Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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?

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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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?

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HOV lanes make traffic worse

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

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.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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?

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.

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.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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?

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.

Anonymous wrote:
What are you talking about and I’m not sure what you’re arguing about. The beltway will be expanded and 270 too. The only question is whether it’s going to have tolls or not. Get over it.

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.

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?

Widening highways leads to increased traffic is pretty much a rule in road planning. There are outlier exceptions where this doesn't happen, but virtually every time you add roads you add drivers.

And if you don't widen it when it's already overburned you have gridlock. Sitting in traffic isn't going to save the planet. what is wrong with people?

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?

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?

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Anonymous wrote: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?