Georgia DOT: Building free lanes won’t solve metro Atlanta’s traffic mess (Sandy Springs: home, construction)

[cqholt]

In a recent interview with the AJC, GDOT Commissioner Russell McMurry said many motorists avoid crowded stretches of highway, finding alternative routes.

“Then when you build more free lanes, people come right back to them and they’re congested right away,” he said.

So GDOT acknowledges Induced Demand exist, but there are posters on here that refuse to

[waronxmas]

I have mixed feelings on the express lanes. The proletariat in me sees it as nothing more than a government hand out to rich people so they can wisk past the plebs stuck in traffic who can't afford to throw money at getting around it. Then there is the me that used the lanes on 85 south when coming back from Charlotte once that shaved an hour off of my trip home.

While there are other more effective ways in reducing traffic, I am glad that GDOT doesn't see adding highway lanes as a viable way to reduce traffic.

It does not work.

The work that was done to "free the Freeways" should prove that or, if you need more convincing, look how super wide highways have worked out for China. (Hint: It hasn't)

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by bu2

Fire this guy. He doesn't drive in it.

Building mass transit doesn't solve the problem.

Building more lanes doesn't solve the problem.

Building HOT lanes doesn't solve the problem.

That doesn't mean you don't do any of them.

No, but it does mean that we need to be directing resources to the systems that make the best use of the space. Transit is far more space-efficient than more open-access lanes, and at least HOT lanes can generally maintain flow.

Further actual tolling systems would directly reduce traffic, while transit could keep pace with increasing demand due to its full magnitude gain of capacity in comparison.

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

Is the gasoline tax not the "fare" for road use?

Yes and no. Strictly speaking it is a fuel-usage tax, not a road-usage fee. They are, generally, strongly correlated, but a extremely fuel efficient car will pay less in fuel taxes than a less efficient vehicle despite doing the same road-damage. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, as there's plenty of argument to be made for incentivizing more fuel efficient vehicles.

Furthermore, the gas tax is applied widely, dissociated with what roads are actually driven. This means you get 'charged' the same for using a back road with no traffic as you do for a heavily congested freeway. What this does is create a mental disconnect between the cost of using roads with those roads that need the most traffic reduction, ultimately not really helping for the most congested corridors. That's not to say that significantly increasing the cost to drive overall doesn't reduce traffic overall, but it's certainly not a direct fee.

A far more useful usage fee would be targeted charging based on the most congested parts of the metro. That can take the form of specific road charges, congestion zones, toll-barriers, etc.

[DavePa]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Seriously. Look at how expensive it is to drive in Chicago. It costs about $15 one way to drive between Indiana and Wisconsin (or the Chicago suburbs) in tolls. New York is even higher especially if you try to cross a bridge... That didn't change their need for driving...and driving through either of those cities is a HECK of alot more chaotic than driving in Atlanta.

As for adding more lanes? I'm not for it or against it. I personally do believe there are roads that need additional capacity regardless..but I do not believe every Interstate needs to be 8 lanes each direction. I will say that I-75 in the south metro does need to be atleast 4 lanes each because it carries alot of intercommercial / vacation traffic - or basically...traffic you cannot put on a mass transit system.

I will also say that even with the most adequate mass transit system, you will ALWAYS...have traffic... adding capacity on ANY SYSTEM, not just freeways; will attract growth and development along that cooridoor.. it's when you neglect that growth, like Atlanta has been doing since the 80's, that you run into the problems we have today...

You all say how Freeways just add more traffic and how they cause suburban sprawl but the argument doesn't hold its weight regardless through which scientific means its been proven because Atlanta has entirely proved this to be incorrect. Atlanta has about a quarter of the freeways of Houston, and especially DFW, likewise Chicago, and even Denver CO has a more efficient system than we do..yet Atlanta STILL sprawled to nearly the size of Houston...and doesn't have anywhere near the freeway coverage..so where is the logic in that?

Anyway...

I would just add Chicago has free expressways till you are to exit into Indiana on the Skyway bridge .... which is tolled. The tri-state tollway goes around the city and leaving the city past O'Hare airport it does become tolls for those entering and exiting the city from the northwest.

Interesting article from 2014 (after some comment on a major Chicago snowstorm) on Chicago built on a Grid and Atlanta Not.
How Chicago and Atlanta differ from space by NASA.... * IN A SIDE BY SIDE PHOTO. The Grid of Chicago clearly is seen in streetlights.

How an Urban Grid Prevents Atlanta 's "Heart-Attack" on expressway Traffic.

Interesting comments in the article on Atlanta NOT a Grid city:

Atlanta isn’t merely sprawling. As a metro area, it’s notable for its street hierarchy—cul de sacs feeding into collectors, arterials, and interstates—basically the opposite of Chicago’s grid.

Because so much of metropolitan Atlanta’s development was happening in unincorporated areas, a significant portion of the region’s surface streets and neighborhood roads were laid out and constructed by individual landowners and developers, only being turned over to local government control once the lots in the residential development had been sold.

The vast majority of these routes were designed to only serve specific land subdivisions, which meant that the internal street networks tended to be self-referencing and essentially fenced off (or cul-de-sac’d). Without governmental oversight, adjacent subdivisions were only rarely connected together.

The ARC [Atlanta Regional Commission] was not in the business of building roads (or anything else), which meant that most counties were left with little alternative but to accept new residential roads as ‘gifts’ from private developers.

As a result, aside from a few places, a secondary network of through routes did not emerge by accretion as in other regions of the country. In other words, the grid so common in many urban areas simply never came to exist in metropolitan Atlanta, a fact that forced distributed traffic patterns into a constrained system of arterials and freeways.

But there’s a problem with funneling. When the funnel clogs, it reduces the number of alternate routes, causing a “traffic heart attack.” Think of how you can get around in Chicago—if someone wipes out and blocks an entire major artery, there are multiple routes to another one, usually in three or four directions.

It does not seem adding lanes will change that?

[tikigod311]

If only the state didn't restrict funding for transit, GDOT could actually provide a real solution.

I will do my best to avoid ever living/working in a place where these lanes are an attractive option.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by DavePa

I would just add Chicago has free expressways till you are to exit into Indiana on the Skyway bridge .... which is tolled. The tri-state tollway goes around the city and leaving the city past O'Hare airport it does become tolls for those entering and exiting the city from the northwest.

Interesting article from 2014 (after some comment on a major Chicago snowstorm) on Chicago built on a Grid and Atlanta Not.
How Chicago and Atlanta differ from space by NASA.... * IN A SIDE BY SIDE PHOTO. The Grid of Chicago clearly is seen in streetlights.

How an Urban Grid Prevents Atlanta 's "Heart-Attack" on expressway Traffic.

Interesting comments in the article on Atlanta NOT a Grid city:

Atlanta isn’t merely sprawling. As a metro area, it’s notable for its street hierarchy—cul de sacs feeding into collectors, arterials, and interstates—basically the opposite of Chicago’s grid.

Because so much of metropolitan Atlanta’s development was happening in unincorporated areas, a significant portion of the region’s surface streets and neighborhood roads were laid out and constructed by individual landowners and developers, only being turned over to local government control once the lots in the residential development had been sold.

The vast majority of these routes were designed to only serve specific land subdivisions, which meant that the internal street networks tended to be self-referencing and essentially fenced off (or cul-de-sac’d). Without governmental oversight, adjacent subdivisions were only rarely connected together.

The ARC [Atlanta Regional Commission] was not in the business of building roads (or anything else), which meant that most counties were left with little alternative but to accept new residential roads as ‘gifts’ from private developers.

As a result, aside from a few places, a secondary network of through routes did not emerge by accretion as in other regions of the country. In other words, the grid so common in many urban areas simply never came to exist in metropolitan Atlanta, a fact that forced distributed traffic patterns into a constrained system of arterials and freeways.

But there’s a problem with funneling. When the funnel clogs, it reduces the number of alternate routes, causing a “traffic heart attack.” Think of how you can get around in Chicago—if someone wipes out and blocks an entire major artery, there are multiple routes to another one, usually in three or four directions.

It does not seem adding lanes will change that?

Atlanta has a fundamental problem with its road structure as the article indicates. Texas has most development in unincorporated areas as well, but have dealt with that by the concept of "extraterritorial jurisdiction" which allows cities limited control over things like roads in an area up to 5 miles (for the largest cities) outside the city limits. Atlanta's arterial system is a bigger catastrophe than its limited freeways.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Georgia DOT: Why building free lanes won’t solve metro Atlanta’s traffic mess | Spinning our Wheels

This quote is used often, but they really need to put it in context:

McMurry cited I-75 in Cobb County as an example of how ineffective free lanes can be. Above the Perimeter, I-75 is already up to 15 lanes wide in spots, and traffic still backs up at rush hour...

This width is just after the convergence of two major interstates and a major arterial road within 1,600 feet of each other. It is that width for just under 4,000 feet, where it loses two lanes. Within 1.1 miles from the start, it's 12 lanes. In about 2.75 miles, it's down to ten lanes. But, what kills things in this area, is the multiple dual-lane entrances with very short merge lanes. The ramp from 120 to 75NB brings two lanes of entrance ramp, and it's less than 900 feet until both of those lanes are gone.

Southbound 75 goes from seven lanes to four at the 285 split, but I'm not sure three lanes' worth of traffic exits there. And once 285 intersects again, it's back down to four lanes and one HOV lane within a mile.

It's completely disingenuous to say "See! See! It's 15 lanes and it's still full!!" No ****....because those lanes disappear very quickly, causing lots of merging, which causes slowing, which backs things up. Poor design.

And if I recall from my previous research into this area, all of those lanes have existed for some 20 or more years. They have not been expanded as the area has grown.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

The work that was done to "free the Freeways" should prove that or, if you need more convincing, look how super wide highways have worked out for China. (Hint: It hasn't)

You mean the road which is that wide for less than 3/4 a mile at a toll booth before dropping back down to four lanes, and with a picture as proof taken at the end of a huge national holiday period as everyone was returning home?

Do you guys even try any more?

[jsvh]

Oh! Part of it is only 10 or 12 lanes? Clearly that is the problem, it needs to be at least 15 lanes and traffic will get better! /sarcasm

[primaltech]

Here's one, highly controversial way that we could actually, seriously fix the traffic:

1. Make everything open 24-7. All businesses, everything.

2. Randomly hand all the residents of the metro a number, 1-24. Split us into 24 equal groups.

3. This number is now the hour that you wake up, start your day, and commute to work. And you go home 8 hours later.