« children on transit: a personal note | Main | new media and transit complaints »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I don't mean to sound uncaring, but... this IS the trade-off for choosing a low-density lifestyle.


I'd be careful there, Rhywun... when discussing the working poor, often times they have little choice where they live.

And in cities like Seattle (and Portland), the urban core is dominated by the economically well-off, other than a core population of homeless which congregate around the social services located downtown. Most of Portland's poor live east of 82nd or south of Woodstock/Foster, for instance--real estate closer to downtown (and with more convenient transit) is generally more expensive.

W. K. Lis

While housing maybe cheaper in the sprawling suburbs, transportation costs are higher because one is almost required to use a motor vehicle of some kind to get around. If one does an accurate budget, they will see the actual costs of living in suburbs is quite high. Especially, when more than one vehicle is evolved. Even with only one vehicle in the home, they may end up chauffeuring other members of the family and adding to the cost each time.

Taking away Sunday/Holiday service will add even more costs for them. Instead of reducing service, they should be adding service. At the same time, zoning should be changed to allow for higher density and mixed uses, which is needed to make public transit more efficient.

Adam Parast

I think it it s bit more complicated. In my view CT's self image is that of an agency that gets people to and from work in Seattle. This self image is partially acute because Everett Transit essentially runs most of the local service in the city, but essentially the county. The rest of the count is very rural while areas in Everett, mostly to the south, are much more urban/suburban. I think that is a pretty major caveat.

Also politically this paid off. It looks like CT will be be give the authority to increase car tab taxes along with Pierce Transit, precisely because they are in such dire straits.

Jeffrey Bridgman

It'd be interesting to see ridership statistics...

I assume they are choosing to cut service on Sunday because there it has the least ridership. But it sounds like you are implying that lots of riders (choice riders, that is...which are probably the majority in a suburban system) will lose mobility. Does the data back up their decision?

I hope they aren't doing something like cutting service on Sunday because it makes more "sense" when it turns out that Thursday has the lowest ridership...hehehe

Adam Parast

@ Jeffrey

They decided to do this because they got the most bang for their buck because they are able to completely shut down the agency on Sunday. This way they aren't just cutting service hours, they are also cutting overhead like dispatchers and O&M facility costs.

The comments to this entry are closed.

the firm

Jarrett is now in ...

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...