State scraps plans for HOT lanes on 75 & 575 (sales, home)

[billl]

Originally Posted by cqholt

if we want to really solve congestion then we need to offer commuters an alternative to driving, whether it be LRT, HRT, BRT, or commuter trains. We need to stop building more highways and start building more mass transit.

THAT!

I'd rep you again but the website won't let me.

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Why encourage more far-out development by adding these lanes. First, the new lanes would destroy the scenery from I-75 with overhead lanes supported by ugly concrete columns. Second, if we want to really solve congestion then we need to offer commuters an alternative to driving, whether it be LRT, HRT, BRT, or commuter trains. We need to stop building more highways and start building more mass transit.

1. So scenery > quality of life for tens of thousands of commuters?

2. Offer commuter buses free use of the lanes.

3. What $1 billion mass transit plan would have any sort of traffic impact like these 2 lanes would? LRT to Cumberland is a $1 billion proposal. Do you think that will do anything for congestion? Heck, MARTA wants to build a 4.7 mile rail track for $1.3 billion that will only see 6,900 new riders. I haven't seen user projections on the new lanes, but I would expect them to be at least 25,000 given that the single lane HOT debacle on I-85 has been averaging in the 14,000 a day range. 25,000 vehicles should see, and pay for, the direct benefits of the lanes, and the non-users will still see a reduction in vehicles in the free lanes. It just makes sense.

[testa50]

Originally Posted by billl

And again will do nothing to reduce congestion in the regular lanes. At least not to any noticeable degree. The only truly positive effect it will have is giving the commuter buses an express lane that bypasses all the congestion.

Cite please?

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by testa50

The long term plan is to add new lanes on 85 as well. It would be quite a leap for the DOT to be under construction on I-75 for years and years without any working example of what they plan to create.

Also, I don't understand the "we already paid for it" argument. Maintaining the existing infrastructure is also extremely expensive, something like half the DOT's budget. If being "free market" is so important, then why support a centralized, "all you can eat" approach to roadway management? Free markets punish people for using scarce resources--that's kind of the name of the game. But for some reason the government's completely distorted approach to roadway funding and management has a lot of fans among so-called "free market" folks.

Maintenance is a big part of the budget, but when compared to the cost of maintaining mass transit systems, the cost is minimal. MARTA spent about $87 million on maintenance in 2010 ($43 million from MARTA and another $44 from federal hand outs). Now MARTA wants $540 million from the TSPLOST initiative to cover maintenance projects. The entire Georgia DOT maintenance budget for 2008 was about $570 million for the state's roads.

You are talking apples and oranges when talking maintenance costs for highways and mass transit systems.

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by billl

And again will do nothing to reduce congestion in the regular lanes. At least not to any noticeable degree. The only truly positive effect it will have is giving the commuter buses an express lane that bypasses all the congestion. Source?

And I object to the government spending my tax dollars (which I pay every week at the pump) to build a lane that I can't use unless I pay more money. Sounds just like mass transit to me.

The lanes as proposed offer little to no benefit for those working along the I-75 corridor from the Galleria outwards. We would have to go either all the way up to Terrel Mill (a nightmare during the afternoon rush) or all the way down to Mt. Paran and turn around in order to be in a position to get in the lanes. That pretty much soaks up any time savings. But hey, at least the folks who work downtown and in Buckhead will be able to pay for their luxury lane. Well, they will only be paying for part of their luxury lane because all the rest of us will have already paid for most of it.

[testa50]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Maintenance is a big part of the budget, but when compared to the cost of maintaining mass transit systems, the cost is minimal. MARTA spent about $87 million on maintenance in 2010 ($43 million from MARTA and another $44 from federal hand outs). Now MARTA wants $540 million from the TSPLOST initiative to cover maintenance projects. The entire Georgia DOT maintenance budget for 2008 was about $570 million for the state's roads.

You are talking apples and oranges when talking maintenance costs for highways and mass transit systems.

I'm pretty sure I made no mention whatsoever of MARTA.

What I'm saying is that you can't just say "we already paid for it", as if commuters have the perpetual right to use a roadway for free just because they paid the initial construction costs.

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by testa50

I'm pretty sure I made no mention whatsoever of MARTA.

What I'm saying is that you can't just say "we already paid for it", as if commuters have the perpetual right to use a roadway for free just because they paid the initial construction costs.

I'm not saying you did, but ultimately the argument of most on here is that we need mass transit over roads. I used your post on maintenance to integrate both subjects together.

Roads are the cheapest route we have to easing congestion. Sure a balanced approach should be sought, but only where it makes sense. Building roads 15 miles outside the perimeter makes sense. Building new interstates inside the perimeter does not. I used your post to illustrate the myth that road maintenance is expensive, when in fact, it is very affordable (especially compared to the mass transit that so many on here are pimping).

[testa50]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

I'm not saying you did, but ultimately the argument of most on here is that we need mass transit over roads. Roads are the cheapest route we have to easing congestion. Sure a balanced approach should be sought, but only where it makes sense. Building roads 15 miles outside the perimeter makes sense. Building new interstates inside the perimeter does not. I used your post to illustrate the myth that road maintenance is expensive, when in fact, it is not (especially compared to the mass transit that so many on here are pimping).

Is that actually a myth?

My understanding is that something like 50%+ of the DOT's discretionary budget is consumed by maintenance. I'm thinking that it's actually quite considerable, and the idea that tolls might help allay this half-billion dollar burden shouldn't be off the table from the get go, which is what the "we've already paid for it" argument would seem to imply.

FWIW, I agree completely more roadway infrastructure is needed. We're projected to add another million people each decade for the foreseeable future, and our roadway system is not keeping pace.

[billl]

Originally Posted by gtcorndog

Sounds just like mass transit to me.

With mass transit I'm not also paying for my own gas, and paying tax on that gas, in addition to wear and tear on my own vehicle.

What a useful and informative response. Were you on the debate team in high school?

[gtcorndog]

Originally Posted by testa50

Is that actually a myth?

My understanding is that something like 50%+ of the DOT's discretionary budget is consumed by maintenance. I'm thinking that it's actually quite considerable, and the idea that tolls might help allay this half-billion dollar burden shouldn't be off the table from the get go, which is what the "we've already paid for it" argument would seem to imply.

FWIW, I agree completely more roadway infrastructure is needed. We're projected to add another million people each decade for the foreseeable future, and our roadway system is not keeping pace.

Take a look at a budget included in the annual report of the DOT. While not the most recent, it is from 2008.

I see maintenance as about 25% and new construction/improvement as 46% of total expenditures. I'm not sure about the discretionary expenditure breakdown. I'm not sure how much control the DOT has in saying how the money is spent (fed regs, prior obligations, etc.) Sure the maintenance budget is a large number, but compared to the number of miles put on the road system, it is pretty minuscule. I am all for more road tolling though. I like the consumption tax that places more of the burden on the user. That is fair. Raise the gas tax significantly. Every time I drive though North Carolina, I look at their expanding road system with envy. Its not that they are the nicest roads or even the best maintained, but their foresight to expand and build new roads is obvious. They have made it a priority. We as a state have not.