Continuing my exploration of the 2011 data from the American Community Survey, I want to look now at some aspects of commuting.
Public Transit
Public transit commuting remains overwhelmingly dominated by New York City, with a metro commute mode share for transit of 31.1%. There are an estimated 2,686,406 transit commuters in New York City. All other large metro areas (1M+ population) put together add up to 3,530,932 transit commuters. New York City metro accounts for 39% of all transit commuters in the United States.
If one were to guess the #2 city for transit commuting, another older, pre-auto, centralized city on the lines of New York (say Chicago) might be the obvious guess. It would also be wrong. It’s actually Washington, DC that has the second highest transit commute share among large metros at 14.8%. Here’s the complete top ten:
Rank |
Metro Area |
2011 |
1 |
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA |
2,686,406 (31.1%) |
2 |
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV |
439,194 (14.8%) |
3 |
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA |
299,204 (14.6%) |
4 |
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI |
503,535 (11.6%) |
5 |
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH |
267,568 (11.6%) |
6 |
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD |
251,285 (9.3%) |
7 |
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA |
137,858 (8.1%) |
8 |
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA |
66,619 (6.3%) |
9 |
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA |
355,811 (6.2%) |
10 |
Baltimore-Towson, MD |
80,472 (6.1%) |
Not only are New York and Washington top two cities for public transit commuting, they are also the two cities that have been dominant in increasing transit’s market share. Both cities showed material share gains since 2000, over three and a half percentage points each, for transit. Among large cities, Seattle was the only one that managed to post a share gain of even one percent.
Rank |
Metro Area |
2000 |
2011 |
Change in % of Workers Age 16 and Over |
1 |
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA |
2,181,093 (27.4%) |
2,686,406 (31.1%) |
3.74% |
2 |
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV |
278,842 (11.2%) |
439,194 (14.8%) |
3.61% |
3 |
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA |
106,784 (7.0%) |
137,858 (8.1%) |
1.17% |
4 |
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL |
12,601 (1.6%) |
24,901 (2.5%) |
0.91% |
5 |
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT |
15,755 (2.8%) |
21,794 (3.7%) |
0.91% |
6 |
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC |
9,532 (1.4%) |
19,227 (2.3%) |
0.91% |
7 |
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA |
278,207 (13.8%) |
299,204 (14.6%) |
0.81% |
8 |
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA |
287,392 (5.6%) |
355,811 (6.2%) |
0.67% |
9 |
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL |
67,685 (3.2%) |
95,536 (3.8%) |
0.61% |
10 |
Nashville-Davidson–Murfreesboro–Franklin, TN |
5,574 (0.8%) |
10,705 (1.4%) |
0.55% |
Vaunted Portland only managed to eke out a share gain of 0.07%, which could be entirely statistical noise. Its performance lagged even auto-centric cities like Charlotte and Nashville.
Bicycling
Every city out there seems to be vying to be the bike friendliest city in the world. Yet bicycling has yet to make much of an impact on commuting. Only 7 out of 51 large metros even post 1% mode share for cycling:
Row |
Geography |
2011 |
1 |
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA |
23,941 (2.3%) |
2 |
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA |
38,419 (1.9%) |
3 |
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA |
16,013 (1.9%) |
4 |
Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville, CA |
15,804 (1.8%) |
5 |
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX |
8,847 (1.0%) |
6 |
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA |
5,307 (1.0%) |
7 |
Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ |
18,007 (1.0%) |
8 |
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA |
15,949 (0.9%) |
9 |
Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO |
12,052 (0.9%) |
10 |
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA |
50,080 (0.9%) |
Portland grew bicycle mode share by 1.51% Perhaps this explains its poor transit performance. Cycling is canabalizing transit growth.
Walking
The low level of bicycling can perhaps best be illustrated by comparing it to walking. Even in Portland more people walk to work than ride bikes.
Rank |
Metro Area |
2011 |
1 |
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA |
540,733 (6.3%) |
2 |
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH |
121,537 (5.3%) |
3 |
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA |
87,409 (4.3%) |
4 |
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD |
101,107 (3.7%) |
5 |
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA |
62,238 (3.7%) |
6 |
Pittsburgh, PA |
36,857 (3.4%) |
7 |
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA |
35,242 (3.4%) |
8 |
Rochester, NY |
15,573 (3.2%) |
9 |
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV |
94,698 (3.2%) |
10 |
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI |
134,399 (3.1%) |
Working from Home
Looking at telecommuting gives a much different list of top cities, this one dominated by “wired” metros like Austin and Raleigh. The share of telecommuters in these cities is bigger than walking or biking, or even transit in many cities. This is an oft-overlooked part of the green transport agenda. The most green commute possible is the one you never have to make.
Rank |
Metro Area |
2011 |
1 |
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX |
62,593 (7.1%) |
2 |
Raleigh-Cary, NC |
37,030 (6.6%) |
3 |
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA |
67,223 (6.4%) |
4 |
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA |
131,029 (6.4%) |
5 |
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA |
89,547 (6.3%) |
6 |
Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO |
76,025 (5.9%) |
7 |
Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ |
105,570 (5.8%) |
8 |
Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville, CA |
52,143 (5.8%) |
9 |
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA |
132,979 (5.5%) |
10 |
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA |
87,839 (5.2%) |
Commute Times
Unsurprisingly, large cities – including New York and Washington again at the top – feature the longest average commute times. Larger cities tend to have worse congestion and feature longer commutes. As transit commutes are generally longer than driving, the high transit mode share helps to drive up commute times in those cities.
Rank |
Metro Area |
2011 |
1 |
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA |
34.9 |
2 |
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV |
34.5 |
3 |
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA |
31.0 |
4 |
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI |
30.9 |
5 |
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA |
30.6 |
6 |
Baltimore-Towson, MD |
30.3 |
7 |
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH |
29.2 |
8 |
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA |
29.2 |
9 |
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA |
28.6 |
10 |
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD |
28.5 |
Whether New York might prefer a more auto-oriented layout in order to reduce commute times is a different matter. There’s no precedent for such a huge region having anything less than terrible congestion and commute times. And clearly New York would not be New York with such a radical change. The same forces that drive up commute times in places like New York and Washington are some of the same forces that sustain them as centers of elite economic production.
Note: An early version of this piece contained an incorrect version of "Working from Home" table.
Aaron M. Renn is an independent writer on urban affairs and the creator of Telestrian, a data analysis and mapping tool. He writes at The Urbanophile.
Light trails photo by Bigstock.