Does Traffic Congestion Really Make You More Productive?

[owlman]

I'll make the crazy argument that no major road expansion should be done, because congestion is mostly a human problem; in another 25 years or so highways will be designated for self-driving vehicles only and will have more than sufficient capacity in their current state.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by BevoLJ

Really? They are increasing Mopac to 18 lanes? Because that is what the above posters are talking about. Not the little band aid you are talking about. If they could increase Mopac to 18 lanes for only $250 million that would be a massive win!

I don't believe anyone said that MoPac is being increased to 18 lanes. I cited a 1999 TxDOT study that showed that we need 18 lanes on I-35 to handle future passenger and freight traffic demand. No one mentioned MoPac in that context.

What's going on, on MoPac, *is* a band-aid - you're right. It's a very small part of a much larger action plan that is in play right now, including road improvements where possible, and the use of high capacity transit to break through the rings of congestion around the metro area and the CBD.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by owlman

I'll make the crazy argument that no major road expansion should be done, because congestion is mostly a human problem; in another 25 years or so highways will be designated for self-driving vehicles only and will have more than sufficient capacity in their current state.

Not if they still only carry one person per vehicle...

[tonyurban]

It makes sense that congestion is a sign of good economy.

Here is where I think the author seemed to blank out at. Lets imagine if we were to take Atlanta's congestion and actually reduce it by 50%. No, businesses wouldn't become more economical right away because the same amount of people are still shopping/working at those businesses. Now if atlanta's congestion would be reduced by 50%, then that means thousands of more people could live in Atlanta and the city wouldn't have horrible gridlocks. NOW the economy goes through the roof because more goods and people can be routed to and from these economical districts.

Think of it like this, Atlanta is smaller than L.A.---- L.A. is more popular than Atlanta, but Atlanta's traffic almost rivals Los Angeles, HOWEVER, since L.A. can move a lot more goods and people to and from various points more efficiently than Atlanta, L.A. has the upper hand. Just because Atlanta's traffic rivals or is even worse than a bigger city's doesn't mean it has a bigger economy or more popular, it just means Atlanta is inefficient.

To clarify, there are smaller cities than bigger ones that have traffic that is on par with the bigger city. It doesn't mean the smaller city is more desirable, it just means the smaller city is ineffecient at moving goods and its population.

I also think reducing congestion should be done to reduce it for the better of the environment and quality of life. Not to increase economic output. Yes the economy might be big and good, however is it efficient and sustainable. It's like trying to blow a lot of air through a straw. Yes it can work and you can blow a lot of air, however if you get a bigger straw you can blow the same amount of air or maybe even more with less work.

Sorry for the long and possibly redudent post yall.

[eepstein]

Wider lanes, at least 4 mainlanes in each direction, HOV lanes, and possibly toll lanes as well. Longer on ramps, metering lights at ramps, traffic sensors and cameras giving approx travel times. These are all things that many other major cities have in place already.

In order for the train tracks to remain in the middle of Mopac, it would mean many more people and businesses would need to be displaced. I suspect the COA and TxDOT would much prefer to go up against the "official with the railroad" rather than the rich along both sides of the freeway.

Again, every other city that I mentioned secured the funding necessary to gut their roadways. They all took ROW, increased the "footprint" as you say, and displaced many businesses and residents.

Again sir, many other cities mentioned earlier (many well smaller than metro Austin) have taken a progressive approach to their transportation infastructures. The City of Austin continues to bury it's head in the sand and ignore the traffic congestion that is among the worst in the nation. It will only continue to get worse, and continue to degrade the quality of life in this area.

If you would like to join the COA and "bury your head", that is fine. But please don't act like gutting and rebuilding Mopac and I-35 is impossible, because the is FAR from the truth.

Originally Posted by jb9152

Define "21st century standards". What does that even mean? And how do you propose widening the freeway (more than the one lane each direction that's proposed) without "cutting too much into the neighborhoods"? First of all, define "cutting too much". Second, how does one accomplish that? Bending time and space?

I noted two separate studies, 10+ years apart, that found that demand over the next 20-odd years would require anywhere from 12 to 18 lanes on I-35 alone. How is that not "super wide"?



What are you even talking about? Trains could potentially carry the equivalent of more than 2 freeway lanes in each direction with congestion-proof, free-flow capacity. The tracks are already there; there is no need to acquire more right of way to provide the service. And you want to reroute them (which ones, by the way? You simply said "train routes need to be rerouted"), which means that you need to acquire ROW somewhere else at enormous cost, and reconstruct a railroad that was working perfectly well before. This assumes, of course, that the shippers who have located their businesses along the rail line and the railroad itself would just smile warmly as you pitch your idea to tear out their facility and put it someplace else.

Then you acknowledge that the bridge replacements would cost "tons of money" without a thought as to how much it would cost to reroute the train routes. You might not be a 'train guy', but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that what you propose at least doubles the cost of the project, conservatively.



Leaving aside the fact that money does not fall unbidden from the heavens (and that you studiously avoid specifying what exactly you mean, order of magnitude, by 'a lot of money'), I find it intriguing that the only barriers you envision to building "21st century standard" highways is money. You ignore the other issues such as footprint, cost effectiveness, constructibility and staging that I mentioned.

I find it very difficult to believe that you actually work in transportation, as you claim.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by eepstein

Wider lanes, at least 4 mainlanes in each direction, HOV lanes, and possibly toll lanes as well. Longer on ramps, metering lights at ramps, traffic sensors and cameras giving approx travel times. These are all things that many other major cities have in place already.

Please read my first rejoinder to your first post. I cited two studies that showed that we need anywhere from 12 to 18 lane equivalents of capacity into Austin by the year 2035, which is not that far off.

Wider lanes, longer on ramps, ramp meters, traffic sensors, and cameras do NOTHING for capacity. They do not add any ability to fit more vehicles in the envelope of the roadway. The only way to add any measurable capacity to a highway is to add lanes. This requires the conquering of all of the hurdles - financial, physical, social, and regulatory - that I listed in my first reply (and to which you haven't really replied except to speak in generalities).

Originally Posted by eepstein

In order for the train tracks to remain in the middle of Mopac, it would mean many more people and businesses would need to be displaced. I suspect the COA and TxDOT would much prefer to go up against the "official with the railroad" rather than the rich along both sides of the freeway.

That's a nice straw man, but it's a false choice. The Union Pacific has agreed to move its 'through' freight trains to a new bypass line east of the I-35 corridor as long as a satisfactory business and joint operations agreement can be worked out with Lone Star Rail District. The tracks aren't going anywhere, as they're a valuable asset not only for future high capacity transit service (and able to deliver upwards of 2 lane equivalents of free flow, congestion-free capacity in each direction), but also for the continuation of local freight rail service to the 40-plus local businesses that are served by rail in our region.

Originally Posted by eepstein

Again, every other city that I mentioned secured the funding necessary to gut their roadways. They all took ROW, increased the "footprint" as you say, and displaced many businesses and residents.

Or, we could provide the needed capacity by making the roadway improvements that are possible (like the MoPac Improvement project, and the I-35 managed lanes project), and build cost-effective high capacity transit that is not subject to roadway congestion. The Project Connect plan can provide upwards of 12 lane equivalents of congestion-proof capacity into the core of the region. That, coupled with the diversion of some truck freight from I-35 to higher capacity freight trains on the urban bypass line, is the most rational way to address the capacity deficit. And it's actually achievable in a reasonable time frame, unlike the 'highway only' method of providing the needed 12 to 18 lane equivalents of capacity.

Originally Posted by eepstein

Again sir, many other cities mentioned earlier (many well smaller than metro Austin) have taken a progressive approach to their transportation infastructures. The City of Austin continues to bury it's head in the sand and ignore the traffic congestion that is among the worst in the nation. It will only continue to get worse, and continue to degrade the quality of life in this area.

The City of Austin is moving forward with MoPac and I-35 improvement projects (with partners like the CTRMA and TxDOT), and is a full partner in Project Connect (the regional high-capacity transit implementation plan, currently in progress). It is not "burying its head"; only a willfully ignorant person or ideologue could truly believe that.

Originally Posted by eepstein

If you would like to join the COA and "bury your head", that is fine. But please don't act like gutting and rebuilding Mopac and I-35 is impossible, because the is FAR from the truth.

18 lanes through Downtown Austin, accompanied by a huge new bridge across the lake, the destruction of East Austin and large portions of the UT campus, the loss of tax base for the city, and a HUGE (probably historically huge) environmental regulation hurdle to get over, and you accuse *me* of "burying my head"?

Again, I seriously question whether or not you actually work in the field of transportation. Do you mind if I ask what it is that you do in the field?