Who's afraid of a Beltway? (Pittsburgh: tax, cost of living, to move)

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by pman

...building enough highway capacity so theres no traffic is virtually impossible.

Is traffic that moves reliably during the day too much to ask? How about traffic that doesn't back up onto or past I-79 if there's a fender bender near the Fort Pitt Tunnel during morning rush hour, and doesn't take all day to thin out after the cops leave the scene?

Originally Posted by pman

279 is, if anything, overbuilt.

Only the HOV lanes are overbuilt. Traffic moves so smoothly on I-279 that the HOV lanes aren't even needed. Delays during rush hour are short. Minus the HOV lanes, I-279 was built right the first time. It's better to overbuild than underbuild infrastructure. Pittsburgh International Airport has plenty of room to expand into if needed. Pennsylvania sells a lot of its electricity to other states. The HOV lanes on I-279 can be converted into a North Busway or some other transit extension.

[pman]

Originally Posted by GeneW

Well, it's only the fasted growing area because they built a giant highway out that way. If they hadn't built 279, no one would be moving to Cranberry.

bingo. more to the point, the Pittsburgh metro didn't become a fast growing metro because of it.

Originally Posted by Gnutella

Is traffic that moves reliably during the day too much to ask?

it's a more reasonable goal than no traffic.

Originally Posted by Gnutella

Only the HOV lanes are overbuilt. Traffic moves so smoothly on I-279 that the HOV lanes aren't even needed. Delays during rush hour are short. Minus the HOV lanes, I-279 was built right the first time. It's better to overbuild than underbuild infrastructure. Pittsburgh International Airport has plenty of room to expand into if needed. Pennsylvania sells a lot of its electricity to other states. The HOV lanes on I-279 can be converted into a North Busway or some other transit extension.

it's very expensive to overbuid infrastructure and likely not worth the expense. It's also a devastating highway inside city limits. it's intent is clearly to benefit further out areas at the expense of core areas, which is exactly what it does. more to the point, that is exactly what speculative new highway capacity does. it shifts things around not necessarily creating any real growth. as I've noted earlier, I think addressing where demand is makes good sense. tolling the tunnels would be a good way to raise money and reduce demand. often not included in the conversation about traffic is that "free" ways are not managing demand. when you fly, the price rises as the plane fills up. why shouldn't highways operate in the same manner? if you have too many cars then the rational response is to increase the price until you don't have too many cars. as a result you will either have enough money to build capacity enhancements or people will substitute into more "efficient" means (carpooling, buses, etc).
transit extensions down the middle of highways had their day, it's not a great way to build a transit system on the whole. that north hills t extension is garbag, perhaps a result of highway people designing transit.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by GeneW

Well, it's only the fasted growing area because they built a giant highway out that way. If they hadn't built 279, no one would be moving to Cranberry.

Yes, and to do that, they moved people who were already living in its path and permanently scarred/divided and large part of the city in the process. It was basically a federally-assisted transfer of wealth from the city to the suburbs and from Allegheny County to Butler County.

And pman already said that before I got to it. I hadn't caught up on the whole thread first.

[Lost_In_Translation]

I believe in congestion charging for ppl commuting from outside the city limits to inside. Set up toll booths on the freeways at the point of city entry and charge commuters for the use of the infrastructure . Couple that with a reduction in local business taxes and watch industry and money roll in. It also serves to strengthen mass transit options which compete more competively with cars and nearby suburbs with local roads access, keeping the city metroplex slightly more right knit.

[SammyKhalifa]

Originally Posted by Lost_In_Translation

Set up toll booths on the freeways at the point of city entry

Yeah, that will REALLY make the traffic situation better . . .

[pman]

Originally Posted by Lost_In_Translation

I believe in congestion charging for ppl commuting from outside the city limits to inside. Set up toll booths on the freeways at the point of city entry and charge commuters for the use of the infrastructure . Couple that with a reduction in local business taxes and watch industry and money roll in. It also serves to strengthen mass transit options which compete more competively with cars and nearby suburbs with local roads access, keeping the city metroplex slightly more right knit.

think of it less of congestion pricing than demand pricing (although it's really the same thing). in this day and age there is no need for actual toll booths or even for cars to slow down. I also wouldn't limit it to city limits but wherever congestion (which is nothing more than demand in excess of supply which happens when the price is $0) occurs...be it the city or monroeville. using it to lower business taxes (I'd actually start with the outragous state taxes) is an interesting idea. indeed it would make transit more competitive.

[airwave09]

Instead of just making driving worse during rush hours, we should be making other transportation options better so that more people choose them during those times.

[SammyKhalifa]

Originally Posted by pman

think of it less of congestion pricing than demand pricing (although it's really the same thing). in this day and age there is no need for actual toll booths or even for cars to slow down. I also wouldn't limit it to city limits but wherever congestion (which is nothing more than demand in excess of supply which happens when the price is $0) occurs...be it the city or monroeville. using it to lower business taxes (I'd actually start with the outragous state taxes) is an interesting idea. indeed it would make transit more competitive.

While I appreciate that actual city residents foot an unfair portion of the burden of upkeeping city roads, this seems overly punitive to people further out of town who want to visit (spend money in) the city who may not have an ez-pass or whatever. I grew up in Steubenville but visited downtown relatively often. If I had to pay money for the privilege I would not have bothered.

I also would not have driven to another suburb just to park my car and take a bus in, or other ideas that would have been just as a big of a pain in the butt.

That also would have curtailed my travel to places East and South of the city, because as we all know from the topic of this thread THERE'S NO WAY AROUND.

[Lost_In_Translation]

Originally Posted by SammyKhalifa

Yeah, that will REALLY make the traffic situation better . . .

EZ Pass straight, build out toll booths off to sides.

[SammyKhalifa]

Originally Posted by Lost_In_Translation

EZ Pass straight, build out toll booths off to sides.

Again, as an Ohio resident I would not have purchased an EZ pass or paid money to do this.