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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prove this. Show me proof that not expanding an overburdened system provides relief to the current gridlock.
What is your solution? TO pray the traffic away? Do you take Metro? It's beyond woeful. It is NOT a viable solution. It is not a transportation system. It is a jobs program. It is not going to provide relief, it is not going to take many cars off the road. So what do you propose to deal with the CURRENT gridlock which is only going to get worse?

At this point, you're basically asking the PP to show you proof that gravity is what keeps you from floating off into space. That's how well-established the theory of induced demand is.

So doing nothing is the solution? Despite knowing more people are moving further out? There is already gridlock. Does expending metro mean more people take metro? So why does it with roads?

Stop building further out. Build more densely. Add more mass transit. Prioritize all highway use during peak periods for mass transit.

That would take 30-50 years. What about now and the immediate future? I'm saying be realistic, not some decades away fantasy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prove this. Show me proof that not expanding an overburdened system provides relief to the current gridlock.
What is your solution? TO pray the traffic away? Do you take Metro? It's beyond woeful. It is NOT a viable solution. It is not a transportation system. It is a jobs program. It is not going to provide relief, it is not going to take many cars off the road. So what do you propose to deal with the CURRENT gridlock which is only going to get worse?

At this point, you're basically asking the PP to show you proof that gravity is what keeps you from floating off into space. That's how well-established the theory of induced demand is.

So doing nothing is the solution? Despite knowing more people are moving further out? There is already gridlock. Does expending metro mean more people take metro? So why does it with roads?

No, nobody is proposing doing nothing.

Yes, when Metro runs better/more convenient service, then more people take Metro.

This is actually from an Australian satire TV show, but it's an outstanding explanation of the theory of induced demand as applied to road widening: https://www.facebook.com/ABCTV/videos/simulated-solutions-utopia-watch-full-season-now-on-iview/806088466514123/ (Economists can quibble about whether or not that actually is an example of Jevons paradox. I am not an economist.)

Metro is NEVER going to operate competently. NEVER.

I took Metro down town for 20 years. Most of the time..I sat and read a book and it got me to work as expected. The number of times I was more than 10 minutes delayed was quite small. I know it is not the solution for everyone but it moves lots of people pretty well. No way I would sit in traffic on the beltway.

I’m not sure when you stopped taking Metro but that last decade has been brutal. They have had nonstop fare hikes and increased parking fees such that it is cheaper to drive and park downtown (not counting wear and tear) and then added to that, it’s been fewer trains so they are packed before they get to Medical Center and the reliability was a disgrace. I lost a lot of money over the years on huge after care late fees because Metros unreliability. I’m not interested in taking it anymore once this pandemic is over and if I have to go back downtown again. I’m not doing it.

DP, I have been riding metro since I was in elementary school. You can count on one hand the number of times I have been significantly delayed for any reason.

I concur, it's cheaper to drive if you don't work downtown than take the metro. FOr example if I were to take public transit to my current job, it would take at least 2 hours each way, I'd pay the maximum fare both ways and pay the metro parking fee. Instead I drive, takes about 45 minutes each way, and there's free parking at work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prove this. Show me proof that not expanding an overburdened system provides relief to the current gridlock.
What is your solution? TO pray the traffic away? Do you take Metro? It's beyond woeful. It is NOT a viable solution. It is not a transportation system. It is a jobs program. It is not going to provide relief, it is not going to take many cars off the road. So what do you propose to deal with the CURRENT gridlock which is only going to get worse?

At this point, you're basically asking the PP to show you proof that gravity is what keeps you from floating off into space. That's how well-established the theory of induced demand is.

So doing nothing is the solution? Despite knowing more people are moving further out? There is already gridlock. Does expending metro mean more people take metro? So why does it with roads?

Stop building further out. Build more densely. Add more mass transit. Prioritize all highway use during peak periods for mass transit.

That would take 30-50 years. What about now and the immediate future? I'm saying be realistic, not some decades away fantasy.

DP. You're saying we should keep doing the same thing that has been proven not to work and calling it realistic. That's the opposite of "realistic" it's a fantasy from 80 years ago that you can't let go of in the face of the overwhelming evidence that it's a fantasy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prove this. Show me proof that not expanding an overburdened system provides relief to the current gridlock.
What is your solution? TO pray the traffic away? Do you take Metro? It's beyond woeful. It is NOT a viable solution. It is not a transportation system. It is a jobs program. It is not going to provide relief, it is not going to take many cars off the road. So what do you propose to deal with the CURRENT gridlock which is only going to get worse?

At this point, you're basically asking the PP to show you proof that gravity is what keeps you from floating off into space. That's how well-established the theory of induced demand is.

So doing nothing is the solution? Despite knowing more people are moving further out? There is already gridlock. Does expending metro mean more people take metro? So why does it with roads?

Stop building further out. Build more densely. Add more mass transit. Prioritize all highway use during peak periods for mass transit.

That would take 30-50 years. What about now and the immediate future? I'm saying be realistic, not some decades away fantasy.

Why would it take 30-50 years to add more transit and give buses priority on 270 and the Beltway?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prove this. Show me proof that not expanding an overburdened system provides relief to the current gridlock.
What is your solution? TO pray the traffic away? Do you take Metro? It's beyond woeful. It is NOT a viable solution. It is not a transportation system. It is a jobs program. It is not going to provide relief, it is not going to take many cars off the road. So what do you propose to deal with the CURRENT gridlock which is only going to get worse?

At this point, you're basically asking the PP to show you proof that gravity is what keeps you from floating off into space. That's how well-established the theory of induced demand is.

So doing nothing is the solution? Despite knowing more people are moving further out? There is already gridlock. Does expending metro mean more people take metro? So why does it with roads?

No, nobody is proposing doing nothing.

Yes, when Metro runs better/more convenient service, then more people take Metro.

This is actually from an Australian satire TV show, but it's an outstanding explanation of the theory of induced demand as applied to road widening: https://www.facebook.com/ABCTV/videos/simulated-solutions-utopia-watch-full-season-now-on-iview/806088466514123/ (Economists can quibble about whether or not that actually is an example of Jevons paradox. I am not an economist.)

Metro is NEVER going to operate competently. NEVER.

I took Metro down town for 20 years. Most of the time..I sat and read a book and it got me to work as expected. The number of times I was more than 10 minutes delayed was quite small. I know it is not the solution for everyone but it moves lots of people pretty well. No way I would sit in traffic on the beltway.

I’m not sure when you stopped taking Metro but that last decade has been brutal. They have had nonstop fare hikes and increased parking fees such that it is cheaper to drive and park downtown (not counting wear and tear) and then added to that, it’s been fewer trains so they are packed before they get to Medical Center and the reliability was a disgrace. I lost a lot of money over the years on huge after care late fees because Metros unreliability. I’m not interested in taking it anymore once this pandemic is over and if I have to go back downtown again. I’m not doing it.

DP, I have been riding metro since I was in elementary school. You can count on one hand the number of times I have been significantly delayed for any reason.

You obviously don't use it to commute. Beyond the horrible service, arcing insulators, fires, crashes, they also close lines down, a whole bunch of stations, for months on end, for renovations. The escalators don't work. The system is a nightmare. If they had a japanese style system here, I agree it would be better and possibly a viable alternative to driving. But that's not what we have we. We have a national embarrassment. A disgrace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I concur, it's cheaper to drive if you don't work downtown than take the metro. FOr example if I were to take public transit to my current job, it would take at least 2 hours each way, I'd pay the maximum fare both ways and pay the metro parking fee. Instead I drive, takes about 45 minutes each way, and there's free parking at work.

Well, there you go. Driving works for you. So there's no need for the state to embark on a fiscally-dubious, environmentally-damaging highway widening/toll lane project.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HOV lanes make traffic worse

They seem to work great in VA. Just too expensive.

Ergo, not working.

Curious how are the fees on I66 non HOV drivers not "racist"? when it can be $50 to drive a couple of miles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I concur, it's cheaper to drive if you don't work downtown than take the metro. FOr example if I were to take public transit to my current job, it would take at least 2 hours each way, I'd pay the maximum fare both ways and pay the metro parking fee. Instead I drive, takes about 45 minutes each way, and there's free parking at work.

Well, there you go. Driving works for you. So there's no need for the state to embark on a fiscally-dubious, environmentally-damaging highway widening/toll lane project.

So what's the purpose of local government then? TO encourage gridlock?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You obviously don't use it to commute. Beyond the horrible service, arcing insulators, fires, crashes, they also close lines down, a whole bunch of stations, for months on end, for renovations. The escalators don't work. The system is a nightmare. If they had a japanese style system here, I agree it would be better and possibly a viable alternative to driving. But that's not what we have we. We have a national embarrassment. A disgrace.

The driving equivalent of all of these things happen when you're driving on the roads - especially fires and crashes. How many times have you been delayed by a crash while driving? That's like half of the morning "drive time" news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a recognition that

1. Widening highways for "congestion relief" only leads to more driving and more congestion
2. While also contributing to air pollution, water pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions
3. And dumping the additional cars on local roads that aren't any bigger
4. Plus the for-profit company that's supposedly going to build it will only make a profit if the "free" lanes stay backed up
5. Plus taxpayers have ended up on the hook for the projects that the for-profit company has built elsewhere
6. Plus it was unlikely to get federal approval anyway because there are alternatives that are less damaging to the environment

Other than that, though...

(And the solution to inadequate transit is to fund better and more transit.)

That makes no sense. People are going to commute regardless of whether they expand roads or not. And this area, the closer you get to DC, the more expensive it is, so people will continue moving away, especially with violent crime going up. Wishing it away isn't a sol;ution. Busses are not a solution. Metro isn't a solution. Even if they expanded metro to frederick and to Woodbridge, it still would make no difference as metro is unreliable at best. Dangerous at worse. What is the solution then?

Stop making everyone travel to an office in a central place to work.

My office isn't in a central place. It's near Springfield, VA. I live in central moco. Public transit isn't a feasible option for me.

Why don't you move closer to your office?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I concur, it's cheaper to drive if you don't work downtown than take the metro. FOr example if I were to take public transit to my current job, it would take at least 2 hours each way, I'd pay the maximum fare both ways and pay the metro parking fee. Instead I drive, takes about 45 minutes each way, and there's free parking at work.

Well, there you go. Driving works for you. So there's no need for the state to embark on a fiscally-dubious, environmentally-damaging highway widening/toll lane project.

So what's the purpose of local government then? TO encourage gridlock?

To repeat: widening the highway won't fix the gridlock (which can't be all that gridlocky, because otherwise your driving commute wouldn't work for you).

And the toll lanes especially won't. Nobody would pay to drive in the toll lanes if the "free" lanes are uncongested. Therefore, Transurban would make sure that the "free" lanes remained backed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prove this. Show me proof that not expanding an overburdened system provides relief to the current gridlock.
What is your solution? TO pray the traffic away? Do you take Metro? It's beyond woeful. It is NOT a viable solution. It is not a transportation system. It is a jobs program. It is not going to provide relief, it is not going to take many cars off the road. So what do you propose to deal with the CURRENT gridlock which is only going to get worse?

DP but...

https://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traffic-induced-demand/

https://www.planetizen.com/news/2018/09/100480-induced-demand-explained

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/06/21/the-science-is-clear-more-highways-equals-more-traffic-why-are-dots-still-ignoring-it/

https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/induced_traffic_and_induced_demand_lee.pdf

https://www.vtpi.org/gentraf.pdf

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/762976/latest-evidence-on-induced-travel-demand-an-evidence-review.pdf

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3141/1659-09

I mean, there are hundreds, if not thousands of these studies.

NP here but this poster who keeps denying that extra lanes don’t alleviate traffic is so typical DCUM know-it-all. I know nothing about the economics or engineering of urban planning around traffic but I have heard this stated a bunch of times. It is pretty irrefutable that extra lanes just lead to extra cars on the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You obviously don't use it to commute. Beyond the horrible service, arcing insulators, fires, crashes, they also close lines down, a whole bunch of stations, for months on end, for renovations. The escalators don't work. The system is a nightmare. If they had a japanese style system here, I agree it would be better and possibly a viable alternative to driving. But that's not what we have we. We have a national embarrassment. A disgrace.

The driving equivalent of all of these things happen when you're driving on the roads - especially fires and crashes. How many times have you been delayed by a crash while driving? That's like half of the morning "drive time" news.

THIS!!!! I used to drive to Ft Meade and use BWI Pkwy (got on right at Bladensburg) and EVERY.FREAKIN.MORNING there was an accident or stalled car that caused a delay both in the morning and evenings. I work downtown now and take metro all of 5 stops (reason why I changed jobs) and would not ever go back to commuting on these roads! It's INSANE! Yes, the RL can be troublesome occasionally, but you cannot get me back on these roads, (well, maybe if my salary was doubled )

[Anonymous]

Over the past 40 years, construction of US urban freeways and arterials far outpaced urban population growth. Yet traffic delay per commuter more than doubled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I concur, it's cheaper to drive if you don't work downtown than take the metro. FOr example if I were to take public transit to my current job, it would take at least 2 hours each way, I'd pay the maximum fare both ways and pay the metro parking fee. Instead I drive on roads that are subsidized for your use, takes about 45 minutes each way, and there's free parking at work.someone paid for the parking, it just isn't you. It is most liklely me in the form of subsidies to your employer

IOW if you paid the actual costs for your commute, metro would be more cost effective.