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

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I know they want everyone but them to take the bus, but it's not realistic. WMATA is woefully inadequate and dangerous. The bus isn't a viable option for many people especially if they have to work in another state. Having people sit in traffic isn't going to "save the planet" especially as more people move further out. They just don't expect to be in office when the consequences are full to see and traffic just gets far worse than the hell it currently is?[/quote]

Can you name one example of a place or time when widening a street or adding a lane has resulted in better traffic flow for cars?

No?

Neither can anyone else.

It is time to go a different path on our transportation policy.[/quote]
I've lived here my entire life. THey widened streets before they became insane due to high demand already in existance. When I was a kid, 270 was 4 lanes. Then they started widening it. Imagine if it was still only 4 lanes, do you think gridlock would be improved? This area is increasing in population, people are moving further out. THe metro only goes out so far, and the parts exist now are woeful.[/quote]

If it were still only 4 lanes, then there would be a lot fewer people driving down 270 on it. Instead we spent an enormous amount of money to widen 270 in the 1990s, which was supposed to "solve" congestion for decades, and the lanes filled up again in just a few years. That's induced demand. And meanwhile that money wasn't spent on other things that would have permanently helped people get places, like extending Metro to Germantown.[/quote]

No, it just means that longstanding projects that were planned in the 60s were delayed and delayed (and many, like the Outer Beltway were never built), so we are consistently way behind what is needed to meet population growth.  Yeah, if you are building half the needed capacity then those will fill up fast.[/quote]
Not only that but the statement itself about 270 widening actually supports the outcome. It was previously widened in the 90s and now it’s 30 years later. It did solve the problem for decades. Now we need to address it again. [/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