Why do people complain so much about 520/90 traffic when its only 9 miles? (Seattle: insurance, home)

[usernametaken]

I have noticed so many posts with complaints about Seattle traffic. Since I mostly do independent contracting, I can avoid it, but I do get stuck once in a while when going to my other part-time job. However, I am so surprised that East side (Bellevue) to Seattle is only 9 miles and even during rush hour, usually takes an hour at most to commute. Yet no-one seems to ever appreciate this fact. Is 9 miles typical for many other big cities (as far as distance from downtowns to east sides or west sides goes)?

In Cleveland, east side to west side is probably more like 30 miles, with rush hour traffic slightly better than Seattle, but not by a lot. East side Cleveland, where I lived, to downtown Cleveland is 20 miles.

[Hemlock140]

Many of the people (like me) have a 23 or more mile commute as we start in places like Sammamish or Issaquah, and have to go through Bellevue. Even 9 miles is frustrating when you can only go 5-10 MPH the whole way, but it's really nothing compared to the traffic we endured in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 80s when we lived there. My last commute there was 14 miles
and took close to an hour. The main difference is that there that traffic was 6-8 lanes each direction, here 2-3. People are always going to complain when a 15 minute drive takes an hour every day, especially with high gas prices, with all those cars burning a lot more sitting in the traffic than if they
were at the speed limit.

[Garfunkle524]

There's two big reasons to complain about it:

1. Most peoples' commutes begin or end with that hour long bridge crossing. If it takes 30 minutes to get to the bridge, you're in for a long day.

2. It's a gov't manufactured traffic jam via sky-high tolls on 520. Suddenly people who never use 520 had their commutes double or triple out of thin air. People lived on opposite sides of the lake from where they worked since there were 2 easy ways across and the commute was never really all that bad. Now they can choose to pay up to 10 bucks a day RT or suffer the onslaught of I90 traffic all so the transpo dept could create revenue almost out of thin air.

[JesseJB]

Because people move far away from work and enjoy that kinda thing.

[Transmition]

Originally Posted by usernametaken

only 9 miles and even during rush hour, usually takes an hour at most to commute. Yet no-one seems to ever appreciate this fact.

9 mph on a freeway isn't exactly something you should be pleased about.

[jojo7]

The toll cost is enough to make anyone complain. The outrageous toll to cross the bridge forces people to take I90 to save some money which is really bad. It can take up to an hour to get into Seattle in that mess. I feel bad for the Mercer Island residents who have absolutely no choice but take I90. I live on the east side and my son goes to school in Seattle so I am heading into Seattle 2 times a day so either you pay the high cost toll which I do most of the time or stay in traffic on I90. Luckily come June I am so done with the 520 bridge except for leisurely fun. Not the worst in the US but it's still pretty bad in my opinion. Ranked #10 in the USA
10 Worst Traffic Cities in the U.S.

[cjg5]

It once took me over an hour just to cross Mercer Island. That is ridiculous.

[SpikeDurden]

Because Seattleites think their traffic is really bad when in fact most have never lived somewhere where the traffic is actually, truly awful. And there are many, many, many places in the USA with much worse traffic than the Seattle area. They just think it's bad based on Seattle alone.

Taking an hour to cross Mercer Island? Maybe that happened to you once, but you know for a fact that is not usual or the average during rush hour. I get from Seattle to Issaquah (about 20 miles), in 30 to 40 minutes almost every single time during rush hours and in non-rush hours I can make it in 25 minutes.

[Inkpoe]

Cleveland isn't really a good comparison point given that compared to Seattle: its essentially flat and doesn't have huge waterways flowing around the city. Seattle has lots of natural elements (water, isthmus, et c) that stand in the way of having all freeways be more than 4 lanes. I am not saying more lanes will ease traffic... but the fact remains: We have way too many bottlenecks. That's really frustrating to deal with.

It also doesn't really help when you have:
A.) A mayor that's completely dismissive about the traffic issues and thinks everyone should ride bikes.
B.) Given the natural elements and other issues (like money), light rail can't finish fast enough and doesn't even reach to the outer Seattle area limits, therefore useless for majority of the population.
C.) Roads suck... too many gas and other taxes increases are supposed to be going to fix the road conditions-- and yet every election, they ask for more tax increase to "fix the roads". What's the point of asking if you're not doing it anyways?
D.) You have people coming in and they don't really know how traffic is (thinking there is none; having incorrect perceptions; being told wrong information; not knowing what the traffic pattern is so therefore putting a lot of stock on "reverse traffic")-- they should be forewarned. Awhile back, there was a poster who wanted to live in the Northern part of Seattle proper (Green Lake, Greenwood area) but her husband will work in Monroe. For whatever reason, the people at her husband's office told them to expect a 40-45 minute commute because it is a "reverse commute" (the husband is working regular commuter hours). It just blew my mind.
E.) You have too many people who can change their schedule, so they do to "avoid" traffic-- but instead, extend the time for everyone. Friday traffic sucks butt. Also why is going home (pm traffic) worst than the morning traffic? No one can answer that.
F.) Really, who cares about what goes on in the other cities? We're not living there. What happens out there doesn't really affect what's going on here. (I highly doubt its because the drivers are clueless about the other cities' traffic... We do have people living here that come from cities that are worser than Seattle. But we are free to complain anyways... Seattle-style, LOL.)

[mrman78]

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

F.) Really, who cares about what goes on in the other cities? We're not living there. What happens out there doesn't really affect what's going on here. (I highly doubt its because the drivers are clueless about the other cities' traffic... We do have people living here that come from cities that are worser than Seattle. But we are free to complain anyways... Seattle-style, LOL.)

Agreed, it is all relative to where you are actually living. However, Seattle traffic is still not bad compared to many other places. People always tend to complain about the traffic where they live since, well, obviously they live there. But in terms of traffic congestion, Seattle isn't really that bad - which to me is a surprise because of the points you made about the water surrounding the city, etc. It makes me wonder why some other cities, similar in population to Seattle, have worse traffic and they don't have these natural boundaries as an excuse!