Reply to Why has 270 been horrific in the mornings?

Forum Index » Cars and Transportation

Reply to "Why has 270 been horrific in the mornings? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

That article does nothing to address bottlenecks.  It's talking about induced demand.  I fully understand what induced demand is, if you make the commute easier then more people will choose to live further out where it's cheaper which will fill up the roads.  Fixing bottlenecks makes sense even if you don't agree that widening the road elsewhere should be done.  While induced demand may very well be real, [b]it's also true that if all of 270 was 2 lanes each way that it would be much worse than it is today.  [/b]There is an equilibrium where extra lanes do no good and fixing a bottleneck where six lanes on each side drops to 2 would do a lot to help.  Expanding roads where it's already 12 lanes across to 14 would do nothing to help.[/quote]

That's not true at all. If 270 hadn't been widened, people wouldn't have made decades of decisions based on the existence of a wide 270. They would have made different decisions. Land use and travel patterns would all have been different.

Not to mention that, in places where roads have been reduced, there has been no traffic armageddon.
[/quote]

Okay so let's reduce 270 from 12 lanes to 0 lanes.  We would eliminate traffic jams right?[/quote]

San Francisco reduced the Embarcadero to 0 lanes in 1991. What happened?[/quote]

Never been to San Francisco and never heard of that road.  You’ll have to fill me in....[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics