Rochesterians are spending less time driving and more time on bikes and buses, says a recent report from the US Public Interest Research Group. “Transportation in Transition” analyzed the country’s 100 largest urban areas to measure shifts in how people get around.
Rich Perrin, executive director of the Genesee Transportation Council, says that people are increasingly interested in biking and public transportation. If those options are feasible, he says, people will use them. And local transportation planners are emphasizing projects to make those options easier, he says.
“Really, what we’re trying to do is adjust our systems as people’s behaviors change,” says William Carpenter, CEO of the Rochester Genesee Regional Transportation Authority.
Transit ridership saw the biggest shift locally; Rochester’s increase was the 13th largest nationwide, the report says. The RGRTA recorded 13.1 million trips in 2005 and 17.2 million in 2010, a 31.6 percent increase, the report says.
Carpenter says that a growing downtown population has boosted ridership. And the $1 fare plays a role, too, he says.
RGRTA’s routes are frequently re-evaluated and reconfigured, Carpenter says. In some cases, RGRTA works with large employers or institutions to develop and fund routes, he says, and to encourage employees to use the bus system.
Other shifts detailed in the report aren’t as dramatic. For example, the Rochester area saw a .4 percent increase in the number of people who bike to work, which gave the city the eighth-largest increase nationwide, the report says.
And Rochester drivers are logging fewer miles; they drove 400 million fewer miles in 2011 than in 2006, the report says. Rochester saw a 7.5 percent decrease in vehicle miles traveled per capita over that time period, which puts the city in 21st place nationwide. The 7.5 percent figure matches the national average.
The report takes into account the population of an area so that shifts in transportation choices are true shifts and not the result of population growth.
This article appears in Jan 1-7, 2014.
Even if you personally don’t like to walk or bike through Rochester’s streets or take public transit, news that “Rochesterians are spending less time driving and more time on bikes and buses” should be welcome. Shifting to a more humane transportation system that doesn’t cost a zillion dollars for its infrastructure means a healthier and wealthier community.
More folks walking and bicycling and taking public transportation can have a dramatic effect on lowering our greenhouse gas emissions and our blood pressure. Imagine a Rochester where those who wish to (and these numbers will grow as our streets and sidewalks become more accommodating to active transportation) can move about our community without the relentless drive of vehicular traffic.
Our out-going mayor has begun an incredible legacy of moving Rochester towards a healthy active transportation system (Really check out: Rochester’s ROC the Bike!) and our in-coming mayor has a great opportunity to continue that move towards a resilient community in a warming climate, a community that can provide jobs and transportation options for those not especially keen on our present transportation system that is expensive to maintain, expensive to use, expensive on our health, and especially grating on our nerves.
Take a deep breath and imagine a community devoted to people, not cars.
RGRTA’s numbers are misleading. The reason for the significant jump in ridership is due to a long-term contract with Rochester City Schools to transport students who previously got to/from school with a private yellow school bus company. Also factor in the contracts with area colleges for local transportation that was once provided by private, college and/or student government provided transportation. The only thing changing here is the provider of transportation, and not travel habits.
Take away the school and college kids and the actual increase in discretionary ridership (i.e., those who opt to leave their car home and choose to take public transit) is actually quite insignificant. Public transportation will always be primary the carriage of choice for those who do not have the means to afford or acquire other sources of transportation due to financial hardship, criminal sanction (i.e., loss of driving privileges due to DWI), and/or physical disability.
Sure, these numbers are good for RGRTA’s public relations and bottom line who has increased revenue from sources other than state transit operating assistance dollars – but let’s not go to lengths to say travel habits have voluntarily changed either. The numbers who voluntarily take the bus or bike to work is statistically insignificant.
Well – 400 million fewer miles of driving? Curious as to where they came up with that number. My guess is the major contributor is likely higher unemployment numbers during the study period from 2006-2011 (people who don’t work tend to drive fewer miles – as our daily commute makes up the bulk of time we spend behind the wheel). In fact, area unemployment climbed from ~4.5% to 8.25% from 2006 to 2011 – so the decrease in miles driven makes sense because people aren’t going to drive to/from their former place of employment.
Additionally, during that time, it’s likely that people started driving less by combining trips to the store to save on increased fuel costs – which rose from about $2.50/gal to $4.00/gal from 2006 to 2011. I’d say yes, that’s a travel habit change – but mainly out of economic necessity to try and stretch what less disposable income they have.
Again, travel choices aren’t being dictated by “doing the right thing” for the environment – but out of fiscal necessity. Fewer people are working and the cost of fuel is increasing.
Unfortunately, RGRTA and GTC are attempting to capitalize on these numbers to justify their own existence and funding by saying “hey – more people are choosing to ride the bus” (they’re not – the bus they’ve been taking all along is now being provided by someone), or “hey – more people are taking their bikes”. Again – where do these numbers come from? Very few people are taking their bike to work to begin with, especially in February. So this .4% increase probably means 10 more people are now biking to work increasing the very small pool of a few hundred existing bike commuters (if that) – most of which are doing it because they are unable to drive a car for reasons in my last post. A handful more people out of a very small minority opting to do so doesn’t signal a major habit change.
These numbers and charts look impressive in press releases and board meetings to justify more funding (disclaimer – I used to work for RGRTA… so these aren’t pie in the sky assumptions). But in reality the shift in travel habits is very insignificant. You’ll see a corresponding increase in miles driven as unemployment numbers decrease, along with a corresponding increase as fuel prices either decrease or stabilize.
Wouldn’t it be GREAT not to HAVE to own a car? Some of my co-workers drive company cars which are justified because they are often driving very long distances. But they make short trips too. Costs for the car, the insurance, the gas, and the maintenance are all paid for by the company. It’s unfair that travel costs are covered for some, but not others. Gas is still HIGH! I’ve had some very large repair bills, and my already high car insurance just went way up! If I don’t get a raise soon, I will be asking for one while looking for a better job. And, BELEIVE ME, working nearby, so I can ditch the car IS being considered!! If this happened, I would ABSOLUTELY want a bike! Bus and taxi rides as well as getting rides from others would then become a necessity. I like having my own vehicle, but am rethinking if I can really afford this.