You gotta admit that ad is pretty funny, I had to hold back laughing in my cubicle.

by Funnyguy on Dec 3, 2008 9:00 am  

not everyone's mind has changed, though i think you're right that many people no longer have the "transit is for the poor" stigma.

i was home in michigan for thanksgiving, and more than a few family members, when told i would be taking the bus from the airport upon returning, had a look of fear come over their faces, and asked me if i'd be safe. they said "crazy people ride the bus".

i think this is part of the reason michigan's auto companies are in trouble. michigan doesn't have any good transit examples, so people in the state think that there's no way you can possibly live without a car. i think a lot of people can't understand why the rest of the country is thinking about getting out of their automobiles, because they can't imagine life any other way.

by IMGoph on Dec 3, 2008 9:06 am  

We have heard all this before. Here is a little factoid for you. The passenger boarding prediction made in the 1975 FEIS used to promote the building of the system was never achieved by the projected date.

For those that don't know that number, here it is "Projected Daily Volume 1990 2,857,924"

WMATA metrorail 09 1975 FEIS (112 MB PDF file) the figure appears on PDF page 61.

As we all know metrorail doesn't come anywhere near carrying that many people daily. It is not likely that metrorail will carry that many people daily 25 years from now.

With all the hoopla about the throngs of people that are expected to be in Washington on Inauguration Day, don't be surprised to find out that the boarding statistics for that day will be well under half for what was projected for regular day by 1990.

by Sand Box John on Dec 3, 2008 9:27 am  

I agree with the general sentiment, although perhaps I'm not quite so optimistic about it. Maybe it's because I live in a neighborhood where I still see people hop into cars every morning despite the fact that it is well serviced by bus lines (I take a bus to the Metro and I can get to downtown in less than 15 minutes, particularly now that Nextbus is working again). Maybe they're driving to Virginia or some other inaccessible location, but I suspect most are just driving down to K St. or Metro Center and just can't bring themselves to ride the bus. So rather than pay 75-80 bucks a month for a metro ride, they pay over 200 bucks a month for parking alone (plus gas, wear and tear, etc.).

It's a mindset. It seems particularly prevelant amongst my southern female neighbors, but it's certainly not exclusive to them. (and I'll add that my bus is often full of pretty young things, so it is possible for them).

by Reid on Dec 3, 2008 9:57 am  

Right. But weren't those numbers made up to persuade Congress to fund construction of the system?

My point wasn't about models and projections from years ago. It was about a shift in attitudes and outlook.

by Cavan on Dec 3, 2008 10:01 am  

This is partly off topic and I've probably missed it, but how do we go about accessing the apparently working again Nextbus information? The website of both Nextbus and WMATA provides no clues, nor does a Google search. Thanks.

by Chris on Dec 3, 2008 10:12 am  

"after decades of being seen as a last resort for those that can't afford an automobile, mass transit has lost its stigma."

I suspect you weren't around decades ago listening to people's attitudes toward transit, but I can tell you that for many metropolitan areas this simply isn't true. Using mass transit, including commuter rail, to commute was not seen as a last resort.

by Andy on Dec 3, 2008 10:28 am  

Sand Box John,

I think you're misreading that chart. It says that the total number of people using each station would be 2.8 million, but that double, and perhaps triple, counts people (the station you enter, the station you transfer, the station you leave). In the text of the report it says something very different:

"WMATA anticipates an integrated rail-bus system serving 350 million annual transit trips in 1990. Of these trips, 78.1 million are to be rail only, 78.3 million by bus only, and 195.6 involving a combination of rail and bus"

By those calculations, that would mean an average of 745 thousand rail trips a day. Still somewhat overoptimistic (in June 2008 the average was 658k per day [and 798k per weekday]). Nonetheless, it's not the wildeye overselling that you claim.

by Reid on Dec 3, 2008 10:35 am  

This is partly off topic and I've probably missed it, but how do we go about accessing the apparently working again Nextbus information?

Ahh, Chris my boy, you've been missing out. I hesitate to leave a link for fear that they still don't want too many people using the system, but here's how you get to it:

1. Go the the Next Bus website

2. Click on the "Simple Website" button on the left

3. Select any state (it doesn't matter which one, but I know that Arizona works)

4. Select a transit system (normally there's just one)

5. In the web address it should end with the name of the transit system you selected. Change that to WMATA.

6. Enjoy.

If you have an html browser on your smart phone (like Opera for Blackberry) you can get the info straight to your phone. It's kind of a pain to load each stop manually so I've bookmarked my most frequent stops.

It's frustrating because it still doesn't capture every bus for some reason, but it's still pretty reliable for the buses that it is predicting.

It still makes me livid that Metro is doing absolutely nothing to encourage this technology and that we're forced to sneak in to get this information.

by Reid on Dec 3, 2008 10:45 am  

Thank you Reid! I completely agree that this is the type of technology WMATA should be pushing to the masses - it's just too convenient.

by Chris on Dec 3, 2008 10:54 am  

Not sure if the stigma you are referring to is DC-based or something you brought with you from somewhere else.

People in DC have for as long as I've lived here, readily ridden the bus, and have not demonstrated much shyness about doing so, or shame in stepping on.

It's great that numbers are increasing.

by Jazzy on Dec 3, 2008 11:44 am  

As for the ridership numbers, don't forget that the EIS expected the adopted regional system (103 miles) to be completed by July 1981 (See EIS, page 34). So one must look at the numbers for 1990 not as a date which passed 18 years ago, but one which would pass 9 years after the completion of the ARS. That occurred in January 2001 with the Green Line extension to Branch Avenue. So the target year should actually be January 2010.

All the stations opened later than expected, so they've had less time to generate transit oriented densities and less time to build a ridership base. However, since some parts of the system were more delayed than others, the balance is not exactly 2010. Still, that's something that needs to be considered.

As for ridership, the EIS report states (on page 53) that annual trips on the system are expected to number 350 million on bus and rail by 1990. According to the National Transit Database, in 2007 WMATA carried 410 million unlinked trips on rail and bus. That is significantly more than was expected in 1990 with a complete ARS. In 1999, the earliest year with available data on NTD, WMATA carried 355 million annual unlinked trips, which means that they exceeded the numbers quoted in the EIS at least 9 years ago, and 2 years before the Adopted Regional System was complete.

by Matt' on Dec 3, 2008 12:12 pm  

Jazzy, I wrote this piece about nationwide "conventional wisdom." The Washington region has been ahead of the curve for decades now. Not surprisingly, anti-transit stigma has been far more prevailant in car-dependent places.

I didn't bring any bias with me. I grew up in a rural place where there was no transit. I knew nothing about it. My first experience with transit was hopping on the Green line in College Park in September 1999. That was also my first ride on any train of any kind on this side of the Atlantic.

I do remember that my mom's friend who lives in the favored quarter Baltimore suburbs was against the light rail being built because "it would bring crime from the city." I also remember my mom arguing with her about why she was wrong. That was my introduction to suburban sensibilities. However, I never really connected my mom's friend's foolish argument to suburban sensibilities until I got involved with advocating for transit.

by Cavan on Dec 3, 2008 2:15 pm  

Cavan: Your entire discussion seems to be based on your claim that nationwide "conventional wisdom" had associated a stigma with public transportation. I cannot see any real basis for this association. People have used public transportation to commute to work without stigma for many years. You seem to say DC, where I commuted to work by bus (the L2 bus on Connecticut Avenue) without stigma, along with many other residents of NW DC, long before there was a Metro, is an exception. But it certainly isn't the only exception, since commuters have been using public transportation in other US cities for years without stigma. In old movies, you have probably seen examples of commuter trains running to Connecticut.

This sounds simply as though you used a couple comments from random individuals in an effort to claim some sort of moral superiority to others who have used public transportation to commute for many years, and perhaps also owned cars to fill transportation needs for which public transportation was inadequate or inferior.

by Tom on Dec 3, 2008 3:23 pm  

I certainly think that in many parts of the country there is a transit stigma. Perhaps in the Northeast the stigma isn't as strong, but I grew up in Atlanta, and there are plenty of people there who say they wouldn't take transit for any reason.

And although I live in Northwest DC, just over 10 minutes on foot from the nearest Metro station and steps from 2 of Metro's frequent bus lines (the S Line and the 50s Line), almost every car parked on my block at night disappears before the morning rush is over. They don't come back until after working hours, so people are clearly driving.

Even in the Northeast, the share of transit commuters rarely rises over 10%, so there's certainly something keeping people off the train and the bus. Perhaps it's inconvenience, perhaps it's something else, and perhaps part of it is stigma.

by Matt' on Dec 3, 2008 3:31 pm  

I wouldn't take the fact that some people drive to work as evidence of a stigma associated with public transportation. Have you asked where they work and whether it is easily accessible by Metro? Have you determined whether using Metro would dramatically increase the amount of time spent commuting, which is likely to be the case if they would need to take the train and one or more buses? Have you asked whether they need to use their car on the job? Have you determined whether they need to drop their children off at school on the way to the office?

Like Cavan, you seem to assume you know what people are thinking and basing your "analysis" on those assumptions, although I can't tell whether you, like Cavan, are also assuming that you know what people thought long before you were even born.

I followed your link, and like some of the other frequent posters here, it seems that you are a first-year grad student, and that you has been in the DC area for about a year and a half. I think it takes a little more time and experience to understand how families make housing, work and transportation decisions.

by Tom on Dec 3, 2008 3:49 pm  

tom: others here (me included) are citing instances of where they've spoken with people who definitely have a negative opinion of transit. you are telling us that because you can cite certain people who don't share this stigma, we're making an incorrect assessment.

i'd argue that both of us are right and wrong at the same time. anyone can claim anecdotal evidence on any of this, and since none of us are trotting out official studies on the topic, then maybe it would be a good idea to not attack other people's anecdotal evidence, eh?

by IMGoph on Dec 3, 2008 3:54 pm  

Tom, please tone down the personal nature of your comments. Many of your comments are taking the tone of a cross-examination, where you are criticizing the person's own thought processes that led to their comment rather than their conclusions. And being new to DC is not a disqualification to having one's opinions be valued.

I welcome disagreement with the points people make. But if you want to disagree, please disagree with the substantive conclusions, not with people's method of reaching those conclusions, their background, or other personal issues. Attacking the way someone reached a position is much more personal, and leads to more negative experiences for everyone, than simply debating the end conclusions.

Perhaps you know more about certain topics than others. If so, please use this as an opportunity to teach and inform rather than attack. A professor doesn't say to a student, "Your thoughts about this piece of literature are totally wrong. You must have just skimmed this part. And you don't know enough about literature to write a thesis."

We're here to engage in a conversation about these issues. I don't necessarily know everything about a topic when I write; reading the comments helps me gather new information as well as my own research. That informs future posts. I ask you to please participate in the discussion here in that spirit, rather than trying to attack people personally for having the opinions they do.

by David Alpert on Dec 3, 2008 3:58 pm  

Tom,

You are quite correct. It would not be appropriate to merely look at the fact that people drive to assume a stigma exists. I have not done that. As a matter of fact, I haven't done any analysis. I just said that perhaps *part* of the reason that ridership is low is due to stigma.

In a prior comment, you seemed to suggest that because "commuters have been using public transportation in other US cities for years" that there was no stigma. I simply made the point that less than 10% of commuters take transit--ergo your point only accounts for less than 10% of the populace. The other 90% might be transit-phobic, or as I suggested perhaps transit is just inconvenient.

You mention commuter trains in Connecticut as one example of a lack of stigma. Commuter trains typically carry white collar workers and have an average income in the triple-digits. You'll note in the Post article that MARC and VRE's ridership gains are both more than Metro's. Perhaps that's because there's less stigma about riding with upper-middle class seatmates. It could also be because they're faster, make fewer stops, or serve parts of the region that are growing. I'm not making any conclusions, I'm just pointing out potential reasons for the growth.

I resent your ageism. You note that I'm a graduate student, but you also don't know how old I actually am. One of my classmates is in his 50s. Why would you assume that I'm young?

Incidentally, I'm a *second year* graduate student in *transportation planning*. I guess I need to update my profile.

And I was not making any comments suggesting that Washington was more or less stigmatic than the rest of the country. I pointed out Atlanta, where I spent 21 years. The Washington Post article points out Dallas, TX and Orange County, CA. These places are certainly different from Washington, both in transit ridership and urban form. And they're both in places where the car is king. So my tenure here in DC should not play a role in this discussion.

And just because I'm a student does not make me ignorant of issues. I've worked for two regional governments and planning departments in two local governments. If you have any doubts about my capacity to use logic, I would encourage you to continue to read my blog, which has, of late, received quite a few compliments on the anaylsis I did of the Blue Line Re-Route.

Understanding why people have continued to ride transit after gas prices subsided will not be easy. I have no data, so I can't do a regression, and I can't do much to convince you other than to ask what has changed since July.

And what has changed since July?

Transit ridership spiked this summer, with gas prices approaching $4. So people who--for a variety of reasons--had not previously taken transit. But since they started when driving became more expensive, it must not have been technically infeasible.

Perhaps they didn't ride before because:

1. Driving was cheaper

2. Driving was quicker

3. Parking was easy

4. There was little gridlock

5. They didn't want to try something new

6. Their job/home wasn't near transit

7. They had a stigma

Now that gas is cheaper, transit use on Metro is still up. So people who formerly didn't ride continue to do so because one of the 6 points on top has changed.

1. Driving is now cheaper, so that's not what has changed.

2. Perhaps congestion has increased, but I find that unlikely. According to FHWA, VMT has dropped, and with the economy in the dumps, fewer people are commuting, so that's probably not it.

3. Maybe parking downtown is pricier or less accessible, but I haven't heard anything about a mass of parking lots being torn down in the central city, so that's probably not it.

4. See #2.

5. They tried something new, and liked it. This might be it.

6. They or their job moved. This might be the case for a few, but by and large the structure of the region is the same as it was in July, so this is also probably not it.

7. As with #5, they realized their stigma was outdated, and stuck with transit. Maybe this is it.

In reality, it's probably a combination of these.

As for my study of how people make housing, work, and transportation decisions, that's a part of my life. As a transportation planning student and as an aspect of my former and future jobs, I explore these topics in great detail. It's a complex formula, unique to each individual in the process--and neither you nor I can prove that stigma is or is not a part of it without data, but for some people I'm pretty sure it plays a role. For others it does not.

The question at hand right now is whether that stigma affects fewer people than it did before July. And I think based on trends and the crowdedness of my Metro train every day, that perhaps at least 1 person in the Washington region is less afraid of the train. Personally, I believe that number to be greater than 1, but I can't prove it. Sorry.

by Matt' on Dec 3, 2008 4:24 pm  

The entire premise in Cavan's post and some of the other comments is that there had been a stigma associated with public transportation. Now it appears as though that premise is based on a couple examples of off-hand remarks that had been overheard. I simply called into question the basis for this premise, especially since that premise is contrary to what I have observed in northeastern cities over a long period of time, specifically the time frame that Cavan was discussing. This isn't my essay, so I didn't actually look for studies on the topic.

I do agree with your comment "I don't necessarily know everything about a topic when I write," and while you have been corrected in the comments at times, I certainly would appreciate a better effort on your park to research the topics more carefully before you post. I don't expect you to know "everything," but I do think you could do a much better job.

It also is useful for grad students to keep in mind that future professors and potential employers read their blog posts, and grad students might want to be more cautious about posting essays that demonstrate a willingness to draw strong conclusions based on anecdotal evidence and poor research habits. (And if a professor reviews an assignment that demonstrates that the student did not put any effort into researching the issue, I would expect him to make exactly the sort of comment you gave and either assign an "F" or send the student back to try harder, rather than give a private tutorial to a student who apparently isn't putting any effort into the assignment.)

And if you want to engage in a productive conversation, you might want to cut down on the labelling of anyone who opposes a developer's project as a NIMBY, or the assumption that any development must be beneficial because it increases density.

by Tom on Dec 3, 2008 4:26 pm  

I'm a native Washingtonian, but I've always had an aversion to the bus. I've loved the metro ever since my parents decided I was old enough to take it by myself (10ish). Maybe it's that I don't like all the stopping and starting in traffic.

It could also be that when I needed the bus most, in high school, it would usually be a half-hour late full and refusing to accept passengers.

Now, I metro whenever possible, but you'd never find me voluntarily on the bus.

by Zack on Dec 3, 2008 4:33 pm  

I don't label people as a "NIMBY." I made that mistake once in my first post on this blog and have learned from it. I found that it's a term that's not productive to a conversation. You'll find that's the first time I typed that word here since that first post.

I hope you can learn a similar lesson about framing your views in a way is constructive to a conversation.

by Cavan on Dec 3, 2008 4:44 pm  

Zack, I do agree that DC's buses can and should be improved. We should strive toward having frequency, cleanliness and reliability comparable to the Metro. A preference for Metrorail over Metrobus can be related to these factors rather than to "stigma" associated with the bus. If we can make it more pleasant and more reliable, I hope that you will consider using it "voluntarily."

And improving the bus system is critical to better serving low-income residents and providing them with access to better jobs. A better bus system would probably be more useful than the Purple line, since those low-income residents probably won't be able to afford the housing that will be available within walking distance of the eastern Purple line stops. Improved bus service can help residents in a much broader area.

I do know that for many routes, the bus can be unreliable or might not be accepting passengers when it reaches your stop, and it does become difficult for workers who rely on it for transportation. I have also found that Metro trains will arrive at my station with no room for additional passengers to board, but at least there is information available about the likely wait for the next train.

by Tom on Dec 3, 2008 4:47 pm  

Matt,

I can't argue with you on the numbers in the NE, because I don't know, but ridership of public transportation would be higher, I think, if it could be better - more reliable, more frequent. I think the drivers and operators are fine - more than fine, beacons of patience. The cleanliness too is something I have no problem with. Or much of one.

Main issue: increase frequency and reliability. And these other issues like bus lanes and holding or pushing a light would be huge bonuses.

As for those drivers in your neighborhood, that's not a lot of people, do you think?

Atlanta - nightmare. I barely like to fly into there! Alas, many of the fine cities in the SE are thus. But, there are definitely advocates and leaders working (usually against an all-powerful road lobby).

by Jazzy on Dec 3, 2008 6:05 pm  

Thank you Reid! I completely agree that this is the type of technology WMATA should be pushing to the masses - it's just too convenient.

Chris, the masses? Come on, you know better than to think the masses own smart phones and blackberries! Sorry to be so picky..

by Jazzy on Dec 3, 2008 6:14 pm  

We're talking about DC, where large portions of the masses are government employees, and a lot of them have blackberries. So many that Blackberry advertises government discounts on the Metro.

by David Alpert on Dec 3, 2008 6:17 pm  

@Jazzy: Hah, I don't even own one of those...I looked at the whole thing on my computer. Gotta say it's better than nothing!

by Chris on Dec 3, 2008 6:20 pm  

I love how Tom tries to threaten Matt that "future professors and potential employers read their blog posts". Classy. Calling out a student for being a student. Also classy!

I've worked with Matt on several projects so I know he's a smart dude. One project in particular at the Center for Smart Growth simply could not have happened without his valuable research and insight. He's also known as the transportation guru on campus to staff and faculty alike. So trust me when I say that you attacking him on this thread is amusing.

You seem to be picking on him because he is making an educated guess instead of conducting a rigorous survey amongst the drivers on his block. Take his observation for what it is...a well informed hunch. Besides, this isn't earth shattering news- Richard Layman's been blogging about the stigma of public transit in DC-MD-VA for years.

by Chris Loos on Dec 4, 2008 11:10 pm