Traffic is bad? Blame the commuter

This WaPo article about commuting was published in February, but it’s still showcased on the Metro web page so the editors must think it’s really important.

The writers of the article blame the workers for their own misery.

In spite of increasingly long and frustrating commutes, the survey found that Washingtonians remain addicted to their cars. Three in four area commuters drive to work alone.

Notice the use of the word “addicted.” Implying that going to work is as evil as using crack cocaine. The writers of that article need to take a realistic look at where the office buildings and residential buildings are located in the Washington, DC metro area.

I hate traffic as much as the next person, but there is no faster way for me to get to work and back than to drive alone in my car. The nearest Metro station (Metro being the silly name for Washington, DC’s subway system) is miles from where I have to work. And my situation is hardly unique.

Whose fault is this? Certainly not the worker’s fault. The worker is a victim of where his employer happens to be and where the housing is located. And right now, commercial and residential buildings are going up like mad all over the outlying counties far removed from convenient public transportation.

Now government officials, if they chose, could zone some dense development around existing undeveloped Metro stations, thereby making it possible for people to actually use Metro to commute. But they choose not to. And the Washington Post, instead of blaming the government for the problem, blames the commuter.

Comments

[Michael H.]

Hi Half Sigma
This was a point I was trying to make in my post on Linear Cities: if you force people to live near a Metro Station and force business to located their offices near a Metro station, the cost of the land rises enough so that the workers and the business get none of the benefit of mass transit. The only beneficiary will be the people who own land near the Metro line.

Come to think of it, I heard that that Metro is thinking of adding a line to Tyson's Corner. That might run right by my house. Maybe it is a good idea for the government to force every to live near a Metro line.

[William]

This is a good point. It's about time cities force people to build sustainable stuff. I was out in the suburbs today... DUMB. These huge suburban complexes, farm field, mall, farm field, high rise, another farm field. Capitalism ain't gonna stop that, they're going to buy the cheapest field near a highway, the governmnet can.

[superdestroyer]

But isn't the problem is DC is that the people who live in Fredricksburg, Fredrick, Haymarket, Annapolis, and Columbia and who drive in are the ones who complain the loudest and longest about traffic even though the intentionally purchased homes that are 30 or miles from where they work and who do not see their homes during daylight hours on weekdays during 8 months out of the year.

[Half Sigma]

superdestroyer, I think it's dumb that people choose to live so far away from where they work just so they can afford a bigger lawn and more square feet of living space. You only have a few good years on planet Earth, I don't want to waste it sitting in traffic jams.

BUT, this doesn't change the fact that there is at any given time a fixed quantity of housing where the commutes are convenient, and although there are new buildings going up, they aren't quite going up fast enough to meet demand.

Politicians need to zone more high rise buildings near Metro stations and in the downtown parts of DC. This is a solution that won't cost the taxpayer anything.

Michael H mentioned a proposed plan (or maybe it's approved, not sure) to expand the Metro in Virginia, and I think this is just plain dumb because the existing Metro stations are already underutilized.

[superdestroyer]

I don't know who you can claim that metro station are underutlized when the parking lots are virtually every station are full my the end of rush hour and ridership is at its highest.

I think of the problems with traffic is two earner homes. You may be able to find a convient place to live for one earner in a family but not both. How else to you explain the people who rick in Rockville and work in Reston and vice versa.

[Half Sigma]

superdestoyer: "I don't know who you can claim that metro station are underutlized..."

The stations on the Orange Line past Ballston are situated in what almost seems like the middle of nowhere. Local zoning boards don't want to have high rise development there and "ruin" the suburban character of the neighborhood.

"I think of the problems with traffic is two earner homes."

Very good point. The problem is two earner homes PLUS exurbanization. When everyone worked in a downtown hub, where there were two wage earners they both commuted towards the same general area. But with exurbanization, the jobs are now located all over the place, like Reston, Rockville, Springfield, etc, all over the DC area. So you are right, in a two wage earner family, it is often impossible for both wage earners to live close to their jobs.