Many Transportation Modes Available
Personal mobility is important in society, but I can’t imagine limiting myself to just one mode. Within the last year I’ve used every mode visible in the following image:
I count four modes above:
- Amtrak passenger rail? Yes.
- Greyhound bus? Yes.
- Public transit via light rail? Yes.
- Private auto on highways? Yes.
Each has it’s place, I generally use public transit or, lately, ride with my boyfriend in his car. In a couple of weeks we’re renting and car for a weekend trip. I’m itching to take Amtrak again soon, perhaps to Kansas City? Maybe mono-mode (car) is perfect for you, I couldn’t possibly know. For me though, I did the car-only thing for many years without any consideration of other choices. The car culture had a grip on me, I was afraid to let it go.
Now it’s habit to think about the various modes available when planning every trip, whether to Target or out of town. How much thought do you give to your mode of travel?
— Steve Patterson
No thought of any kind! My wife, 3 kids and I use our cars exclusively. We both drive hybrids, though, so we feel as if we might be doing our small part to limit our family’s contribution to air-pollutants and smog. And neither bus nor train is convenient for our local commutes. I can’t imagine boarding a Greyhound with three kids to visit family in Mississippi and Alabama. Kids today (and wives) don’t travel as light as I did 20 years ago. Each has a laptop, multiple audio devices, other “vital” necessities that they “can’t live without”, plus their clothes. And once we arrive at both cities, we’d have to rent a car since there isn’t a bus or taxi available within 250 miles in any direction. Our family will probably be strapped in the car seats for at least the next 20 years.
I used to travel with a lot more stuff when I drove everywhere. I pack so much lighter now, even when I happen to drive.
I now try to pack much lighter too. But try to convince 3 kids, 1 wife and 1 dog to leave a few things behind.
I think about my options, and my personal vehicle usually ends up being the best choice. For local trips, public transit invariably takes too long and runs too infrequently to go anywhere except downtown. For out-of-town trips, flying makes sense for trips of more than 400 or 500 miles, driving, for shorter distances. And when the weather doesn’t suck, biking or walking are options for shorter trips.
As a county resident who doesn’t live close to a Metrolink line, a car is sadly the only way to go. Until Metro realizes that South County residents don’t just want to be funneled by bus to the Shrewsbury Metrolink stop, a car will continue to be the option I almost exclusively use. I If I am going downtown by myself, I sometimes drive to a Metrolink stop and take the Metrolink downtown, but that happens 1-2 times a year at most.
In terms of travel, we as a family enjoy the automotive road trip, but if we ever do get anything close to high-speed train service between St. Louis and Chicago, that might change. Also, if I ever travel by myself within the region I might consider other options, but I can’t say I that I travel within the region that frequently.
I believe it was South County that put the kibosh on a deeper connection than the Shrewsbury terminus in the first place, right? I don’t think you’re alone though now, bailorg, in recognizing the potential benefits of bringing it further south.
The two preferred alternatives for Metrolink south expansion show a route hugging I-55 and a line in the De Soto right-of-way (the UP rail system curving up around Tower Grove Park) both terminating at Loughborough. If you could park-and-ride there, would you use it more than the Shrewsbury line. Similarly, if there was a South County connection to the Loughborough station, would you be inclined to use THAT and transfer over at Loughborough?
Either way, we desperately need a Metrolink touching down on the South City/South County border.