Category Archives: car culture

One thing I actually miss about driving

Today I rented a Flexcar (for the first time since January) and brought along two of my favorite CDs for the ride. I have to say, there’s nothing like rollin’ through the streets of your city on a sunny(ish) afternoon, windows down, blasting Erykah Badu’s “Cleva” as loud as it will go.

Somehow, the Schmipod (which has its uses but which I rarely listen to on the bus, as it distracts me from reading and prevents me from eavesdropping) doesn’t compare.

Fellow car-free types: What do you miss about driving?

Hands on the wheel, eyes on the road (please!)

A few days ago, my coworkers had an e-mail discussion about the new “no texting while driving” law that will take effect in 2008.

Here’s an example of the comments:

“The law makes sense, but I don’t know how I’m going to live without texting in the car.”

As a frequent pedestrian (and thus, a frequent victim of distracted drivers), I have to admit I was a little thrown–not really because people actually do this (OK, a little because people actually do this) but because they freely admit to it, as if it’s as common as driving five mph over the speed limit.

On the way home that evening, I decided to see for myself how common it was. As my bus zoomed by all the cars stuck in traffic, I peered inside at their drivers. Out of the dozens of drivers I spied on, I saw only three sending text messages–fewer than the earlier conversation had led me to fear. Then again, that was probably because most of them (at least 80%) were busy talking on their cell phones. One guy was using a laptop (with both hands), and another woman was reading a book.

Folks who want to use their commute time to get stuff done: It might be best to choose a form of transportation that allows your hands (and eyes) to remain free. I can think of at least one that fits the bill…

Even car dealers want better transit

Sound Transit Andrew spotted this at 80th & Lake City Way:

For some help understanding what, in fact, is up with that, check out History Link’s Seattle Transportation Timeline.

Busing, bumpers, buttons, backpacks, and beliefs

Waiting in line to board my bus home this evening, I stood behind a guy with a backpack covered in buttons. Some examples of the messages:

“Consume less. Share more.”
“Be nice to mice: Don’t test on them.”
“I’m not a lesbian, but I hate men.”

The first two were pretty straightforward. I have no idea what the third was supposed to mean, but it kept my mind occupied until it was my turn to get on. Which led me to this conclusion: Backpack buttons are a bus rider’s equivalent to bumper stickers.

Bumper stickers, you see, serve two primary purposes:

1) To entertain and distract bored drivers who are stuck in traffic.
2) To provide a vehicle (pardon the pun) for car owners to share their beliefs (and biases) with strangers.

Backpack buttons serve similar purposes for transit riders. They entertain and distract bored riders (of which, of course, there are very few) who are stuck waiting at stops, and they allow us to use our “portable bumpers” to declare our positions to anyone who happens to get stuck behind us. As if the bus chick bag didn’t already have enough uses.

While we’re on the subject of bumper stickers…

Heidi from Redmond sent me this a couple of weeks back:

The Concourse of Hypocrisy: A cavalcade of gas-guzzling contemporary automobiles with hypocritical bumper stickers

My favorite example from the site:

Calling folks out like this isn’t usually my flavor (it seems less than constructive), but the point is valid. I know I’ve made note of similarly baffling righteousness a time (or fifty).

How to make a great place even greater

Looks like it’s time for some major renovations at the Market:

City politicians hope to ask voters in November 2008 to approve a tax increase for the Market and the Seattle Center. City officials don’t yet have an estimate for the project.

“It’s recognized nationally and internationally as the heart and soul of the city,” Mayor Greg Nickels said Monday. “So it’s time, I think, for another generation to renew that commitment, renovate the physical (infrastructure) that keeps it running and put a new coat of paint on it.”

[…]

The Market also is exploring ways to ease crowding, she said — for example, whether it’s possible to add a sidewalk along the eastern edge of the Market arcade.

Here’s an “option to ease crowding”:

Remove (or severely limit) automobile traffic! The sidewalks along Pike Place are extremely narrow and usually blocked by tourists (not that there’s anything wrong with that) or street performers. I’m sure there are arguments for allowing commercial vehicles on that street, but I can’t think of a single good reason to allow through traffic. Imagine: No of weaving between parked cars or dodging traffic to get to those delectable black Russians at Three Sisters–just a leisurely stroll on a cobblestone street reserved for pedestrians.

I know I said I didn’t like writing about the weather

But if this ain’t a blatant example of carism…

Carism in winter

Whycome they put dirt down for the cars but not for the pedestrians? A girl could mess up her fly winter coat (not to mention her tailbone) just tryna get on the 27.

Seriously, though, what’s the deal, here?

Carism in winter, part II

Yesler is a major street. Did the city drop the ball, or is it the responsibility of residences and businesses to clear their own sections of the sidewalk?

Carrots and sticks, part III

Let’s get the stick out of the way first. From our friend Mr. Singer:

Stick

Guess those muscle cars Detroit is so fond of haven’t been doing the trick.

And now, the good stuff:

From a recent American Public Transportation Association study:

• Public transportation usage reduces U.S. gasoline consumption by 1.4 billion gallons each year – or the equivalent of 108 million cars filling up, almost 300,000 each day. These savings result from the efficiency of carrying multiple passengers in each vehicle; the reduction in traffic congestion from fewer automobiles on the roads; and the varied sources of energy for public transportation.

• Households that are likely to use public transportation on a given day save over $6,200 every year, compared to a household with no access to public transportation service. These households have two workers, one car and are within three-quarters of a mile of public transportation.

For those of you who aren’t ready to go cold turkey: This study proves you don’t have to give up driving altogether to make a difference–to the world and your own bank account.

For the details, check out APTA’s full report.

How not to impress a bus chick, part III

To all the chivalrous gentlemen who, during the weeks and months of 2007–on rainy nights and sunny days and foggy mornings–will slow their Toyotas and Volkswagens and Chevies and Benzes and peer through tinted or mud splattered windows–or perhaps partially opened doors–to ask:

No! (Thank you.) I don’t need a ride.

How GM made this chick a bus chick

Last night I finally watched Taken for a Ride,–only 10 years after its 1996 release. The film is only available on VHS, and even then, copies are scarce (I got mine from the library), but if you haven’t seen it yet, you should make the effort.

Taken for a Ride is a documentary about how General Motors, through the holding company National City Lines, purchased streetcar and trolley systems in 40 American cities (not sure if Seattle was one of them, but I do know we used to have streetcars) and purposely altered operations to make them less efficient and useful. They then destroyed the existing streetcar infrastructure, burned or sold the trolleys, and replaced the systems with GM buses.

Beyond simply making cities dependent on vehicles that the company made, the intent behind this move (or so the film asserts) was to provide people with a less desirable public transportation option (buses are noisy, polluting, and dependent on traffic), so more people would choose to travel by car. It also had the added benefit of making the newly track-free streets completely available to motorized traffic.

GM was part of the extremely powerful highway lobby, the force behind the interstate highway system we know today. Apparently, freeways began to appear in cities in the late 50’s/early 60’s, and apparently, there was strong citizen opposition to them. The filmmakers interviewed community activists who said that when freeways came to their cities, homes, libraries, and churches were demolished, and neighborhoods were bisected.

I remember an incidental mention of resistance to I-5 in my Quintard Taylor book about the history of the Central District, and when I was a kid, my dad would tell stories about what Seattle was like before there was an I-5. I listened politely, but in my mind, it was just talk, no different from my grandma’s stories of penny candy and eggs straight from the chicken. Even now, as much as I support the idea of transit-dependent, car-free communities, I simply cannot conceive of an American city that does not have freeways.

Which reminds me (and then I promise I’m done): My favorite part of the film was the old footage of highway lobby TV ads. The first one showed 1950’s-style “good American” types sitting in their cars, frustrated by noisy, gridlocked traffic. The voice-over says something like, “It’s your country.” [um, actually…] “Ask for better highways and more parking space.” The second one was almost as good. I can’t exactly remember the action–I think it showed someone driving on a beautiful, coastal highway–but that’s not important. The important thing was the text that flashed across the screen: Mobility: the Fifth Freedom.

“What’s good for GM…“