^ Interesting article, thanks for posting. I don't flat out disagree with it, but I think the numbers could also support how car independent Seattle is. The first image in your post compares Seattle with just nine other cities where car-free households are generally quite high. Another way of summing the numbers up could be "Seattle is among a fairly elite group of car-free cities" (the chart below supports this fairly well).
The second chart shows car-free households appear to be growing at roughly the same rate as single car and two or more car households. My Google-Fu failed me in finding these numbers for other cities, but I'd be surprised if the average US city has the same rate of car-free household growth. And, honestly, I'm not sure how those numbers in the second chart jive with a per-capita car growth being equal to the population growth, unless average household size is really small and/or the number of cars owned by a household with 2+ cars is really large.
I did find the chart below from
this article. Seattle is quite high up there. But, surprisingly, so are Baltimore, Milwaukee and Detroit. My guess with those three cities is there exists a larger lower income population who would prefer to own a car, but do not have the income to do so.
Also, as your article points out, "Seattle is an increasingly affluent city. A lot of folks can afford to own a car for convenience and weekend getaways more than out of true necessity". Big difference between car-dependency and "nice-to-have".
![]()
[/img]