Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
You just repeated what the top PP said. More lanes will allow more people to sit in traffic.
It will increase capacity. If the worst case scenario is that traffic will move just as slow, at least more people can move slowly.
"Hey, let's spend billions of dollars to create bigger traffic jams!"
No. Let’s spend billions to allow more people to get to where they need to go like jobs that facilitate economic activity.
If you REALLY wanted that result, then you would support the expansion for mass transit. Spending on single occupancy cars is a fools errand.
Cars and transit are not mutually exclusive. Need more capacity for cars and if there is a case for adding transit they can do that too. The current plan is to provide buses priority access to the HOT lanes, which makes a lot of sense.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
You just repeated what the top PP said. More lanes will allow more people to sit in traffic.
It will increase capacity. If the worst case scenario is that traffic will move just as slow, at least more people can move slowly.
"Hey, let's spend billions of dollars to create bigger traffic jams!"
No. Let’s spend billions to allow more people to get to where they need to go like jobs that facilitate economic activity.
If you REALLY wanted that result, then you would support the expansion for mass transit. Spending on single occupancy cars is a fools errand.
Anonymous wrote:Maryland needs to do 3 things.
1. Rebuild and expand the American Legion Bridge.
2. Expand Point of Rocks
3. Build a third bridge that will connect to Dulles area.
A forth thing that MD needs is for the congressional delegation to appropriate funds for NPS to expand Clara Barton Parkway to add a third reversible lane and to have upper Beach Drive reopened.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
You just repeated what the top PP said. More lanes will allow more people to sit in traffic.
It will increase capacity. If the worst case scenario is that traffic will move just as slow, at least more people can move slowly.
"Hey, let's spend billions of dollars to create bigger traffic jams!"
No. Let’s spend billions to allow more people to get to where they need to go like jobs that facilitate economic activity.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
You just repeated what the top PP said. More lanes will allow more people to sit in traffic.
It will increase capacity. If the worst case scenario is that traffic will move just as slow, at least more people can move slowly.
"Hey, let's spend billions of dollars to create bigger traffic jams!"
No. Let’s spend billions to allow more people to get to where they need to go like jobs that facilitate economic activity.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
You just repeated what the top PP said. More lanes will allow more people to sit in traffic.
It will increase capacity. If the worst case scenario is that traffic will move just as slow, at least more people can move slowly.
"Hey, let's spend billions of dollars to create bigger traffic jams!"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
You just repeated what the top PP said. More lanes will allow more people to sit in traffic.
It will increase capacity. If the worst case scenario is that traffic will move just as slow, at least more people can move slowly.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
You just repeated what the top PP said. More lanes will allow more people to sit in traffic.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
More lanes will allow more people to cross the bridge.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Don’t trr we ll anyone about Chain Bridge.
I don't think there's a problem with current connections between VA and DC. The issue is between VA and MD and MD's boneheaded refusal to improve connections to VA at its own economic detriment.
Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has studied the history of Los Angeles freeways/highways should know that any money put towards adding lanes or any type of bridges isn't going to fix the traffic problems.
You buy a single family home in the suburbs and it’s your problem.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Don’t trr we ll anyone about Chain Bridge.
I don't think there's a problem with current connections between VA and DC. The issue is between VA and MD and MD's boneheaded refusal to improve connections to VA at its own economic detriment.
Anonymous wrote:Don’t trr we ll anyone about Chain Bridge.