[sustran] Re: a bias against drivers?

[Wendell Cox]

Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people.

Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example.
Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to 100
percent of the jobs --- we could call this an Auto Employment Access Index
of 95 - this means 5 percent are excluded. Auto competitive transit service
(let us say a 40 minute ride, nearly double that of the average auto
commute) is available, on average, to less than 15 percent of jobs, assuming
the average downtown employment share of 10 percent. On the assumption that
100 percent of the residences are within walking distance of transit (a
highly optimistic assumption, since in Portland only 78 percent are), that
gives us a Transit Employment Index of 15 --- this means 85 percent are
excluded. Do the walk and cycle index and it wont even match that.

With respect to the very few who dont have cars, perhaps the best approach
is to follow the proposals of the Democratic Leadership Council, largely
endorsed by President Clinton, that would implement financial incentives to
universalize access to autos. For those not able to drive, we should provide
good dial a ride systems.

I suspect if you calculate modal Employment Access Indexes for European
cities and for that matter affluent Asian cities, you will generally find
the auto number considerably higher than the transit number. The comparison
will be less stark than in the US, Canada and Australia, but it will still
be generally stark.


DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy)
http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use)
http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport))
Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134
PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA
----- Original Message -----
From: <BruunB at aol.com>
To: <sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>; <eric.britton at ecoplan.org>;
<sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>
Cc: <litman at vtpi.org>
Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 13:29
Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers?


> Wendell,
>
> I would like to suggest that there is a reason to be biased against
private transport. The benefits go primarily to the individual, but
externalities go to the public at large. Nor can it ever be available to all
age groups, all income groups, to people with disabilities, etc.. These
people get none of the benefits but the same externalities.
>
> Public transport uses less space, creates fewer externalities, and doesn't
exclude large portions of the population.
>
> I think the core of our difference is that we can't agree on how to
evaluate these externalities, and what to do, if anything, about
compensating for them.
>
> Eric Bruun