The Answer to All of Life's Problems

OK, so the headline may not be totally true but maybe we can tackle one or two or at least make it look like we are trying. The truth is that when it comes to transportation there really is no one perfect answer that is going to address everyone's needs. I heard from someone recently who came across this website and wrote me an email on the difference between those living in the city (or close to it) and those who live in the suburbs and beyond. It was an interesting perspective that many will dismiss out of hand perhaps as being naïve or short-sighted or living in the past but I thought it offered some food for thought.  The writer's name is Henry and I have pasted his email below:

"You people seem to think that everybody has access to some kind of bus or subway and that if you didn't ride one then you were evil and doing bad thing to the environment. You also want people to live in the city or in apartments so that everybody can walk everywhere. Why?  So that its easier for the government to keep an eye on everyone or so that everyone ends up the same? That's what things were like a hundred years ago but what happened was all the ethnic groups like the Italians and the Polish and the Jews all lived together apart from everyone else.

"Lots of people live away from the city because they don't like the crime or the schools are bad. I like to have land so I can grow some of my food. People live here because the like the fresh air. It is cheaper to buy a house too. The only thing we don't have is buses to pick us up in front of our house and take us to work. We have to drive and you people don't like that. Some of my neighbors ride there bicycles every weekend but they don't get all dressed up in shirts with numbers and tight shorts like city people do. They just ride because it feels good to them and not because somebody tells them they have to.

"I just think that you need to stop trying to get everybody to do the same things you do because people are different and we don't all live in the same place and want the same things. Just because we don't live in the city doesn't mean we don't want clean air and clean water and we don't exercise. We do want all of those things but we don't have buses and subways and lots of us can't afford to live where there are."

While I'm not certain that we tell people they have to wear goofy Spandex outfits in order to ride bikes I can appreciate what Henry had to say. I would have to say in response (and I did in my return email to him) that this simply may not be the right site for him but some of his issues are understandable. One of the long-standing American goals has been to get out of the city and to move to the country and acquire land. That was a response to some of the tenement situations that existed in big cities in the 1800's and early 1900's. The cities were smelly and smoky and very crowded and it was a sign that you'd made it to be able to move to the country. Obviously things have changed in terms of the amount of livestock on public streets and the amount of raw sewage we're exposed to on a daily basis but for many the desire for "land spreading out so far and wide; keep Manhattan just give me that countryside" is engrained in their psyche.

++++++++

I am a big fan of the concept of high-speed rail. I say concept because, other than the not-so-speedy Acela trains, I've never ridden one. I think that there are certain parts of the country such as California, Texas, the mid-west and the northeast where high-speed rail would be a great alternative to air travel.  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has just released a report that is actually Congressional testimony of one of its Directors and it paints an interesting picture of the potential. The thing that I found interesting was that there are currently 50 proposals for high-speed rail in this country. The problem, as noted in the testimony, is largely the high cost of the projects. "High speed rail does not offer a quick or simple solution to relieving congestion on our nation's highways and airways. High speed rail projects are costly, risky, take years to develop and build, and require substantial up-front public investment as well as potentially long-term operating subsidies."

I would add that making the investment in high-speed rail becomes an issue of public will. If this is something that can get high-polluting airplanes out of the sky and more cars off the roads then it has extra value in terms of the environment. While the nation is investing billions and trillions of dollars in bailing out banks and car makers why should we have to think so hard about building high-speed rail? Besides, the construction of these projects could give work to thousands of tax-paying citizens at the same time.

---

Steve Eldridge is a long-time reporter, observer and commentator on the Washington region's transportation issues. You can contact him directly by writing to: Steve@SprawlandCrawl.com. Unless otherwise requested, letters or portions of letters can be used within future columns. Letter writers will be identified by their first name and city/neighborhood.

Comments

[Amelia]

At the same time as agreeing with Henry, I think we could do better by our suburbs in general with regard to park and ride options. There are some metro areas, ie cities surrounded by suburbs, that do a good job of providing transport to and from major cities where people work. I think the Boston-Worcester metro area is a good example. I grew up in the middle of a lot of sprawl (ex-urban style, somewhat rural) yet there was a commuter rail that brought me into Boston within 30 minutes or less only 4.5 miles away. Even if you live nearly a third of the way across the state from Boston in Worcester, there is a commuter rail line that will take you into Boston within about an hour - faster than the car trip, especially in traffic. Cars are definitely a necessity currently in the suburbs - biking to get your groceries can be done, but it's really hard for most people, especially if you've never tried it before. However, the main commute to work can be cut down to a short ride or carpool to a commuter rail station and then rail into the city you work. This doesn't work for everybody, but it does help to alleviate congestion and one person in a car driving a bunch of miles situations. it's also less expensive than gas and the cost of extra miles on your car. It also works really well for DENSE metro area sprawl, as seen in Houston and LA.

[BeyondDC]

Commuter 182 - Arlington has accomplished some amazing things by changing the way it does business. Things like no increase in traffic congestion despite a massive increase in population and jobs.

The people who read this site are interested in learning how to apply that very successful model elsewhere.

If you prefer to sit in traffic congestion and continue to follow a failed model, rather than look for solutions, then by all means, ignore what the transportation professionals on this site say.

[Commuter 182]

Steve wrote:
"I would have to say in response...that this simply may not be the right site for him but some of his issues are understandable."

This site may not be right for people like Henry and me, but for whom is this site for?
From the name "CommuterPageBlog", you'd think it would be for...gee, I don't know...commuters??

But the vast majority of commuters in every local city and county except for the District and Arlington are car drivers, according to a survey last year posted on this very site. Even in Arlington, car drivers make up about 50% of commuters. So even if drivers aren't a clear majority there, they are still the largest single commuting constituency.

A commuting site and blog that manages to alienate their single largest constituency...way to go there, guys!

Perhaps this blog should have its name changed to the "Arlington Navel-Gazing, Green-Living, Cramped Apartment Dwelling, Bike-Loving, Transit-Riding, City Hiking Car Haters Blog". At least then it would more accurately set readers' expectations and cause less confusion as to its actual intended purpose.