Streetsblog Capitol Hill

At some point over the past few years, a lot of my friends started moving to Silver Spring and Takoma Park and Falls Church. These inner-ring, transit-connected suburbs of DC are still far less compact and walkable than the neighborhoods my friends moved from. So they bought cars.

Many young people opt for urban living in walkable, compact neighborhoods -- even once they have kids. Photo: Let's Save Michigan

Why did they do this? They’re entering peak driving age, which is historically between 35 and 54. They have more money than they did in their early 20s. But mostly, they had kids. Of all my friends, I now have exactly one that is still proudly car-free with kids.

In light of the new U.S. PIRG and Frontier Group report on changing driving habits, led by young people, the question arises: Won’t those young people also drive more as they get older?

Reports of diminished interest in driving focus on two groups: baby boomers, the generation that came of age with the automobile and settled in car-dependent suburbs, who are now retiring and driving less; and millennials, the oldest of whom are in their early thirties now and the youngest of whom aren’t even old enough to drive.

Millennials’ shift away from automobile travel is well documented, especially in last year’s report, “Transportation and the New Generation,” by U.S. PIRG and the Frontier Group. That report found that between 2001 and 2009, annual driving by the 16-to-34 age cohort decreased 23 percent, from 10,300 miles to 7,900 miles per capita. The same age group also made 24 percent more trips by bike and 40 percent more trips by public transit.

With more people having children later in life, the vast majority of millennials are still childless. They also haven’t hit their prime earning years, which tend to be prime driving years.

That’s true, said U.S. PIRG’s Phineas Baxandall, co-author of the new report on driving trends, but the expected increase in driving by millennials had already been factored into the reports forecasts — all of which entail far less driving than government models predict. “Our scenarios all assume that millenials will drive more when they get older,” Baxandall told Streetsblog. “The real question isn’t, ‘Will millennials drive more as they get older?’ It’s, ‘Will they drive more than their parents as they get older?’”

There are persuasive reasons to think they won’t.
Read more…

Jake's girlfriend and her co-worker at Sam Schwartz Engineering were so excited that he won Streetsblog's "Commuter Idyll" challenge that they created this "infographic" of his commutes.

When we saw that Washington’s news-traffic-weather radio station, WTOP, was holding a ”Commuter Idle” contest for the worst commute in the DC area — and rewarding it with $1,000 in gas money — we couldn’t resist. We went looking for the best “Commuter Idyll” — the trips to work that made people happy, got them fresh air, helped them fit exercise into their day, gave them some extra time to sleep or read, and brought them to work more clear-headed and ready to tackle the day. And Streetsblog readers had lots of great stories to share of ditching long car commutes for transit, biking, or walking. We shared some of them yesterday.

Meanwhile, check out the painful stories of soul-sucking commutes of WTOP’s 10 finalists. Some are out of the house by 4:00 a.m., drive 80 miles each way, are stuck in their car for six hours a day. Imagine all the better ways they could use that time and money!

Our “Commuter Idyll” winner — Jake Williams of Chicago — had a hellish commute too. He made big changes to get control over his time, his health, and his happiness. Here’s Jake’s story.

Upon graduating from college at UCLA, I moved back home to Chicago to start my working career as an engineer. I had commuted to internships before, one in Kenosha, WI and one in Melrose Park, IL, so I was already exposed and accustomed to the solo commute by automobile. I was looking for work anywhere in the metro area, and when I was offered a job in Lincolnshire, a suburb of Chicago 26 miles from my apartment, I was not fazed. Little did I know that the next four years would at times literally “drive” me crazy.

The guts of Jake's old ride.

The commute affected my whole life and actually made me dread going to and from work. I tried waking up early in the morning, and while it was nice seeing the sunrise, it was not a sustainable schedule. I worked longer hours, and although the morning commute was somewhat more tolerable, the commute home was about as awful. I tried breaking up the afternoon commute by heading straight to the gym and then going home. The result was that I was gone 14 hours a day and exhausted, constantly.

I would become angry and irritable. I needed a “cool-off” period when I got home. I stalked the roads religiously on traffic sites and on the various radio stations, but knowing never changed what was coming. I realized that the commute had completely conquered me when I left work one snowy winter day and got so frustrated with the stagnation on the road that I turned around and went back to work, for hours.

So, when times got rough and I was laid off from work, the strange, overwhelming feeling was of relief. Ironically, I was supposed to be laid off a day earlier, but I had to call off work because my car had broken down. I was disenchanted with my career choice and lifestyle choice, and I realized after a couple of months that I had the power to change all of that. I decided that I had one of many new goals: to walk to work.

Read more…

Some of you have some fabulous commutes. Rather than watch the stress-filled minutes and hours tick by stuck in traffic, you go outside, get exercise, and connect with your community.

Think car-free parenting is a drag? Babies like smiling at other passengers on the bus way more than they like being restrained in a rear-facing car seat. Photo: Mommy Bluebird

I’ve had the pleasure of reading many of your commuter tales over the last few days, since we launched our Commuter Idyll contest. It’s our response to WTOP’s “Commuter Idle” contest for the worst commute in the DC area, with its prize of $1,000 in gas money. We’d rather focus on the positive: the wonderful daily transportation routines you can have when you get out of your car.

We did have one overall favorite, which we’ll post tomorrow, but there were so many that deserve mention. Here are some ancillary awards:

Most Family-Friendly

Katie from the DC suburbs won my heart with her story of taking her 10-month-old son to daycare on the bus. “He loves the bus, and despite the fact that he can’t talk yet, he manages to make lots of friends,” she writes. “As soon as he sees the bus coming down the road, he starts squealing and kicking his legs, and once we get on, he just charms everyone on the bus by smiling and chattering away at all of them.”

“The other day, someone started snapping out a beat, and my little guy was just dancing along,” she said. “I seriously thought maybe someone was about to break into song, like we were in a musical or something.” Sure beats strapping him in to a car seat in the back where you can’t even see him.

Plus, waiting at the stop gives them some nice outdoor time. After dropping her son off at daycare, Katie continues on to work on the bus or walks – a healthy 30 minutes of exercise.

Runner-Up: Most Family-Friendly

Parents of young children will also appreciate this story from reader “TalF.” He had been driving his commute from Riverdale, New York, to his job in New Jersey, but that could take anywhere from 45 minutes to two hours. The transit connections weren’t great either. Then last summer, he started cycling 45 minutes down the Hudson River Greenway to the 39th Street ferry, where it was 10 minutes across the river to New Jersey. He even biked the commute through the winter.

“So far it has been great!” TalF wrote. “I’ve lost weight and, paradoxically, feel like I have more energy for dealing with a newborn at night.”

Best of all, he and his wife have been able to sell one of their cars, saving them a bundle they can now spend on their little bundle.

Best Use of Rational Transportation Economics

We’ve got to hand it to Pancake for making his decisions based on rational economics. The Center for Neighborhood Technology has pioneered the H+T model for evaluating household expenses – Housing + Transportation, that is. Pancake says he pays more to live in the city because the cost of owning a car or taking public transportation into the city every day can erase the savings of marginally cheaper housing in the suburbs. He walks or bike-shares to his job that’s just over a mile from home. “Some days, I even come home for lunch for a nap,” Pancake writes. “That availability alone makes my form of transportation (my legs) well worth the extra money expelled in rent.”

Read more…

If your idea of the American dream is to spend your mornings and evenings alone in an idling car surrounded on all sides by other lonely people in other idling cars, by all means, buy a house.

Congratulations! You just reduced your own employability, and that of your neighbors, too. Photo: Circle Mortgage

A new paper [PDF] from the Peterson Institute for International Economics finds a strong link between homeownership and unemployment — not necessarily for the homeowners themselves, but for the area where they live. In fact, a doubling of homeownership rates for a state is correlated with a more-than-doubling of the unemployment rate about five years down the road.

Another way to put this is that homeownership renders employees immobile, so their commutes stretch longer and longer as they look for work until they reach the breaking point.

“The cost of travelling to work should act as an impediment to the rate of employment (because it raises the opportunity cost of a job),” wrote Dartmouth professor David Blanchflower and University of Warwick professor Andrew Oswald. They note their finding that high homeownership is associated with longer commuting times “is consistent with the idea that moving for an owner-occupier is expensive, and that in consequence the places with high home-ownership will see more workers staying put physically but working further from their family home.”

When there are no jobs available within a reasonable commute, people can choose between an unreasonable commute – and many people do – or no job at all. The option of moving closer to work is less appetizing for homeowners than renters, especially since so many people are still under water on their mortgages. A more flexible labor force — one made up of renters — can move to where the jobs are.

The flip side of the high homeownership coin is that if rental housing is in short supply, people interested in nearby jobs might not be able to move to the area.

The researchers also found that fewer businesses establish themselves in areas with high home-ownership, possibly because of what they call “NIMBY pressures in action.” Zoning for residential-only and other attempts to curb development prevent businesses from creating jobs near where people live. That’s a big endorsement for mixed-use development, where people can work, shop, and live all in relatively close proximity.

Read more…

Before I became your editor here at Streetsblog Capitol Hill, I was a reporter for WTOP, the DC area’s “most-listened-to” radio station. Its traffic reports “on the 8s” helped feed my ire toward auto-centrism – they wasted one out of every 10 minutes of airtime on an unintelligible litany of route numbers and exits. Meanwhile, I only got 35 seconds for actual news stories.

Did you give this up for a healthy bike ride or relaxing transit commute? We want to hear about it in our new "Commuter Idyll" contest. Photo: Allstate blog

WTOP assumes that most of its listeners are tuning in from inside their cars, and for that reason, the station focuses heavily on commuter issues. About 80 percent of its audience lives in the suburbs, so WTOP has a soft spot for people with long, solo car commutes from unwalkable places who get all road-ragey in rush hour traffic — crawling along no matter how good the traffic report is.

As part of its solidarity with extreme drivers, WTOP is launching its second season of what it calls “Commuter Idle” (I think that’s a pun on American Idol), in which listeners compete for the worst commute. They tell their horror stories of traffic jams and delays, and guess what the winner gets? Aside from radio fame and a limo ride to work, the unfortunate soul with the worst commute gets gas money. A thousand dollars to pour into their hellish daily slog.

Ah yes, that's better. Photo: Stylelist

Here at Streetsblog, we don’t “idle-ize” horrific car commutes. While one can sympathize with people who end up with long treks to work, especially if their financial circumstances and the sprawl of their region conspired to eliminate other options, “extreme commutes” are nothing to glorify.

So we’re taking this opportunity to launch what we’re calling “Commuter Idyll.” We’d like to hear from people who’ve made changes in their lives recently to make their commutes more enjoyable and less time-consuming.

Did you give up the drive for a refreshing, invigorating bike ride? Did you start taking the train so you can relax or read a paperback on your way to work? Did you move closer to the office – or get a new job closer to home – so you didn’t have to cover impossible distances?

Leave your story in the comments. Give as much detail as you want. Instead of gas money (who needs it?), we’ll mail you a copy of the anthology, “On Bicycles: 50 Ways the New Bike Culture Can Change Your Life,” to which Streetsblog Chicago editor John Greenfield contributed a chapter.

You could be Streetsblog’s first Commuter Idyll contest winner!

UPDATE 5/9: We’re still happy to hear your story, but we’ve chosen our winners and the contest is over.

The time it takes the average American to commute hasn't changed much since 2000, according to the Census Bureau.

The new Census data on commuting in America contains a fair amount of information but little reason to celebrate. The big takeaway is that almost four in five American workers commuted alone by car in 2011. Nationally, only about 5 percent of workers commute via transit.

But amid the lousy news are a few reasons for optimism.

The Census Bureau reports that the average American’s journey to work takes 25.5 minutes each way — very similar to what Americans reported in 2000. Commuting lengths aren’t ballooning quite the way they did in the 1990s, notes Brad Plumer at the Washington Post.

The percentages of Americans doing both long-distance (at least 50 miles each way) and “mega” commutes (at least 50 miles and at least 90 minutes each way) were roughly unchanged since 2000, as well. Both long-distance and mega commuters were concentrated around the country’s largest cities, in metro DC and New York.

Nationally, just more than 8 percent of workers commute more than an hour each way, barely higher than the 8 percent rate in 2000. Transit riders are overrepresented in this group, comprising about 23 percent.

Plumer says stagnating commute lengths could be due to the softening economy. The relative decline of the exurbs could also be helping slow the growth in commute lengths. In addition, experts have long theorized that most commuters lose patience with a commute of more than 30 minutes, so growth from here is likely to be moderate.

Read more…

For the first time in four years, a smaller share of Americans are driving to work alone.

Are American commuting habits fundamentally changing? Photo: RI Insurance Blog

The 2011 estimates by the U.S. Census Bureau [PDF] show a razor-thin decline in solo car commuting, 76.6 to 76.4 percent. Meanwhile, public transit’s share ticked up slightly, to 5 percent from 4.9. While the numbers are small — well within the margin of error — the perceived decline in SOV commuting is a departure from trends going back to 2008, when the figure stood at 75.5 percent.

The Census Bureau’s findings conform to much of the recent research on trends in American transportation, including declining vehicle miles traveled, increasing public transit use and shifting generational preferences in favor of sustainable modes.

USA Today, in its reporting on the Census numbers, credited gas prices and the bad economy. The last time there was a decline in solo car commuting mode share was when the economy crashed in 2008, and estimated car commuting dropped by more than one-half percent.

The paper conducted its own analysis and determined that transit ridership had increased in two-thirds of the 342 metropolitan areas examined. The American Public Transportation Association is reporting its sixth consecutive quarterly ridership jump, the story said.

USA Today left readers with this: “Is this a product of the current economy or is this a new normal?” That seems to be still an open question. But this is one more hopeful sign.

The House of Representatives approved the transportation bill conference report this afternoon by a vote of 373 to 52. [UPDATE 4:00 PM: The Senate has also approved the bill, 74-19.] This is a bill that’s been called “a death blow to mass transit” by the Amalgamated Transit Union, “a step backwards for America’s transportation system” by the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, “a retreat from the goals of sustainability and economic resiliency” by Reconnecting America, “a substantial capitulation” by Transportation for America, and “bad news for biking and walking” by America Bikes.

Remember the empty highways that symbolized the House Republicans' vision of America's transportation system? The final transpo bill might as well have the same unfortunate cover.

After more than 1,000 days of waiting since the last transportation bill expired, the nation’s new transportation policy is a grave disappointment to people seeking to reform the current highway-centric system.

The fact that the House GOP tried and, for the most part, failed to reverse the progress made under presidents Reagan and Bush the elder offers a small degree of consolation. “Some of the worst ideas pushed initially by House Republicans went nowhere – funding the highway system with new oil drilling revenues, taking transit out of the highway trust fund, de-federalizing transportation funding – to mention some of the most radical proposals that were seriously being put forward,” wrote Deron Lovaas of NRDC this morning. “But… that pretty much exhausts the good news.”

So what does the bill actually do? Overall, it doesn’t change a whole lot, and the most significant changes tend not to benefit livable streets or sustainable transportation. Here’s a breakdown.

Length and funding. The bill lasts a year longer than the Senate bill would have, expiring at the end of September 2014. That gives states, cities, and the construction industry substantially more stability and allows them to move forward on projects that have been delayed for years because of the uncertainty surrounding federal funding. It maintains funding levels at around $54 billion a year, as did the Senate bill, which is roughly current levels plus inflation.

While some have criticized the complex funding mechanisms that prop it up and its departure from a user-pays model, the Congressional Budget Office reported this morning that the bill actually reduces the deficit by $16.3 billion.

Everyone seems to understand that Congress won’t be able to pull this kind of magic for long and will soon have to deal with the long-term insufficiency of current Highway Trust Fund revenues to cover the nation’s transportation needs. However, the gas tax was not raised, and at the same time the House passed this bill, it also approved an appropriations bill that prohibits even studying the possibility of moving toward a VMT fee.

Non-transportation-related items. The Keystone XL pipeline and the EPA’s ability to regulate coal ash as a hazardous substance, introduced into the transportation negotiations by the House Republicans, were stripped out of the bill. The RESTORE Act to spend BP oil spill fines on Gulf Coast restoration is included.

Read more…

We all know regular TV-watching is a risk factor for obesity and associated health problems. Also, recent studies shined a light on the role of sedentary jobs.

That long car commute could be destroying your health. Photo: AOL News

Less attention has been paid to the threat of the lengthy car commute. But a new study [PDF] from the Center for Disease Control, National Institutes of Health and American Cancer Society is confirming what many have long suspected: lengthy car commutes are terrible for your health.

A study of more than 4,000 residents of greater Dallas found that those who commute more than 15 miles by car get less exercise and have larger waistlines and poorer cardiovascular health. Those who commuted more than 20 miles were also at greater risk for high blood pressure.

The results were adjusted for age, gender, education, family circumstances and health history.

One rather obvious explanation noted by researchers is that long commutes replace time that could be dedicated to exercise. The study’s authors also noted that “participants with long commutes were more likely to live in suburban neighborhoods, which often possess built environment features that are associated with physical inactivity and sedentary behavior.”

In addition, high blood pressure may also be caused by the stress of commuting, or the social isolation it produces, researchers said.

In the Phoenix region, the yellow areas meet CNT's threshold for affordability, while the blue areas do not. Image: CNT

On Monday we wrote that Americans can’t afford a transportation bill that locks households into the expenses of car dependence. Yesterday the Center for Neighborhood Technology hammered the point home, releasing new data showing how communities are getting less and less affordable nationwide.

Only 28 percent of American communities meet CNT’s definition of “affordable,” which accounts for both housing and transportation costs. Today American families are paying more for housing and transportation than they did in 2000, according to CNT’s analysis:

Median housing costs, as reported by the US Census, have increased by nearly 37 percent nationwide, while the national median income has increased by approximately 22 percent. Average transportation costs in the geographies covered by both Indexes increased by more than 39 percent or $318 per month.

CNT attributes the growing burden of these basic costs to development in “location inefficient” places, where households have no choice but to shell out for an expensive mode of transport — driving. The findings come amid a Republican-led effort to pass a highway-centric, sprawl-favoring transportation bill, and a presidential campaign season where candidates are tripping over themselves to pander about gas prices without stating the obvious: reducing car dependence saves money.

CNT, a Chicago-based urban research think-tank, has long held that “affordability” shouldn’t be based on housing costs alone, but must incorporate transportation costs as well. Rather than following the conventional practice of dubbing housing affordable if it accounts for less than 30 percent of household income, CNT adds in transportation costs and sets the combined threshold at 45 percent, which changes the picture dramatically.

The result busts the “drive-till-you-qualify” myth that has driven suburban sprawl for decades, because the money saved on housing is often wiped out — and then some — by the costs of a longer commute, especially when that commute is dependent upon — and therefore sensitive to — the price of gasoline.

Read more…