I was reading this:
http://nextstl.com/transportation/less- ... -st-louis/
St Louis is one of the least-congested cities in the country, but we're still bottom ranked for commute times. The explanation seems to be that while our highways are well-maintained and have excellent coverage through most areas, it causes people to live further from work.
The counter to that is the growing number employers moving to the suburbs to be closer to more educated people (labor pool) and to save money, which for many has resulted in shorter commutes. Of course, those who remain in the city end up driving further than they used to.
I live in the burbs and once a week I drive downtown where the warehouse is located. Why? Because the s*** North St Louis neighborhood means warehousing is dirt cheap. There's also a risk of my car getting stolen.
Some folks (environmentalists, urban renewalists, well-to-do hipsters rebelling against their parents by moving into gentrified urban condos with parental money) are advocating fuel tax hikes and reduced highway development, which sound like great ways to choke the regional economy. It get the feeling they won't be happy until we're all living in shoeboxes and eating celery.
Its a real problem -- a less dense population is supporting the development of more infrastructure which means tax dollars are less efficiently spent. But the there has to be a better solution than jacking up everyone's cost of living and taxing peaceful, comfortable lifestyles out of existence.
The long-winded version of the above, with charts and graphics:
http://jesda.com/2011/02/07/less-conges ... -commutes/