More Highway Widening (Atlanta, Suwanee, Martin: calculating, to live, costs)

[PKCorey]

Originally Posted by sedimenjerry

This is a problem. Especially since our gas is noticeably more expensive than other states. In fact, in the week and a half I was back home I didn't even buy gas in GA. I bought it in SC for $1.90 and bought gas for $1.85 when headed back (I also don't buy gas in NC, WV or MD). If people are smart, they buy gas in Anderson and then again in Alabama if they're just passing through.

With both of the price increase in GA and MD, the prices aren't that far off each other honestly.

Now, I never get to get the cheap gas in SC when I come back from MD most of the time.

[sedimenjerry]

Originally Posted by PKCorey

With both of the price increase in GA and MD, the prices aren't that far off each other honestly.

Now, I never get to get the cheap gas in SC when I come back from MD most of the time.

By other states I just meant near Georgia. I'd run out of gas trying to make it on one tank from PA to GA!

[jsvh]

If you give something away for free, you should not be surprised when all of it gets used up (filled with traffic). That is not an indicator that this road needs to be widened to three lanes.

Originally Posted by DJDeadParrot

Too many people in too many posts in this thread have already spelled out for you that widening I-85 in these areas from 2 lanes to 3 is not about enabling limitless suburban growth out to areas where even a modest number of people commuting to Midtown are looking for a little bit more elbow room 40-50 miles from the office; the investment on one additional lane would yield significantly diminished returns for every mile past Hamilton Mill.

But it does just push out suburban growth. The majority of cars on these roads will be commuters / local traffic. And even for regional travel, it is distorting the market. Many of the people driving on this road may have prefered to use those dollars to travel via another method.

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

JSVH,
It actually is what you're proposing, but the problem if you lack the ability to understand it and connect the dots between the reality that exists beyond your little realm.

If you really think I am proposing forcing everyone from rural and suburban areas into highrises then I am not sure I can help you.

Now, do I think these sort of policies will result in less suburban sprawl? Yes. It lets people have more control over their transportation dollars and cars simply cannot move large numbers of people as cost effectively as transit on a level playing field. But no one will be forced from their home in the suburbs, if driving really is the cheaper option for their situation or just their personal preference they can keep on doing it.

If you think this is radical, well, apparently your radical is the new mainstream because it is what is happening today. Most of the highway lanes built in the coming years will be tolled. More transit will be constructed. More people are making the choice to move closer in and drive less.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

And cyclists should be paying for cycling lanes.
And walkers should be paying for sidewalks.
And train riders should be paying the full actual cost of the trip.
And bus riders should pay what it actually costs.
And people going to parks should be paying the cost to maintain the park.

Yes, they should. But we both know that is never going to happen and some subsidies will continue to exist. I am a fan of minimizing them where reasonable, but the question is for the tax money we do spend what methods do we encourage for how much money? Right now the vast, vast majority is going to cars.

If we are going to be encouraging something it should be the healthier, more sustainable, options that can handle large volumes of people well, agreed?

[bu2]

Originally Posted by jsvh

If you give something away for free, you should not be surprised when all of it gets used up (filled with traffic). That is not an indicator that this road needs to be widened to three lanes.



But it does just push out suburban growth. The majority of cars on these roads will be commuters / local traffic. And even for regional travel, it is distorting the market. Many of the people driving on this road may have prefered to use those dollars to travel via another method.



If you really think I am proposing forcing everyone from rural and suburban areas into highrises then I am not sure I can help you.

Now, do I think these sort of policies will result in less suburban sprawl? Yes. It lets people have more control over their transportation dollars and cars simply cannot move large numbers of people as cost effectively as transit on a level playing field. But no one will be forced from their home in the suburbs, if driving really is the cheaper option for their situation or just their personal preference they can keep on doing it.

If you think this is radical, well, apparently your radical is the new mainstream because it is what is happening today. Most of the highway lanes built in the coming years will be tolled.

Do you never leave the city? There are a lot of these interstates that need 6 lanes between cities.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by bu2

Do you never leave the city? There are a lot of these interstates that need 6 lanes between cities.

And why do you think they "need" more than 6 lanes? Because they are full of cars at a price of zero?

There would be a lot more things we would suddenly "need" if they were free of charge.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by jsvh

And why do you think they "need" more than 6 lanes? Because they are full of cars at a price of zero?

There would be a lot more things we would suddenly "need" if they were free of charge.

It's not a price of 0, and you know it! The people that live and do business there pay taxes into the roads, and those that live there have decided that it's worth subsidizing a few out of towners in exchange for the massive business they bring. You say you're all about choice, so what if it's their choice to build 6-lane roads?

[jsvh]

Of course it is not free Matt. Roads and Highways cost millions and trillions of dollars every year. But users don't directly pay any extra. Those that drive on it won't pay a single extra dollar for this wider, more expensive highway compared to the existing one.

There is no real choice involved here beyond "do you want something for no extra charge to you?". And that is no real choice at all.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Of course it is not free Matt. Roads and Highways cost millions and trillions of dollars every years. But users don't directly pay anymore. These that drive on it won't pay a single extra dollar for this wider, more expensive highway compared to the existing one.

Didn't you just say a few posts ago that most of the users would be local? So if anything, most of the people DO pay, a lot of extra dollars for the wider, more expensive highway. Even most out of towners will pay because they stop for gas, food, other services. Then consider that the Federal government sometimes pays part of projects, and everyone is paying.

[jsvh]

How much do you pay when you drive on this section of highway now? How much will you pay after the tens (maybe hundreds) of millions of dollars are spent to widen it?