If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TwinCities.com)   Adding more lanes is not solution to freeway congestion because that's not in vogue. Recommended are carpool lanes, roundabouts, green wood-burning locomotives, and rickshaw paths   (twincities.com) divider line 191
    More: Unlikely, HOV lane, St. Cloud, Twin Cities, Minnesota Department of Transportation, peak hour, civil engineers  
•       •       •

1108 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Oct 2013 at 2:57 PM (40 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



191 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-14 01:22:38 PM
Actually, carpool lanes would help, because it would take some of the cars off the road, plus give them a lane to be in.  It's a win win.
 
2013-10-14 01:26:04 PM
Mass transit, not living an hour and a half from where you work, flexible hours and telecommuting wouldn't help at all. The only possible solution is adding more lanes. The same way that the only solution to crime is more jail cells
 
2013-10-14 02:00:36 PM
Induced demand
 
2013-10-14 02:00:50 PM

RedPhoenix122: Actually, carpool lanes would help, because it would take some of the cars off the road, plus give them a lane to be in.  It's a win win.


could you post a citation where carpool lanes fixed choke points?
 
2013-10-14 02:04:17 PM
fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.
 
2013-10-14 02:05:35 PM

namatad: RedPhoenix122: Actually, carpool lanes would help, because it would take some of the cars off the road, plus give them a lane to be in.  It's a win win.

could you post a citation where carpool lanes fixed choke points?


What happens when the choke points have more lanes added to them?
Should all construction halt until the choke points are widened?
 
2013-10-14 02:05:36 PM
Traffic is like a gas: it expands to fit the container.
 
2013-10-14 02:10:15 PM
Those highways have to meet up at already choking points of contact. What happens when you send more traffic from different directions into the same already overcrowded area?
 
2013-10-14 02:10:36 PM
More lanes invite more cars.
 
2013-10-14 02:51:15 PM

WelldeadLink: Should all construction halt until the choke points are widened?


That seems pretty logical to me. Fix the broken part, don't break the part that isn't broken.
 
2013-10-14 02:58:43 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Traffic is like a gas: it expands to fit the container.


I've seen it myself.  I've seen them extend expressways or add lanes, and I thought great, now I can finally get to work faster.  True, for a year or two.  Then they build one zillion homes along it, and two or three years later, it's worse than ever.
 
2013-10-14 03:00:59 PM

Lsherm: Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue. They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them. Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.


So rich people cause traffic jams.  Can't we just eat the rich?
 
2013-10-14 03:01:49 PM
More efficient intersections and roundabouts would help a great deal. The problem isn't the long straight sections. It is the points where different traffic patterns have to merge or split.
 
2013-10-14 03:02:50 PM
holy crap stupidmitter read the article. It explain why just adding more lanes wouldn't work.
 
2013-10-14 03:03:54 PM
My agency aggressively pushes teleworking. Most supervisors and managers aggressively resist it. It's like this on any issue there.
 
2013-10-14 03:05:43 PM

edmo: My agency aggressively pushes teleworking. Most supervisors and managers aggressively resist it. It's like this on any issue there.


For some reason, there are still companies that are resisting telecommuting. They just can't imagine that people are as productive at home. Jokes on them, I am Farking at work right now!
 
2013-10-14 03:06:21 PM
I for one, think we can expand the freeways indefinitely, especially the ones in downtown Chicago.  Fark the buildings and shiat, they can move.
 
2013-10-14 03:06:22 PM

Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.


I hardly ever see anyone IN the HOT lanes, though...
 
2013-10-14 03:08:12 PM
More lanes leads to more congestion as it leads to more people changing lanes. What is better to make hard divisions between lanes so that traffic gets funneled. For instance, put hard barriers around a lane which is a dedicated exit lane, but do this several miles in advance of the particular exit.
 
2013-10-14 03:08:23 PM
Rickshaws fare poorly in the summer, since their A/C is determined by how fast L'il Riki can run while pulling my fat ass. I don't want to get to work all sweaty, that's gross.
 
2013-10-14 03:08:43 PM

namatad: RedPhoenix122: Actually, carpool lanes would help, because it would take some of the cars off the road, plus give them a lane to be in.  It's a win win.

could you post a citation where carpool lanes fixed choke points?


Do you serious believe planners just add things without ever doing a study on what the impact is or what it has been in other places?
 
2013-10-14 03:09:01 PM

Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.


Depends on where you live.  In the Seattle area, they have been experimenting with HOT lanes, but the carpool lanes on some roadways are already too highly utilized for them to be able to add any more traffic to them.

They are adding more lanes to be used as HOT lanes in some areas, though.  That will probably work.  I just hope the tolls eventually end up raising enough money to pay for the projects.
 
2013-10-14 03:10:03 PM

Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.



I doubt VDOT will ever recoup the money spent on adding reversible HOT lanes to I-95. They literally rebuilt the interstate to put those things into the median.

Everything mentioned in TFA are bandaids that offer only temporary help. If you live in a growing area, adding lanes is really the only way to stay ahead of the growth in traffic, and very,very few states have the money to do it.
 
2013-10-14 03:10:38 PM
2 lanes adding one lane = 50% traffic increase
3 lanes adding one lane = 33% traffic increase
4 lanes adding one lane = 25% traffic increase.

Adding more lanes doesn't scale. Also you then get people living farther away then before and causing more traffic.
 
2013-10-14 03:11:41 PM

Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.


The cops I see on every on/off ramp on I-66 every morning disagrees that carpool lanes don't generate revenue
 
2013-10-14 03:14:16 PM

lennavan: I for one, think we can expand the freeways indefinitely, especially the ones in downtown Chicago.  Fark the buildings and shiat, they can move.


Hell they are already building roads on to of roads there.
 
2013-10-14 03:14:28 PM
Minnesota Department of Transportation engineer Terry Humbert said a third lane in each direction would simply send more vehicles more quickly toward choke points. "If we just add a lane out here, we're going to be dumping traffic into a freeway system that's stopped," he said.

Yeah, saw this happen on US 60 in the Eastern Phoenix Valley, the freeway was notoriously cramped, they finally widened it, people started using it more, but Tempe decided to play the asshole card and fight the expansion that passed through their part of town, so you had it choke down, go back to the original configuration of lanes, and then widen up again 3 or 4 miles down the road. They finally pulled their heads out of their asses, and once the whole freeway was expanded, it helped. Of course, Az also got intelligent with their carpool lanes, and they are only restricted lanes in the morning and afternoons during rush hour, the rest of the time, anyone can use it, and it helps when there are backups during things like weekend sporting events, concerts, etc... Utah seems to think it would be too "confusing" for their drivers here, apparently clocks are beyond us.

If the freeway is expanded correctly, I see no issue with this, I've seen plenty of freeway widening jobs work out well, but they have to do it correctly and widen the on/off ramps, add ramp meters, and make sure any interchanges with other freeways are up to snuff. NO FARKING CLOVERLEAF INTERCHANGES!! God, those things suck.
 
2013-10-14 03:14:53 PM

Corvus: 2 lanes adding one lane = 50% traffic increase
3 lanes adding one lane = 33% traffic increase
4 lanes adding one lane = 25% traffic increase.

Adding more lanes doesn't scale. Also you then get people living farther away then before and causing more traffic.


I'm sure you meant 50% traffic decrease.  Lots of reasons to think adding more lanes is stupid.  But yours has to be the stupidest.

1 lane = x cars per hour
2 lanes = 2x cars per hour
3 lanes = 3x cars per hour
4 lanes = 4x cars per hour

Adding more lanes does scale.
  reading.kingrat.biz
 
2013-10-14 03:15:00 PM

Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.


Lol you're funny. They've had HOT lanes in my county for over a decade now and they end up being underused Lexus lanes that never paid for themselves and had to be subsidized by the taxpayers. In the meantime traffic is as bad as it ever was.
 
2013-10-14 03:15:43 PM
lennavan:

Adding more lanes does scale.
  [reading.kingrat.biz image 609x900]


Speaking of scale, I probably should have scaled down that graphic.  Fme.
 
2013-10-14 03:16:34 PM

Corvus: 2 lanes adding one lane = 50% traffic increase
3 lanes adding one lane = 33% traffic increase
4 lanes adding one lane = 25% traffic increase.

Adding more lanes doesn't scale. Also you then get people living farther away then before and causing more traffic.


These numbers hold if you assume that the road has approximately zero on/off-ramp and nobody tooling along at 5 under the limit in the far left lane. In the real world, it's a bit less.

I was in Toronto recently, and the 401 has (I think) four lanes of expressway, a concrete barrier, and then three or four lanes for people entering and exiting, with periodic gaps in the barrier. In the areas that weren't congested by fifty years of ongoing construction, it seemed to work pretty well.
 
2013-10-14 03:16:39 PM

Corvus: namatad: RedPhoenix122: Actually, carpool lanes would help, because it would take some of the cars off the road, plus give them a lane to be in.  It's a win win.

could you post a citation where carpool lanes fixed choke points?

Do you serious believe planners just add things without ever doing a study on what the impact is or what it has been in other places?


I'm considering sending a link to this thread to a civil engineer friend that does traffic studies and makes proposals.  There's already a couple gems in here.
 
2013-10-14 03:16:56 PM
If you expand the road to handle a higher volume, traffic volume always increase in response...
 
2013-10-14 03:19:04 PM

Fart_Machine: Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.

Lol you're funny. They've had HOT lanes in my county for over a decade now and they end up being underused Lexus lanes that never paid for themselves and had to be subsidized by the taxpayers. In the meantime traffic is as bad as it ever was.


Our HOT lanes, on the other hand, are owned by a Spanish corporation for the next 75 years...

SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/286599-d-c-beltway-opens-hot-lanes-to-bree ze -past-traffic-for-a-price-but-strapped-govt-wont-get-revenue/
 
2013-10-14 03:19:10 PM
The only thing you can do is raise taxes dramatically to get people to move to other cities.
 
2013-10-14 03:20:47 PM
www.resourcesforlife.com
 
2013-10-14 03:20:55 PM
Does limiting truck traffic to a specific lane or two help at all? Due to the laws of physics they're kind of forced to creep really slow when it's congested, just to avoid colliding with things. Sure seems like the greater the number of trucks on the road during heavy traffic, the slower things go...
 
2013-10-14 03:21:06 PM
The Twin Cities could really use a more extensive light rail system. They are working on it, but it will take a while. I can easily spend over an hour in the afternoon commute if I get going 10 minutes later than normal. A snowstorm can make my drive home take three hours. The worst part is that there are some stretches where there are no places to pee that don't require going a long ways in the wrong direction.

Nothing worse than being blocked into the fast lane and really regretting that 18 ounce Diet Coke you bought at the beginning of the trip. Luckily, my current job is very open about telecommuting.
 
2013-10-14 03:21:07 PM

Lost Thought 00: More lanes leads to more congestion as it leads to more people changing lanes. What is better to make hard divisions between lanes so that traffic gets funneled. For instance, put hard barriers around a lane which is a dedicated exit lane, but do this several miles in advance of the particular exit.


I'd like some true expressways - one lane in each direction - that bypass all exits and only link the various highways.  Right now, getting from I-5 to HWY-26 (via HWY-217) in Oregon can take 45 minutes, and it's only five miles.  It's clogged by local traffic.  One express lane in each direction would really speed up rush-hour for those of us who don't live in Tigard or Beaverton, and ease the local congestion as well, since it would remove us from the picture.

We need skyways, like they have in Texas.  Was really impressed with their solutions to clogged highways - build up!
 
2013-10-14 03:22:25 PM

lennavan: Corvus: 2 lanes adding one lane = 50% traffic increase
3 lanes adding one lane = 33% traffic increase
4 lanes adding one lane = 25% traffic increase.

Adding more lanes doesn't scale. Also you then get people living farther away then before and causing more traffic.

I'm sure you meant 50% traffic decrease.  Lots of reasons to think adding more lanes is stupid.  But yours has to be the stupidest.

1 lane = x cars per hour
2 lanes = 2x cars per hour
3 lanes = 3x cars per hour
4 lanes = 4x cars per hour

Adding more lanes does scale.
  [reading.kingrat.biz image 609x900]


You think adding one lane to a 3 lane road makes 4 times the amount of traffic can go through than when it was a three lane road?

Adding an extra lane to a street doesn't scale. You are expanding it a smaller and smaller amount each time you add a lane.


You are aware that has nothing to do with "statistics" right? It's basic math. You understand the difference?

I can walk through it with you.
 
2013-10-14 03:25:33 PM
Let's compare a freeway to a major artery. A breakdown of one car can cause a complete shutdown of a freeway.  Sort of like an embolism. Unless you can clear the blockage with great rapidity, there is going to be a long-lasting, crippling event.

What we really need are helicopters that can swoop in and lift the wrecked or disabled car right off the freeway and out of the way.
 
2013-10-14 03:27:24 PM
I recommend this book:

ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2013-10-14 03:27:24 PM

lennavan: Corvus: 2 lanes adding one lane = 50% traffic increase
3 lanes adding one lane = 33% traffic increase
4 lanes adding one lane = 25% traffic increase.

Adding more lanes doesn't scale. Also you then get people living farther away then before and causing more traffic.

I'm sure you meant 50% traffic decrease.  Lots of reasons to think adding more lanes is stupid.  But yours has to be the stupidest.

1 lane = x cars per hour
2 lanes = 2x cars per hour
3 lanes = 3x cars per hour
4 lanes = 4x cars per hour

Adding more lanes does scale.
  [reading.kingrat.biz image 609x900]


A) try rereading what I actually wrote. I am talking about traffic capacity. If capacity isn't already planned to be getting maxed out then there would be no reason to adding lanes.

1 lane = x cars per hour
2 lanes = 2x cars per hour
3 lanes = 3x cars per hour
4 lanes = 4x cars per hour


Yes and adding a single lane to those give dimensioning returns. If you have 4 lanes of traffic and you were add one lane you are only adding 25% more of current capacity. If you don't get that then you really should bring that up to your elementary school teacher because you can't do simple math.

B) You really should get a basic understanding of math to learn what the word "statistics" means, because you used it completely wrong.
 
2013-10-14 03:28:56 PM

Rhino_man: Fart_Machine: Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.

Lol you're funny. They've had HOT lanes in my county for over a decade now and they end up being underused Lexus lanes that never paid for themselves and had to be subsidized by the taxpayers. In the meantime traffic is as bad as it ever was.

Our HOT lanes, on the other hand, are owned by a Spanish corporation for the next 75 years...

SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/286599-d-c-beltway-opens-hot-lanes-to-bree ze -past-traffic-for-a-price-but-strapped-govt-wont-get-revenue/


Haha, Chicago has been doing that stuff for years and years now.  One of our tollways was leased to a Spanish company for 99 years.  Our parking meters were leased for 75.  It's great politics, fix a short term problem.  Sure you create a long term problem but what do politicians care about the long term, they won't be running for office 75 years from now.
 
2013-10-14 03:29:09 PM
I can fix this in a minute:

All Defense financing (Including Veterans benefits) shall be through a tax on fuel. This tax shall be offset by removing income tax from the lowest tax brackets (i.e. increasing the level at which you start to pay taxes).

Ta daa! If you're a redneck monster truck lover, you pay for defense! If you're a hippie, you can avoid paying for war by bicycling everywhere.

And everyone gets taxed indirectly due to transportation costs. And every time you go to fill up you see "$4 and more of each gallon you buy is to pay for Defense."
 
2013-10-14 03:29:39 PM

Corvus: 1 lane = x cars per hour
2 lanes = 2x cars per hour
3 lanes = 3x cars per hour
4 lanes = 4x cars per hour

Adding more lanes does scale.
[reading.kingrat.biz image 609x900]

You think adding one lane to a 3 lane road makes 4 times the amount of traffic can go through than when it was a three lane road?


I DONT THINK YOU UNDERSTAND MATH, YOU DOLT
 
2013-10-14 03:29:50 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: Let's compare a freeway to a major artery. A breakdown of one car can cause a complete shutdown of a freeway.  Sort of like an embolism. Unless you can clear the blockage with great rapidity, there is going to be a long-lasting, crippling event.

What we really need are helicopters that can swoop in and lift the wrecked or disabled car right off the freeway and out of the way.


Or, just a big laser! Think of how encouraged everyone would be to keep up on maintenance!
 
2013-10-14 03:31:06 PM

lennavan: Corvus: 1 lane = x cars per hour
2 lanes = 2x cars per hour
3 lanes = 3x cars per hour
4 lanes = 4x cars per hour

Adding more lanes does scale.
[reading.kingrat.biz image 609x900]

You think adding one lane to a 3 lane road makes 4 times the amount of traffic can go through than when it was a three lane road?

I DONT THINK YOU UNDERSTAND MATH, YOU DOLT


Hahhaha funny.

Now tell me about the "Statistics" I used that I said I used. I am ready to hear your definition of "statistics".

Please this should be funny.
 
2013-10-14 03:32:34 PM

Rhino_man: Fart_Machine: Lsherm: fark HOV, go HOT.  They put HOT lanes around the Beltway and it almost immediately improved rush hour traffic (once the accidents stopped).  They are adding HOT lanes to I-95 south of DC and I expect those will do the same.

Carpool lanes just end up being underutilized and they don't generate any revenue.  They're incredibly inconvenient, which is why liberals like them, but they don't make any sense if people aren't going to use them.  Let the wealthy buy their way to better traffic and the conditions improve for everyone.

Lol you're funny. They've had HOT lanes in my county for over a decade now and they end up being underused Lexus lanes that never paid for themselves and had to be subsidized by the taxpayers. In the meantime traffic is as bad as it ever was.

Our HOT lanes, on the other hand, are owned by a Spanish corporation for the next 75 years...

SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/286599-d-c-beltway-opens-hot-lanes-to-bree ze -past-traffic-for-a-price-but-strapped-govt-wont-get-revenue/


Well of course. The area pays for the project with mostly taxpayer funds, it benefits primarily upper scale commuters and profits are privatized while losses are socialized. It's not a bug it's a feature. Wonder how much money that corporation funneled into campaign funds.
 
2013-10-14 03:33:54 PM

lennavan: Corvus: 1 lane = x cars per hour
2 lanes = 2x cars per hour
3 lanes = 3x cars per hour
4 lanes = 4x cars per hour

Adding more lanes does scale.
[reading.kingrat.biz image 609x900]

You think adding one lane to a 3 lane road makes 4 times the amount of traffic can go through than when it was a three lane road?

I DONT THINK YOU UNDERSTAND MATH, YOU DOLT


Just because something is a linear increase doesn't mean it scales well enough. If you have a population with a geometric growth a linear increase does not scale well enough.

(I hope you understand what "linear increase" means since you think I know little about math)

Oh and please teach me this definition of "statistics" that I am unfamiliar with that you used.
 
Displayed 50 of 191 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report