|
|
|
|
|
 |
In his article, America’s Car Culture: Almost Out of Gas Robert Puentes discusses the link between how America’s cities are designed and America’s addiction to cars. Our urban centers are planned with cars rather than people in mind, making the use of a car mandatory for many people to get to the grocery store, post office, church, school or work. Not only does this contribute greatly to global warming, (America, with only five percent of the world’s population, currently emits 22 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases, a fact in part attributable to our over-reliance on cars), it has other negative effects for our society as well.
An urban center designed with cars leads to gentrification and the squeezing out of the middle and working classes. By making itself more pedestrian friendly, San Francisco can in part stem the middle and working class exodus from the city.
America is the only country in the world where a family with a moderate income is forced to budget for not only a house but a car as well. The situation is so extreme that it has been proven that one of the surest ways out of poverty for a family is to own a decent vehicle. That one needs a car to get from your home to anywhere else is an accepted fact of life by most people living outside of large cities, and by many people within them. A fact that few Americans realize, however, is how much money we spend on transportation. For a person driving fifteen miles each day to work, a reasonable car would cost them somewhere in the neighborhood of $5000 dollars a year. (The calculation is: a decent used car costs around $10,000 dollars, and assume the family keeps that car for five years, the car itself costs $2000 a year. Add gas, insurance and maintenance to easily reach $5000). But, the average family needs more than one car. So, an American family with two cars which are used daily can easily rack up $10,000 a year on transportation alone. (This is actually on the low end of the scale, assuming the family buys used cars, does not routinely have to pay for parking, and commutes a moderate distance. With a longer commute, or daily parking fees included, a two-car family could easily break $15,00 or even $20,000 a year… almost the national median income). Take away that need for a car and that family has $10,000 a year or more to spend on other needs, such as, perhaps, choosing to buy a house or condo in the city rather than move to the suburbs. This trade-off is the norm in many countries and could easily be here too with the proper investment in clean, reliable public transportation. The more people who use public transportation, the more economical it becomes, allowing a more heavily used system to be cheaper, nicer and more extensive.
In addition to the benefits of making a more equitable society and decreasing global warming, a transit oriented city forces people to walk more (a definite plus in a society facing an obesity epidemic) and fosters a feeling of community as actual neighborhoods of people who know each other emerge rather than little islands of people who never have any reason to interact with their neighbors. A transit-oriented culture is also far friendlier to those who cannot drive – young teenagers, the elderly and the disabled. A friend of mine has epilepsy and was until very recently, unable to get a drivers license due to her condition. Because of this, she spent nearly a year out of work because it was virtually impossible for her, someone who had graduated cum laude from the University of California, to get a job that did not involve driving.
San Francisco has already done more than many cities in the nation to encourage a more pedestrian-friendly culture. But more can be done. A reasonable first step suggested by Puentes might be a tax on all public garages in the city with the money used to improve Muni. Another is to require that all future planning in the city must have a public transportation impact report, much the way environmental impact reports are done today. The bottom line is, in a city that prides itself on being both eco-friendly and committed to social equality, subtracting the need for a car is one of the best investments it can make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
