Prop 1 discussion (Austin, West, Point: taxi, shop, transportation)

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Longhorn Al

Is there a way outside of HOV lanes to incentivize carpooling?

variable rate tolls (like on mopac) and increasing the cost of gas.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by austinnerd

But will HOV lanes achieve the greater goal of improving traffic? Having lived in places that have HOV lanes, I can't help but imagine that the conversion of an existing lane into an HOV lane can only make traffic worse on any given roadway. While some may benefit from it, the majority of others will not, and unlike the addition of a lane to act as an HOV lane which would in theory make things no worse, the conversion of a lane would. So again, we come down to, regardless of the scale of the numbers, is whatever the number is being well spent?

The point of HOV is to incentivize carpooling. Basically the thought is that you see other cars blazing by in the HOV lane and you remember your neighbor also commutes from RR to downtown and you think "Hmm, if I carpooled with Jim then I wouldn't be stuck in traffic on I-35".

Yes, the other lanes would have more traffic, that is kind of the point to force more people to carpool.

[je2000]

Originally Posted by cBach

The point of HOV is to incentivize carpooling. Basically the thought is that you see other cars blazing by in the HOV lane and you remember your neighbor also commutes from RR to downtown and you think "Hmm, if I carpooled with Jim then I wouldn't be stuck in traffic on I-35".

Yes, the other lanes would have more traffic, that is kind of the point to force more people to carpool.

It won't happen. No one wants to sit next to Jim.

[10scoachrick]

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

No. Not joking. I lived there for five years.

90+ percent of the people don't live near a MARTA station. And 99+ percent would have to drive their car to a MARTA station.

A few million people live outside the areas served by MARTA.

Well, I lived there for TWENTY-five years and drove many times to a MARTA station (just a couple/few miles) to save the 30-mile trip to the airport in horrible traffic. I reckon a few others did similarly...from the MARTA site:

Performance (May 2016 and Fiscal year-to-date):
Combined Ridership for the month of May was 10.8 million unlinked passenger boardings, falling short of the forecast by 0.7 million, or 6.7%. The 2016 Fiscal Year-to-Date (months of July through May) Combined Ridership of 122.9 million unlinked trips falling short of the forecast by 3.8 million, or 3.0%.

[austinnerd]

Originally Posted by cBach

The point of HOV is to incentivize carpooling. Basically the thought is that you see other cars blazing by in the HOV lane and you remember your neighbor also commutes from RR to downtown and you think "Hmm, if I carpooled with Jim then I wouldn't be stuck in traffic on I-35".

Yes, the other lanes would have more traffic, that is kind of the point to force more people to carpool.

Right, I understand that, my point being that while that's the "goal" (kinda like public transports "goal" is to get more folks out of their cars), the reality in my experience is that that "goal" is never attained in any meaningful way so the net effect is worse traffic for the vast majority of folks.

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by austinnerd

Right, I understand that, my point being that while that's the "goal" (kinda like public transports "goal" is to get more folks out of their cars), the reality in my experience is that that "goal" is never attained in any meaningful way so the net effect is worse traffic for the vast majority of folks.

I-35 has become a commuter highway for which we will NEVER be able to add the capacity it needs, if it remains an interstate.

Swap I-35 and SH130:

1.Removes the through-traffic.
2. Incentivizes carpooling/public buses/reduced trips.

[DCtoTejas]

Originally Posted by austinnerd

Right, I understand that, my point being that while that's the "goal" (kinda like public transports "goal" is to get more folks out of their cars), the reality in my experience is that that "goal" is never attained in any meaningful way so the net effect is worse traffic for the vast majority of folks.

This is my experience in the Washington DC area also. The only one that I thought worked at all was 395 / 95 in Northern Virginia because it was access controlled. That's not to say it worked well in my opinion, it creates a massive jam where the HOV/express lanes rejoin I-95 and led to a weird slug (person to fill a seat to meet HOV requirement) culture, complete with a rule that you were not to talk to each other...only in DC. On I-66 inside the beltway it is HOV only which leads to massive cut through traffic in the very neighborhoods the NIMBY's were trying to keep additional lane traffic noise out of to begin with.

Without access control it's too easy for people to jump in and out of HOV with single driver cars; that was the setup in Maryland.

I think additional lanes are best utilized when they are open to all traffic at all times.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by DCtoTejas

This is my experience in the Washington DC area also. The only one that I thought worked at all was 395 / 95 in Northern Virginia because it was access controlled. That's not to say it worked well in my opinion, it creates a massive jam where the HOV/express lanes rejoin I-95 and led to a weird slug (person to fill a seat to meet HOV requirement) culture, complete with a rule that you were not to talk to each other...only in DC. On I-66 inside the beltway it is HOV only which leads to massive cut through traffic in the very neighborhoods the NIMBY's were trying to keep additional lane traffic noise out of to begin with.

Without access control it's too easy for people to jump in and out of HOV with single driver cars; that was the setup in Maryland.

I think additional lanes are best utilized when they are open to all traffic at all times.

I think that's why they went with managed toll lanes on MoPac. You can guarantee that lane is both fast moving and as filled as can be at the safe speed (50MPH) at all times.

There are advantages of HOV lanes though, like ability of fire/rescue/police to get around town and buses as well. Those same advantages are present on managed lanes as well.

[pop251808]

Originally Posted by cBach

I think that's why they went with managed toll lanes on MoPac. You can guarantee that lane is both fast moving and as filled as can be at the safe speed (50MPH) at all times.

There are advantages of HOV lanes though, like ability of fire/rescue/police to get around town and buses as well. Those same advantages are present on managed lanes as well.

Dude, you don't have any standing in this because you voted against the bonds, remember? My guess is that 720 million buys a lot of paint for stripes, SOME of the engineering needed to design the changes contemplated, and a VERY LITTLE of the actual asphalt, concrete and labor needed to make some of these changes.
If you're not wiling to vote the money for the upgrades, you really shouldn't be contemplating them. Just sit it out on the beat up old asphalt we already have.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by pop251808

Dude, you don't have any standing in this because you voted against the bonds, remember? My guess is that 720 million buys a lot of paint for stripes, SOME of the engineering needed to design the changes contemplated, and a VERY LITTLE of the actual asphalt, concrete and labor needed to make some of these changes.
If you're not wiling to vote the money for the upgrades, you really shouldn't be contemplating them. Just sit it out on the beat up old asphalt we already have.

The bonds included zero dollars for interstate HOV lanes or did you not read them?