what's with local pols opposing expanding 270 and 495?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maryland is doing everything it can to take a permanent back seat (no pun intended) to Virginia. It’s their loss.

It’s crazy. They have no alternative plan. Just some pie in the sky hope they can force people into transit when the politicians don’t take transit themselves.

"Force people into transit" how, exactly? I always wonder. Please explain.

Enjoy the poverty you will leave this county in pursuing some stupid jetsons bullsh*t.

I have seriously never before heard walking, biking, buses, trains, and subways described as "stupid jetsons bullsh*t".

Do you have a realistic plan for economic growth in this county?

I have a realistic plan for transportation in this county, unlike Governor Larry Hogan.

I want to hear your economic development plan. That was the question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who support it have not really learned about the plan. 2 New lanes plus the HOV 2 lanes will become 24-7 Toll HOV-3 lanes. I think the projected toll is about $20 from the MD line to exit 9. The lanes will stop there...and the traffic will too. There is no help for anyone above exit 9. The toll lanes will be completely seperate from the non-toll lanes. If you want to enter the toll lanes you will use seperate entrances which do not exist now...like Guide. You can not go from non-toll to toll lanes with out exiting the highway and driving on local roads. I do support some expansion but not this one.

Plus, nobody is going to pay those tolls unless the non-toll lanes are backed up.

Just like no one in VA pays the tolls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who support it have not really learned about the plan. 2 New lanes plus the HOV 2 lanes will become 24-7 Toll HOV-3 lanes. I think the projected toll is about $20 from the MD line to exit 9. The lanes will stop there...and the traffic will too. There is no help for anyone above exit 9. The toll lanes will be completely seperate from the non-toll lanes. If you want to enter the toll lanes you will use seperate entrances which do not exist now...like Guide. You can not go from non-toll to toll lanes with out exiting the highway and driving on local roads. I do support some expansion but not this one.

Plus, nobody is going to pay those tolls unless the non-toll lanes are backed up.

Just like no one in VA pays the tolls?

People in Virginia pay the tolls even when the traffic is flowing freely in the non-toll lanes? That's foolish of them. What do they do that for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maryland is doing everything it can to take a permanent back seat (no pun intended) to Virginia. It’s their loss.

It’s crazy. They have no alternative plan. Just some pie in the sky hope they can force people into transit when the politicians don’t take transit themselves.

"Force people into transit" how, exactly? I always wonder. Please explain.

Enjoy the poverty you will leave this county in pursuing some stupid jetsons bullsh*t.

I have seriously never before heard walking, biking, buses, trains, and subways described as "stupid jetsons bullsh*t".

Do you have a realistic plan for economic growth in this county?

I have a realistic plan for transportation in this county, unlike Governor Larry Hogan.

I want to hear your economic development plan. That was the question.

This thread is about the 270/495 P3/toll lane project. I.e., it's about transportation.

[Anonymous]

The "induced demand" theory applies in the long run not short run. The question is how long it takes to reach that. For example, the ICC was opened about 10 years ago. It's still not congested. What happened to induced demand?

The other thing about it is that if the claim adding lanes makes traffic worse, then why not reduce 270 to 1 lane each way. Won't that make traffic better? We know it wont...

As for people working near their home, that's ideal, but in a 2-earner household, it's not easy for both parents to find a job near their home, and it's not easy to just pick up and move each time someone gets a new job. It's also not likely the person will hold that job for 20+ years. So, people will need to commute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The "induced demand" theory applies in the long run not short run. The question is how long it takes to reach that. For example, the ICC was opened about 10 years ago. It's still not congested. What happened to induced demand?

The other thing about it is that if the claim adding lanes makes traffic worse, then why not reduce 270 to 1 lane each way. Won't that make traffic better? We know it wont...

As for people working near their home, that's ideal, but in a 2-earner household, it's not easy for both parents to find a job near their home, and it's not easy to just pick up and move each time someone gets a new job. It's also not likely the person will hold that job for 20+ years. So, people will need to commute.

Induced demand does not apply to HOT lanes. Because access is restricted and you have to pay to use them, it does not induce any additional demand to thr non-tolled lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who support it have not really learned about the plan. 2 New lanes plus the HOV 2 lanes will become 24-7 Toll HOV-3 lanes. I think the projected toll is about $20 from the MD line to exit 9. The lanes will stop there...and the traffic will too. There is no help for anyone above exit 9. The toll lanes will be completely seperate from the non-toll lanes. If you want to enter the toll lanes you will use seperate entrances which do not exist now...like Guide. You can not go from non-toll to toll lanes with out exiting the highway and driving on local roads. I do support some expansion but not this one.

Plus, nobody is going to pay those tolls unless the non-toll lanes are backed up.

And VA has guarenteed TansUnion a certain amount of income so , we the taxpayers will likely owe if not enough people choose to pay the toll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maryland is doing everything it can to take a permanent back seat (no pun intended) to Virginia. It’s their loss.

It’s crazy. They have no alternative plan. Just some pie in the sky hope they can force people into transit when the politicians don’t take transit themselves.

"Force people into transit" how, exactly? I always wonder. Please explain.

Enjoy the poverty you will leave this county in pursuing some stupid jetsons bullsh*t.

I have seriously never before heard walking, biking, buses, trains, and subways described as "stupid jetsons bullsh*t".

Do you have a realistic plan for economic growth in this county?

I have a realistic plan for transportation in this county, unlike Governor Larry Hogan.

I want to hear your economic development plan. That was the question.

This thread is about the 270/495 P3/toll lane project. I.e., it's about transportation.

Transportation is the cornerstone of economic development. If you deny the ability to upgrade infrastructure without an alternative, the economy will not grow. There is no alternative proposed by TPB. They have only proposed further studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The "induced demand" theory applies in the long run not short run. The question is how long it takes to reach that. For example, the ICC was opened about 10 years ago. It's still not congested. What happened to induced demand?

The other thing about it is that if the claim adding lanes makes traffic worse, then why not reduce 270 to 1 lane each way. Won't that make traffic better? We know it wont...

As for people working near their home, that's ideal, but in a 2-earner household, it's not easy for both parents to find a job near their home, and it's not easy to just pick up and move each time someone gets a new job. It's also not likely the person will hold that job for 20+ years. So, people will need to commute.

The claim is that adding lanes increases the number of cars. Would reducing 270 to 1 lane each way reduce the number of cars on the road? Yes, it would.

The last time 270 was widened, in the 1990s, the "congestion relief" lasted less than 10 years.

Under Hogan's toll-lane proposal, there won't be any "congestion relief" for people in the non-toll lanes, because if the non-toll lanes are moving without back-ups, then nobody will pay for the tolls. And if nobody pays for the tolls, then Transurban won't make a profit. And if Transurban doesn't make a profit, guess who'll pay Transurban to make up for it? Yes, you're right: Maryland taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The "induced demand" theory applies in the long run not short run. The question is how long it takes to reach that. For example, the ICC was opened about 10 years ago. It's still not congested. What happened to induced demand?

The other thing about it is that if the claim adding lanes makes traffic worse, then why not reduce 270 to 1 lane each way. Won't that make traffic better? We know it wont...

As for people working near their home, that's ideal, but in a 2-earner household, it's not easy for both parents to find a job near their home, and it's not easy to just pick up and move each time someone gets a new job. It's also not likely the person will hold that job for 20+ years. So, people will need to commute.

Induced demand does not apply to HOT lanes. Because access is restricted and you have to pay to use them, it does not induce any additional demand to thr non-tolled lanes.

But we are losing two lanes that were HOV 2 only a few hours a day so it will feel like more traffic most of the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Transportation is the cornerstone of economic development. If you deny the ability to upgrade infrastructure without an alternative, the economy will not grow. There is no alternative proposed by TPB. They have only proposed further studies.

There are multiple alternatives proposed by the members of the TPB, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Transportation is the cornerstone of economic development. If you deny the ability to upgrade infrastructure without an alternative, the economy will not grow. There is no alternative proposed by TPB. They have only proposed further studies.

There are multiple alternatives proposed by the members of the TPB, though.

The TPB did not endorse or approve any alternative. They only blocked the project and proposed studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The "induced demand" theory applies in the long run not short run. The question is how long it takes to reach that. For example, the ICC was opened about 10 years ago. It's still not congested. What happened to induced demand?

The other thing about it is that if the claim adding lanes makes traffic worse, then why not reduce 270 to 1 lane each way. Won't that make traffic better? We know it wont...

As for people working near their home, that's ideal, but in a 2-earner household, it's not easy for both parents to find a job near their home, and it's not easy to just pick up and move each time someone gets a new job. It's also not likely the person will hold that job for 20+ years. So, people will need to commute.

Induced demand does not apply to HOT lanes. Because access is restricted and you have to pay to use them, it does not induce any additional demand to thr non-tolled lanes.

Then it also won't provide any "congestion relief" to the non-tolled lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The "induced demand" theory applies in the long run not short run. The question is how long it takes to reach that. For example, the ICC was opened about 10 years ago. It's still not congested. What happened to induced demand?

The other thing about it is that if the claim adding lanes makes traffic worse, then why not reduce 270 to 1 lane each way. Won't that make traffic better? We know it wont...

As for people working near their home, that's ideal, but in a 2-earner household, it's not easy for both parents to find a job near their home, and it's not easy to just pick up and move each time someone gets a new job. It's also not likely the person will hold that job for 20+ years. So, people will need to commute.

Induced demand does not apply to HOT lanes. Because access is restricted and you have to pay to use them, it does not induce any additional demand to thr non-tolled lanes.

Then it also won't provide any "congestion relief" to the non-tolled lanes.

It will provide relief to the people who pay the toll. That’s why it’s a toll lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Transportation is the cornerstone of economic development. If you deny the ability to upgrade infrastructure without an alternative, the economy will not grow. There is no alternative proposed by TPB. They have only proposed further studies.

There are multiple alternatives proposed by the members of the TPB, though.

The TPB did not endorse or approve any alternative. They only blocked the project and proposed studies.

The TPB cannot approve projects that have not been proposed, and the only thing Hogan has proposed is his P3 toll lane project.