Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Im not against the toll lanes but overall their impact vs the actual cost of construction will be extremely negligible in that region to the decree where I feel it was truly a waste of money and time. Better idea would have been to find a way to divert trucks away from I-285 and bring transit up to Cobb.
I agree that diverting truck traffic away from the I-285 Perimeter and expanding and implementing high-capacity transit into Cobb County has got to be a crucial part of the transportation equation.
But it should be noted that the I-75/I-575 Northwest express toll lanes were commissioned in 2013 after many years and decades of inaction by Georgia state government on transportation issues.
The current/most recent spate of toll lane projects on I-75/I-575 Northwest, I-75 South and I-85 Northeast were pushed forward by current Georgia Governor Nathan Deal and his administration as a way to do something (anything) about transportation after the resounding failure of the regional T-SPLOST referendum debacle the previous year in 2012 and after years and decades of inaction and unsuccessful action on transportation issues.
One of those unsuccessful actions that the state had been involved in the 2 decades preceding the current spate of toll lane projects was an effort to divert trucks away from the I-285 Perimeter by proposing the construction of an Outer Perimeter highway... A highway construction proposal that turned out to be so very unpopular with the Georgia voting public to the point that it played a starring role in deciding the outcome of the 2002 gubernatorial election against the politicians who backed it, including former Georgia governor Roy Barnes, his administration and the Democratic Party of Georgia which took significant losses in the 2002 election and would go on to lose their legislative majorities in 2004 and remain stuck in a deep minority position in Georgia state government to the present day.
Another major motivation in the commissioning and construction of the I-75/I-575 Northwest toll lanes has been the continuing extreme political difficulty of implementing a high-capacity transit connection between Cobb County and neighboring Atlanta and Fulton County.
Despite the very high levels of population growth and traffic congestion growth that the county has experienced since the county rejected the idea of being part of MARTA back in 1965, Cobb County has often actively continued to reject the idea of being connected to Atlanta and Fulton County via high-capacity transit service... Something that the transit-averse voters who have dominated Cobb County's notably conservative electorate continue to actively support.
Because there has and continues to be much resistance to the idea of connecting Cobb County to Atlanta with a high-capacity transit line, the State of Georgia decided to push ahead with a proposal to build toll lanes along Interstates 75 and 575 that was significantly scaled-down from previous proposals to expand the I-75/I-575 corridor complex with toll lanes.
The construction of an Outer Perimeter road to divert trucks off of I-285 has proven to be a virtually impossible lift, and the implementation of high-capacity transit in Cobb appears to still be many years away, but the toll lanes were something that could be commissioned and built almost immediately (within a 5-year period)... So the State of Georgia went ahead with a toll lane project that could be ready for use in a very short period of time while the endless political haggling, maneuvering and obfuscation continues over transit expansion into a traditionally extremely transit-averse area like Cobb.
Yeah, but it only adds the new lanes in Cobb and Cherokee counties, and people are typically commuting from those counties into Fulton. So cars on the express lanes will still have to merge back into the regular lanes, on 75 southbound and 285 in both directions. So it's still going to be basically more or less the same crunch.
Exactly...it doesn't matter if you have 100 lanes in any given direction if they all merge down into 5 lanes at some point.
Look at 85/75 Southbound. After the exit for 400 off of 85 southbound, 85-S is 4 lanes. Shortly after, it drops from 4 to 3 lanes. it then merges with two lanes from 400 South. Then one of those lanes ends within 1/4 mile. So, in the span of about 1/2 of a mile, you drop from 6 lanes to 4 lanes, without exits. Then, shortly after, Buford-Sping connector merges with one lane, which then quickly becomes the exit lane for 75-N. But that exit is not usually very busy. So, now we've brought 7 lanes in, dropped down to 4 lanes to then merge with the 3 lanes of 75-S. That's 7 lanes (already jammed from losing lanes previously) merging together, then dropping to 6 in under 1000 feet. BY the time it hits Williams, which I'm assuming doesn't get heavy traffic exiting in the afternoon peak, you drop to 5. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that if you try to cram seven already-full lanes into five lanes within 1.5 miles, it's not going to work. That's the problem with our highway system....we merge all these lanes together, but don't have the lane capacity after the merge to deal with it.
Same thing with these express lanes...if they're just dumping you into the same already-exiting boondoggle, they're just going to back up as well.
A lot of y'all seem to be missing the point of HOT lanes. They are not there to alleviate traffic. They, like transit, are there to provide an alternative to it while adding capacity to the corridor as a whole.
The tolls are simply a way to meter their flow and (at least attempt) to ensure that the lanes remain free-flowing while also serving the largest number of users as possible.
There are only three real ways to actually reduce traffic:
Have our local economy decay to the point where a ton of people move out or no one can afford to drive
Physically remove road infrastructure to reduce the total number of cars able to use the system, preferably while replacing that with higher-throughput options
Charge tolls and congestion fees on the large-scale to reduce usage on the metro level, preferably focused on the greatest sources of traffic such as the core and the freeways themselves
Anything else will just be adding capacity which will probably be filled up in a couple years after completion. At least the HOT lanes can self-meter the flow to maintain travel speeds for transit using them.
A lot of y'all seem to be missing the point of HOT lanes. They are not there to alleviate traffic. They, like transit, are there to provide an alternative to it while adding capacity to the corridor as a whole.
The tolls are simply a way to meter their flow and (at least attempt) to ensure that the lanes remain free-flowing while also serving the largest number of users as possible.
There are only three real ways to actually reduce traffic:
Have our local economy decay to the point where a ton of people move out or no one can afford to drive
Physically remove road infrastructure to reduce the total number of cars able to use the system, preferably while replacing that with higher-throughput options
Charge tolls and congestion fees on the large-scale to reduce usage on the metro level, preferably focused on the greatest sources of traffic such as the core and the freeways themselves
Anything else will just be adding capacity which will probably be filled up in a couple years after completion. At least the HOT lanes can self-meter the flow to maintain travel speeds for transit using them.
Wait...can you explain how just removing roads will help with traffic. Reducing the number of cars on reduced roads doesn't mean those roads will flow better or be less congested...it just means fewer roads with fewer people...same congestion...or worse.
I notice you didn't mention anything about simply adding robust transit options. Just the "remove lanes and charge people" mantra.
As far as the HOT lanes metering flow to keep them moving, that's all well and good. But the point is being made that the 75 ones seem to merge, at the end, with 285 and 75. So, they are adding another lane or two, merging into the already existing lanes, without those lanes being expanded at all. If those lanes are already congested, then the HOT lanes will not have anywhere to feed TO that isn't already backed up. So, they will also simply back up as well. Nothing is actually fixed in that scenario.
That's the thing, though. How are they supposed to do that, if there's nowhere for the cars to go? Did you read my post?
Southbound, in the mornings, the only thing that really backs up is the 285 EB exit. The lanes for 75 SB and 285 WB flow freely once they get past the stack of cars trying to go onto 285 EB. So, cars on the new express lanes heading for 285 WB and 75 SB should be able to merge pretty smoothly onto those stretches of highway, and to the extent that cars heading for all three highways are now on the express lanes, that should take some additional pressure off of the main highway. I agree that the merge from the express lanes onto 285 EB is still not likely to be a picnic.
In the evening, the new lanes are heading northbound and don't have to merge onto anything, so they really do provide incremental capacity.
Wait...can you explain how just removing roads will help with traffic. Reducing the number of cars on reduced roads doesn't mean those roads will flow better or be less congested...it just means fewer roads with fewer people...same congestion...or worse.
I was speaking in the context of total vehicle counts. Physically remove roads and fewer people can drive there. Fully convert a road to be car-free, and you have no traffic. It's being facetious, yes, but the point stands.
That said, there is opportunity to see average travel times actually decrease if you replace the road-capacity with more efficient modes like a transit way.
Quote:
I notice you didn't mention anything about simply adding robust transit options. Just the "remove lanes and charge people" mantra.
Because simply adding a robust transit system doesn't negate induced demand. As I said, transit without road-metering simply adds alternatives and capacity. Any transfer of mode-use is nearly guaranteed to be back-filled by new trips taking advantage of the new road capacity until traffic is right back to where it was.
Quote:
As far as the HOT lanes metering flow to keep them moving, that's all well and good. But the point is being made that the 75 ones seem to merge, at the end, with 285 and 75. So, they are adding another lane or two, merging into the already existing lanes, without those lanes being expanded at all. If those lanes are already congested, then the HOT lanes will not have anywhere to feed TO that isn't already backed up. So, they will also simply back up as well. Nothing is actually fixed in that scenario.
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech
That's the thing, though. How are they supposed to do that, if there's nowhere for the cars to go? Did you read my post?
Except total travel times are still improved by using the HOT lanes instead of the general-purpose lanes. It still takes less time to bypass all the back up and come out at the, still clogged, destination, than to sit through the back up in the first place.
If the HOT lanes are truly getting backed up to equivalent levels as the standard road, then the pricing is off, and needs to increase. The I-85 lanes are the exception due to their lack of physical separation, and are thus far more effected by ambient traffic than the I-75 lanes on either end.
Southbound, in the mornings, the only thing that really backs up is the 285 EB exit. The lanes for 75 SB and 285 WB flow freely once they get past the stack of cars trying to go onto 285 EB. So, cars on the new express lanes heading for 285 WB and 75 SB should be able to merge pretty smoothly onto those stretches of highway, and to the extent that cars heading for all three highways are now on the express lanes, that should take some additional pressure off of the main highway. I agree that the merge from the express lanes onto 285 EB is still not likely to be a picnic.
In the evening, the new lanes are heading northbound and don't have to merge onto anything, so they really do provide incremental capacity.
Good analysis. The biggest traffic hassles in metro Atlanta are around 285 and that's not easy to address.
A lot of y'all seem to be missing the point of HOT lanes. They are not there to alleviate traffic. They, like transit, are there to provide an alternative to it while adding capacity to the corridor as a whole.
The tolls are simply a way to meter their flow and (at least attempt) to ensure that the lanes remain free-flowing while also serving the largest number of users as possible.
There are only three real ways to actually reduce traffic:
Have our local economy decay to the point where a ton of people move out or no one can afford to drive
Physically remove road infrastructure to reduce the total number of cars able to use the system, preferably while replacing that with higher-throughput options
Charge tolls and congestion fees on the large-scale to reduce usage on the metro level, preferably focused on the greatest sources of traffic such as the core and the freeways themselves
Anything else will just be adding capacity which will probably be filled up in a couple years after completion. At least the HOT lanes can self-meter the flow to maintain travel speeds for transit using them.
I know that tolled lanes are not meant to alleviate traffic, however; In the end, I cannot justify the $1 Billion Dollar price tag for these two additional tolled lanes while Cobb has absolutely no rail system.. it makes me hurl just thinking that something like this got approved over a more reliable mass transit system. I could see it if the cost of implementing these lanes were significantly less, thus justifying it as a reasonable solution to bypass traffic.. but this is completely absurd.
As for removing roads to remove congestion? I cannot buy that, even it congestion were effected in a positive manner, it would still only remain relative to the amount of lane space available, thus...EVEN if the cars decreased, the roads that remain available will still be at capacity.
However my debunk to that entire theory is, Houston, DFW, Chicago, San Francisco, ect all have many more road options of getting around than we do in Metro Atlanta, however; Metro Atlanta surpasses all of those cities as having some of the worst congestion in the world.
I know that tolled lanes are not meant to alleviate traffic, however; In the end, I cannot justify the $1 Billion Dollar price tag for these two additional tolled lanes while Cobb has absolutely no rail system.. it makes me hurl just thinking that something like this got approved over a more reliable mass transit system. I could see it if the cost of implementing these lanes were significantly less, thus justifying it as a reasonable solution to bypass traffic.. but this is completely absurd.
Generally I would agree with this sentiment. The only thing that keeps me from fully agreeing, though, is that I haven't seen any reports on return on investment for the roads, directly from tolls and otherwise.
The advantage that HOT lanes have over standard lanes is similar to that of toll roads over normal roads. That is, that they can recoup much of their initial costs directly. Do we know whether or not the HOT lanes are earning their target revenues, and how well that stands against their initial and ongoing costs?
Quote:
As for removing roads to remove congestion? I cannot buy that, even it congestion were effected in a positive manner, it would still only remain relative to the amount of lane space available, thus...EVEN if the cars decreased, the roads that remain available will still be at capacity.
As I said, I was speaking to traffic as the total number of vehicles rather than just congestion. As I also said, though, with the conversion of road space to more efficient modes, average travel times could drop as more people are moved through the corridor by non-car methods.
Quote:
However my debunk to that entire theory is, Houston, DFW, Chicago, San Francisco, ect all have many more road options of getting around than we do in Metro Atlanta, however; Metro Atlanta surpasses all of those cities as having some of the worst congestion in the world.
And adding more roads, as all of those cities (maybe with the exception of Chicago) showcase, will just increase driving. Just look at Las Angeles.
We can not continue to think of congestion and mobility solutions as purely the efficiency of moving cars. That is the mindset that's gotten us here today, with all the pollution and congestion and infrastructure problems. If converting lanes to a transit way increases auto congestion, but decreases average travel times, then I call that a solid win.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
