Interesting twist on DC "density argument" - Metro ridership continues to plummet
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Density advocates base their platform on building out around DC metro stations, and invariably seek height + zoning exceptions as seen in the yet to be approved comp plan they've put forth. Except Metro ridership is down 88% since last year according to today's Post. Meanwhile, bus ridership, a wonderful web that blankets the DMV is up and WMATA is shifting resources there.
This dramatic shift is obviously Covid and work from home influenced, although we have seen Metro use trending down for a long time due to maintenance and safety concerns. Thus, we should expect to see some permanent changes in DC residents' commuting preferences. While Metro is handy and should be supported, more reliance on bus and other means may become more typical. Do we correspondingly have the wrong focus in the development argument in centering new builds all around Metro hubs, when the emerging preference appears to be great bus service and other lifestyle options? Thoughtful and organic development could really happen anywhere in 3 quadrants of the city that is near an efficient bus line. There could be more effort put by the city into "connecting" SE to the rest of the city by better transport, with thoughtful + equitable development there as well. And density advocates could shift their attention to building around Metro stations in the suburbs where Metro makes sense for a longer commute (if those suburban residents support it of course. They may prefer expanded kiss and ride options with shuttles and the like). 88% plunge in Metro ridership is a significant trend. It would seem like arrogance for current densification rhetoric to not acknowledge the tension and contradictions between this statistic and their current proposals for long term changes. |
Anonymous
| Hello...there's a pandemic going on. |
Anonymous
Took the words right out of my mouth. |
Anonymous
100% true, and acknowledged and addressed in opener. Doesn't change the fact that there was a downward trend in Metro ridership before, and that after the pandemic we may seeonger term changes to peoples work, lifestyle and transport choices. |
Anonymous
| More bus riders take the bus because they dont have other options. Also pandemic. |
Anonymous
| And due to the pandemic, WMATA has reduced metro services. Also, most of the people who ride the bus are lower income in those who have “essential jobs” that are not respected and may not have access to a metro stop anyway. In just DC, think of those that live east of the river is SE or in NE neighborhoods. |
Anonymous
|
I live 2 blocks from a metro station and back when I used to commute downtown for my highly-compensated professional job, I took the bus. So, it's not all poors.
The bus is often faster, it goes more places, and it's more flexible; if traffic is bad, I just ask the driver to let me off and I walk. In COVID times, the huge advantage of the bus is the ability to open the windows. Even with the bus, though, the same basic density arguments apply. One of the reasons the bus is a great option for me is that I have 15 different bus routes that stop within two blocks of my house. |
Anonymous
|
2020 simply can't be used for meaningful metrics for obvious reasons.
I don't have a problem using Metro during a pandemic. I have a problem with interminable waits for trains. I took Metro when trains came every 5 minutes, and a transfer took maybe 8 minutes. Even pre-COVID, Metro reduced rush hour service so transfers took 12-15 minutes. Then they reduced service even more. No, I'm not going to wait 20 minutes for a train and then have to wait some more to transfer. I decided to put another car on the road, and now my entire commute is just 20 minutes. You can't take away service and then complain that people aren't using it. |
Anonymous
| I am really starting to get worried that if commuters don’t return to the district, Metro, like so many businesses, is toast. |
Anonymous
|
There’s a pandemic.
If you haven’t noticed, car traffic is way way down too. Should we tear up all the roads too? |
Anonymous
OMG, are you serious? Yes, ridership may have been a bit down pre-pandemic, but most of that 88 percent is because of the pandemic. And people may be taking the bus more because the buses are what's available right now. It would be insane to make long-term plans based on 2020-2021 trends. Yes, buses are an important part of any urban transportation network, because of their flexibility -- but they are also not a good basis for planning long-term development, precisely because they can easily be moved. |
Anonymous
It is going to be a huge issue. It's reasonable to assume that many office workers will work from home at least one day a week more than they did before. Many will probably stay home 2+ days more. That could easily lead to 33% reduction in riders using metro for commuting, which would have a massive impact on budget and, given other budget needs, it seems hard to imagine the federal or state governments providing substantially more aid. Restaurants and other businesses would be affected, but I do think the impact would be less pronounced. Most people don't eat out everyday and it seems likely that people would be more likely to eat out, do happy hour, etc the days they are in the office. Therefore, I could see businesses being less impacted than metro. |
Anonymous
OP seems to have overlooked this fact. |
Anonymous
No, but we should be assessing how commuting patterns will change before we commit to new road projects. We'd be silly not to be doing similar assessments regarding the long term impact on metro riding. |
Anonymous
We don't know that. Indeed, we can't *possibly* know the long-term impact on metro ridership right now. We'd be idiots to make any plans or assessments before the pandemic is over and we see what *actually* happens. You can't "assess" something that hasn't happened yet. |