Seattle 1-5

[Garethe]

Originally Posted by Gardyloo

A couple of observations as a British-trained city and regional planner (long since reformed) -

The tendency to think that traffic congestion can be relieved by the addition of more infrastructure is something of an urban myth. When BART was developed in the 1960s in the Bay Area much of the argument was that it would take pressure off the Bay Bridge.

Well, it didn't. Instead it added marginal capacity to the bridge and to the freeways leading to it (such as the Nimitz) which was promptly filled by new vehicles. Meanwhile, the extension of BART to the valleys east of Berkeley and south down the east shore of the bay meant that the (already growing) pressure for development in places like Walnut Creek or Concord had better access to the urban core, thereby stimulating more growth, more cars, and the demand for more infrastructure.

Within months of opening, BART was running pretty full, while traffic counts on the Bay Bridge didn't change an iota.

The "laissez-faire" approach you mention actually reflects a known concept in traffic planning. Congestion will increase until it reaches an equilibrium point, when the nth car commuter says, "To hell with this," and starts taking the bus, or moves closer to his/her place of employment. Look at New York, or even up the road to Vancouver. No freeways in the urban core, and very few leading into or through the city (especially considering the size of the city.) The cities are certainly congested, but they work. There are subways, cabs, buses... but also thousands (millions) of people who live in the city centers. If you want to live in Connecticut and ride the train three hours a day, fine, your choice. But those folks aren't clamoring for a new freeway ripping up Harlem.

Traffic "calming" and congestion pricing are being done across Europe, but the jury's still out. Part of the problem with big urban regions around the world (and increasingly obvious in the Seattle area) is that the downtown cores are becoming more residential and less commercial, while job growth is occurring in fringe or even suburban areas. The "reverse commute" across Lake Washington is every bit as big as the traditional one. And more and more people are commuting from Issaquah to Bothell, from Renton to Woodinville, West Seattle to Kirkland. In London, the real congestion isn't in the City of London, it's on the M25 that circles the metropolis at a distance.

Around here, investment of billions in infrastructure - the bus tunnel, the light rail, the new SR520 bridge, the eternal widening project of I-5 in Lynnwood/South Everett... none of it has done bupkis to lessen congestion in the region; arguably it's contributed to it because of adding capacity where the infrastructure ends.

In other words, build it and they will come. Every SOV removed is replaced by two more BECAUSE of the transit system.

Very insightful and I fully agree, the King County exurbs are a good example of suburban job growth, I can't believe the number of offers I've turned down in North Bend, Preston, and Fall City because of a nightmare reverse commute. I've never understood why firms choose to move their facilities away from the labor force, but in the end, it might be a sign of the times, as workers snub downtown Seattle, a place I once loved working, now I wouldn't dream of it (2 hours each way on the bridges, forget it!)

[BATCAT]

Originally Posted by Garfunkle524

When I lived in Seattle it was just a fact of life. Have an appointment at 5pm? Reschedule. Want to go to happy hour? Go someplace where you can walk and avoid the highways. There isn't going to be a substantial improvement in the forseeable future, so it's best to just try to live with it.

It sure made house shopping a massive pain in the butt though. The few affordable houses were affordable because the 10 mile commute to a job center would take an hour each way. Want to avoid traffic? Gotta pay up.

I hate to say it, but I think this is probably the truth. I don't think it's going to be better any time soon. It would be nice to be wrong, but...

My wife and I have made it pretty much a number-one priority to stay walking distance of our jobs (downtown and South Lake Union, respectively) and this has not only ruled out a house, but, with rising rents over the years, led to us downsizing dramatically to a one bedroom in an older, un-renovated apartment. (which still isn't cheap) So maybe we're living closer to how most urban 20-somethings do than the ushing-40 couple we are, but my God, we would do just about anything to not have to deal with a commute through traffic. We'll see how long we can hold out I guess...

[BellevueNative]

Originally Posted by Seattle4321

Wait I-405 is being expanded?

Yes. The WSDOT has been working on this for years. Anyone driving between Bothell and Bellevue has probably noticed all of the trees that have been cut down, new freeway on-ramps, new concrete and re-paving, etc. It's supposed to be done in 2015.

[Botev1912]

they started in 2012 and will finish in 2015.