I405 has probably the worst major city Bypass loop in America! Agree? (Seattle: to move, yard)

[rodentraiser]

Having driven around the Sound many times, am I wrong in assuming that a lot (not all, by any means) of the congestion on 1-5 and 405 is trucks in every lane but the fast lane? I mean, large delivery and transport trucks. Seems to me I thought I heard once they weren't allowed out of the slow lane except to pass, but on I-5 going from Tacoma to Seattle and back, there are hundreds of trucks spread across three lanes and all of them slowing up traffic.

[grega94]

I know I-405 is bad but on the weekends it's actually relatively empty, compared to I-5 which has traffic 24-7. Also is it safe to say 167 is worse than 405?

[beenhereandthere]

Originally Posted by Nodpete

I've never driven the 405, but the by-passes around Atlanta scare the hell out of me.

At least those are in a circle and there's 3 to 5 non hov lanes all the time instead the two joke lanes from Tukwila to Bellevue on 405

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

Let's face it, 405 on the eastside of Seattle is a zoo, and will likely be for decades to come. Congestion brings out the worst in drivers, and we have seen it here. The expansion of toll lanes is cool, but it doesn't really do much for the general traffic. It is simply a way for those who want to spend extra money to skirt around traffic. So be it. OK, spend five or ten bucks and get to your destination 5 minutes earlier. Really?

I'm not sure that is entirely true. If by having two express toll lanes, instead of one HOV lane, traffic moves faster there, that should draw drivers from the general lanes, whether from paying the toll, joining/forming a 3-person carpool, joining/forming a vanpool, or riding a bus. The toll lanes also function as pressure valves, with the incentive to pay the toll increasing with congestion. Ideally, that should keep congestion from descending into gridlock, keeping traffic moving, as long as the toll lanes aren't also gridlocked.

One option could be, taking a hint from Uber and Lyft, would be to enable ad hoc car/van pools, using the Internet to connect drivers and riders. Need to go from Bothell to Bellevue? Call in and schedule a registered car/van pool in need of a rider to arrive at your doorstep to take you there for a fare, and the same for returning (or car/van pool one way, but bus it the other way).

[pnwguy2]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

I'm not sure that is entirely true. If by having two express toll lanes, instead of one HOV lane, traffic moves faster there, that should draw drivers from the general lanes, whether from paying the toll, joining/forming a 3-person carpool, joining/forming a vanpool, or riding a bus. The toll lanes also function as pressure valves, with the incentive to pay the toll increasing with congestion. Ideally, that should keep congestion from descending into gridlock, keeping traffic moving, as long as the toll lanes aren't also gridlocked.

One option could be, taking a hint from Uber and Lyft, would be to enable ad hoc car/van pools, using the Internet to connect drivers and riders. Need to go from Bothell to Bellevue? Call in and schedule a registered car/van pool in need of a rider to arrive at your doorstep to take you there for a fare, and the same for returning (or car/van pool one way, but bus it the other way).

Well, if you go by the theory that all lanes will fill when you add capacity, as 405 has done most recently, then it will do little to ease congestion. I truly believe these toll lanes are just a temporary feel good band-aid, and in the end will just favor those who can afford it.

[pnwguy2]

I think we also should politely correct the OP that 405 is not a loop, as it doesn't loop around the metro like you see in Houston. Dallas or DC. It was originally built as a bypass, but today is just a freeway artery as 405 and many others are in Los Angeles.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

Well, if you go by the theory that all lanes will fill when you add capacity, as 405 has done most recently, then it will do little to ease congestion. I truly believe these toll lanes are just a temporary feel good band-aid, and in the end will just favor those who can afford it.

I don't think the goal is to ease congestion, other than keeping it from descending into gridlock (which could at least keep traffic moving). If traffic is moving freely in the Express Toll Lanes, that will incentivize SOV drivers to choose other modes (toll, car/van pool, or bus). They have cited instances around the country where this is working.

Adding new untolled general lanes is simply not going to happen. Those who call the loudest for it aren't willing to vote for the taxes it would take to pay for what would have to be much more than just lanes to handle the added traffic. The idea that shrinking gas tax revenues could pay for it is a fantasy.

[Xanathos]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

You're blaming people for normal human behavior, which is to put their needs above others.

And you're excusing them for being selfish jackoffs. If you can't make your exit, take the next one and loop back. It's always been this way. It's not acceptable to do otherwise.

As to "enforcement of driving techniques and not obstructing traffic", are you willing to pay more taxes to pay for it? Apparently not.

There's no shortage of traffic patrols that could be allocated towards conditioning proper driving techniques.

75 cents of what dollar? Provide a link. If you're throwing start-up costs in with operating costs, your claim is specious.

I'm sorry, you must have inadvertently mistaken me for your research monkey. Allow me to correct you on this error. I'm not here to cure your laziness or inability to do a search on the subject to see where that number comes from.


Your other commentary on taxation is almost wholly unworthy of reply, other than to point out that it's very popular in this part of the country for people to expect access to something without having to actually contribute to it (non-subsidized transit costs, bike licensing, et al)

[CrazyDonkey]

I called it for what it is. I doubt it will change.

So, you're in favor of diverting police from fighting crime to controlling traffic, just so you can get to where you're going a few minutes faster. See my earlier comment about humans putting their own needs above those of others - you would seem not to be exempt. Note: I'm not opposed to training and hiring more police to enforce both the criminal and traffic laws, but it would have to be paid for, which would likely mean more taxes, which you aren't willing to pay.

As to your refusal to back up your assertion that the out-of-state company operating the tolling system will keep 75 cents of every dollar paid in tolls, I'll simply take that to mean your claim is groundless. By all means, feel free to provide an explanation of how that might be, or a link that does the same.

[Xanathos]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

I called it for what it is. I doubt it will change.

So, you're in favor of diverting police from fighting crime to controlling traffic, just so you can get to where you're going a few minutes faster. See my earlier comment about humans putting their own needs above those of others - you would seem not to be exempt. Note: I'm not opposed to training and hiring more police to enforce both the criminal and traffic laws, but it would have to be paid for, which would likely mean more taxes, which you aren't willing to pay.

As to your refusal to back up your assertion that the out-of-state company operating the tolling system will keep 75 cents of every dollar paid in tolls, I'll simply take that to mean your claim is groundless. By all means, feel free to provide an explanation of how that might be, or a link that does the same.

Did I say anything about diverting police force? No, I did not - and you're simply attempting to twist statements in order to fit a false narrative that you are trying to push. I clearly stated that existing traffic cops (State troopers, sheriff department etc.) that is already assigned to traffic duty could actually place an emphasis on, you know, ENFORCING TRAFFIC LAWS as a whole rather than a select few that the municipality has decided to tell them to enforce.

As to your last paragraph, again, you seem to be confused in thinking that I am your research monkey or in some way indebted to carry your water for you. Your social currency is not nearly so high as for me to save you the 2 minutes it would take you to go from being completely ignorant (which is what you apparently are on this topic) to educating yourself in some way. If you wish to be oblivious, that's your choice. Those of us who keep abreast on things and make sure to know what we're talking about before we open our mouths know what the deal is. Those of you who feel that being completely ill-equipped to discuss a topic should not be a preclusion from spouting off about it apparently don't.

TLR: Your entire platform is bad, and you should feel bad for subjecting us to it.