Am I the only one who believes the ICC was a huge waste of $? (Baltimore: mortgage, construction)

[Phyxius]

Originally Posted by dkf747

Who said anything about paving our way out of a bad decision? We just want a bridge and a couple mile long connector road on either side of it. Half of the outer beltway will then be done.

Why do you want a new bridge? because people chose to live an hour away from your job? How long do you think that a new road will be congested? Then people are going to want another bridge and another road.

Before we start thinking about Outer Beltways, let's replace or maintain our outdated overpasses covered with bumpy patches and repave and repaint the roads we have now. Let's worry about our infrastructure we have now and stop building where the infrastructure can't support future development. I rather see the Purple Line completed before another river crossing.

Building infrastructure should be done in anticipation not after a problem is discovered. I like the idea but it should have been done decades ago before the population boom. For now, people need to put the phone down, stop squeezing their vehicles into tight spaces and pay attention to the road. That solve some of the congestion problems.

[Cruzincat]

Obviously, we need to maintain our current roads. No one contests that. I think Maryland does that better than most states. What Maryland fails to do is anticipate the increase in the number of vehicles that will be using them in the future. I am not saying Maryland is better or worse than other states in that regard. Besides, we don't have any control what other states do in that regard.

To think that the number of vehicles will not increase if we don't build more roads is wrong headed. It would be very difficult to find a time when the population in Maryland decreased, let alone the whole country. Don't forget, that you have to account for the increase in other states as well, because many of those people will be using Marylands highway to get through Maryland travelling up and down the coast.

True that a second beltway should have been started 20 years ago. If we don't start now, what do you think it will be like 20 years from now? I guess that, if nothing is done and it takes an average of 4 hours to go from north of Baltimore to the south of Washington, more drivers will start using I 81 to make the NS or SN trip on the coast. Can you imagine what we will have to put up around here to get them to do that?

I care about these subjects, because I make a living as a field service engineer and I need to be mobile, but I am also looking to retire before any projects starting now would ever be completed. Part of me says, don't spend my tax money for something I won't soon be needing, but I also believe in what is important for the future of my children and the country/state as a whole.

[reiflame]

Originally Posted by Phyxius

because people chose to live an hour away from your job?

This is a fallacy that annoys me every single time it comes up. Not everyone chooses to live an hour away. I was laid off from my job in Rockville and the only other position I could find that year was in Tysons. I did not "choose" to live an hour away, but I needed a job that paid a certain amount and I already own a house in Gaithersburg. I had exactly ZERO choice in that commute.

[dkf747]

Originally Posted by reiflame

This is a fallacy that annoys me every single time it comes up. Not everyone chooses to live an hour away.

That's why I didn't even bother to answer it.

It's a question that had nothing to do with the post I made.

[Cruzincat]

Originally Posted by reiflame

This is a fallacy that annoys me every single time it comes up. Not everyone chooses to live an hour away. I was laid off from my job in Rockville and the only other position I could find that year was in Tysons. I did not "choose" to live an hour away, but I needed a job that paid a certain amount and I already own a house in Gaithersburg. I had exactly ZERO choice in that commute.

Add to that, the fact that many homeowners are upside down and can't sell. If they have to take another job that results in a commute, they will likely be doing that commute for a long time.

[andrew_s]

Used the ICC a few times and while being quite expensive it saved me no time. So waste of time and money to build it? Yes.

[John13]

Originally Posted by andrew_s

Used the ICC a few times and while being quite expensive it saved me no time. So waste of time and money to build it? Yes.

From Gaithersburg to Laurel?

It saves time and gas no matter what time of day. During rush time it saves a lot in both. I've driven it quite a bit at different hours.
As I previously posted I set my cruise control at 61-62 MPH which is impossible driving 270-495-95. I'll take the lighter traffic anytime.

It's my understanding that the traffic on I 270 is a bit lighter because of it. Plus, it is bringing in enough revenue to squash any arguement that it was a waste of money...


.

[Phyxius]

Originally Posted by reiflame

This is a fallacy that annoys me every single time it comes up. Not everyone chooses to live an hour away. I was laid off from my job in Rockville and the only other position I could find that year was in Tysons. I did not "choose" to live an hour away, but I needed a job that paid a certain amount and I already own a house in Gaithersburg. I had exactly ZERO choice in that commute.

I'm sorry that you got laid off but you accepted the job so you made a choice. I'm sure you knew before hand the commute was long but that didn't stop you from taking that job. You can't take a shower and expect not to get wet.

[selhars]

IMO, when you and your family are already living in an area and the only place you can find a job is two hours away -- IMO -- that really isn't a choice. What? A choice to feed your kids or not? A choice to stay on unemployment and not be able to pay your mortgage? Now, if you have a job and choose to live far away afterward, that was a choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reiflame
This is a fallacy that annoys me every single time it comes up. Not everyone chooses to live an hour away. I was laid off from my job in Rockville and the only other position I could find that year was in Tysons. I did not "choose" to live an hour away, but I needed a job that paid a certain amount and I already own a house in Gaithersburg. I had exactly ZERO choice in that commute.

I'm sorry that you got laid off but you accepted the job so you made a choice. I'm sure you knew before hand the commute was long but that didn't stop you from taking that job. You can't take a shower and expect not to get wet.

[smitity]

Originally Posted by selhars

IMO, when you and your family are already living in an area and the only place you can find a job is two hours away -- IMO -- that really isn't a choice. What? A choice to feed your kids or not? A choice to stay on unemployment and not be able to pay your mortgage? Now, if you have a job and choose to live far away afterward, that was a choice.

Just to add to this. It's no secret that the alot of good jobs are concentrated in or close to DC, particularly in Montgomery county. It's also no secret that living near these areas is really damn expensive. So even if you're lucky and haven't had to switch jobs, alot of us still live far from work simply because our jobs don't pay enough to live close to work (and still be able to pay bills, eat, etc). Also, its not uncommon for a couple to work in two different regions, so both either have to commute some distance, or one has to have a longer commute.

Sure being close to work is ideal, and most of us would do it if possible. But in this region its hard to do. It's stupid to assume that most people commute because they want to do it.

Also, if there was better infrastructure, maybe some of our one-hour commutes would be alot shorter?