complained that not only are people choosing to travel solo in their cars, but many families have two or three cars, and they are on the road simultaneously.
Other commuters choose to take a taxi instead of being stuffed in a mass transit vehicle that may leave them blocks from their destination. A taxi driver in Athens said there are 15,000 taxis in the city. I suspect a similar number prowl the streets of Rome.
Can mass transit compete successfully with the privately owned automobile? The answer is maybe - and that "maybe" requires some out-of-the-box thinking by city officials.
Buses offer a flexible alternative that can change routes to fit the ever-changing demographics of the city and surrounding environs. Fixed rail is just that - fixed - but probably works for longer distances. So, why don't more of us ride the bus? Well, look at the experience.
You walk to a bus stop somewhere, and not necessarily near your starting point. Exercise is good but in the winter, walking outside sucks.
You determine which bus to catch, and the timing of the schedule. You need exact change, and forfeit money if you don't have it. You can buy a pass to avoid that hurdle.
Once on the bus, you need a seat. If it's rush hour you may be out of luck. Ah, there's a seat, but who wants to sit with a stranger? It's a cultural thing.
Okay, you have your seat; now you can relax, assuming there isn't someone talking to themselves near you, exploring their orifices or otherwise engaging in other forms of disruptive behavior.
You jostle along (buses are not known for their Mercedes-smooth rides, although they've improved) until you get close to your stop. You try to pull the cord at just the right point.
If you don't, you're off the bus a block before, or after, your stop. Then, you push your way through the throng of bodies to the exit, sighing with relief as you set down on terra firma.
Can we improve that experience? Let's begin with smaller buses, the size of the hotel shuttles to the airport. Many large buses run empty, or nearly empty, much of the time.
Add kiosks around the city, in neighborhoods and at major destinations like shopping malls. Passengers can use cash, a debit card or a credit card to buy a ticket.
A touch screen lets you enter your destination from a menu that includes major points of interest. The system knows which kiosk you're using, and a computer collects and combines rider input from nearby kiosks, grouping them according to the destination and routing. The bus picks up people based on their end point. The small buses run on flexible routes that interface with light rail, monorail, etc.
The buses run frequently and the kiosk provides the estimated time the bus will reach you. The driver announces what the next stop is based on the passenger's input. All this is possible with today's technology, including GPS systems and computers.
This won't replace the automobile, but it offers a more flexible approach - something between today's bus system and a taxi, picking up and delivering passengers quickly and closer to their end points.
Riding the bus doesn't have to be slow, impersonal and inconvenient.
We will still use our car to run to the market, go out to dinner, etc., but for work, a sporting or entertainment event, maybe we would use the transit if it were quick, flexible and comfortable.
Realistically, the key to solving our traffic problems, like most issues, lies in being innovative, a little daring and in our ability to overcome an entrenched bureaucracy.
Mike Davis is a freelance writer living in Magnolia. You can send him an email at the addresss mageditor@nwlink.com.[[In-content Ad]]
