- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Widening Highways Never Fixes Traffic. But Darnit, It Did in Texas
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:30 pm
quote:
IN A TRUE fairy tale of a transportation project, Texas spent a measly $4.25 million widening a highway and, in defiance of conventional wisdom among transportation planners, doubled the speed of rush hour traffic on a notoriously congested highway in Dallas.
The Texas Department of Transportation repaved the shoulders along both sides of a 6.3-mile stretch of State Highway 161 between Dallas and Fort Worth in September. Then it opened them up to traffic during the daily rush hour, keeping tow trucks on standby in case someone breaks down. Based on figures released this month, with the extra lanes in place, traffic “started sailing,” The Dallas Morning News reported this week.
It isn’t supposed to work that way. The rule of induced demand says widening highways does not ease congestion, and often makes it worse. Transportation officials could see this anomaly as a Texas-sized reason to build more highways—but shouldn’t.
LINK
19
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:31 pm to Street Hawk
Frick texas
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:32 pm to Street Hawk
I love Texas
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:33 pm to Street Hawk
quote:
It isn’t supposed to work that way. The rule of induced demand says widening highways does not ease congestion, and often makes it worse.
Really? Why?
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:33 pm to Street Hawk
I'd like to know the cost of keeping those tow trucks on stand-by. They don't do that for free.....I know.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:34 pm to Street Hawk
yea I dont believe TXDOTs numbers for one second.
they took those in the first few days after construction had halted and the project was complete.
once people realize its not the hell that it was for years it will fill right the frick back up.
they took those in the first few days after construction had halted and the project was complete.
once people realize its not the hell that it was for years it will fill right the frick back up.
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:34 pm to CoachChappy
quote:
Really? Why?
quote:
More lanes often means more traffic because people like to go places, as long as the threat of bumper to bumper doesn’t dissuade them. Widening a highway may ease the pressure, but only until everyone learns of the quick, new route about town. Civil engineers liken traffic to a gas: It expands to fill the space provided. As civil engineer and sustainability advocate Charles Marohn so eloquently put it, “Trying to solve congestion by making roadways wider is like trying to solve obesity by buying bigger pants.”
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:36 pm to CoachChappy
Basically building new roads entices more people to drive that route, or not carpool, etc. Seems retarded but that's the concept.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:37 pm to TigerRob20
quote:
Trying to solve congestion by making roadways wider is like trying to solve obesity by buying bigger pants.”
Its funny because people are fat
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:41 pm to CoachChappy
quote:
Really? Why?
Congratulations. You are qualified to be a politician in the city of Baton Rouge where all you have to do to fix their traffic problems is to have studies done on why there is so much frickin traffic.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:42 pm to Street Hawk
This headline is garbage. They even explain it further down.
quote:
Two things might explain why the Dallas project worked. The first is that the bottleneck on that highway was a very specific problem: a two-lane stretch connecting three-lane highways. Opening the shoulders eliminated the choke points of squeezing into a tighter space.
The second and more cynical explanation for the project’s success is that it wasn’t actually successful. The traffic numbers published this month include just a few days after the new lanes opened in September. Traffic has increased since then, though the TxDOT says traffic is still moving faster than before the project. It’s quite possible unbearable congestion will return, as more locals change their behavior to take advantage of what is suddenly a smooth ride—that’s the fundamental principle of induced demand
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:44 pm to TigerRob20
With that line of thinking, we need to cut all interstates back to one lane each direction. "Road diet" them, and all our problems will be solved. I'm off to buy some new pants with waistlines a couple of inches too small. Thanks for the insight!
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 3:41 pm
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:45 pm to Street Hawk
quote:
The rule of induced demand says widening highways does not ease congestion, and often makes it worse.
this is the kind of logic we have to deal with where 10 and 110 meet off the bridge
ETA: maybe they will do another study
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 1:46 pm
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:52 pm to The Mick
quote:
Basically building new roads entices more people to drive that route, or not carpool, etc. Seems retarded but that's the concept.
Well, if by "retarded" you mean, "backed up with observation and research" then, you're correct. How many lanes do the highways around the beltway have? They could have 30 lanes each way and be a mile wide - still would have crushing traffic jams.
Efficiency of the traffic flow is far more important to eliminating congestion than adding lanes. Straighten out the lanes (as much as possible) - every curve and turn slows down traffic, even if you have 1000 lanes. And all the curves and turns stack and have a cumulative effect. Cut down on stops before turns/turning across traffic and such.
Adding lanes actually adds to your traffic volume. If the system is already efficient (straight with minimal interruptions) the added volume will be handled efficiently. If your system isn't efficient, adding lanes won't improve that efficiency 1 bit.
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:58 pm to Street Hawk
quote:
Widening Highways Never Fixes Traffic
[/img]
Posted on 4/25/16 at 1:58 pm to Street Hawk
That was at a choke point where 3 lanes skinny down to 2 lanes. Why it was designed this way in the first place is a question for the Aggie Engineers. But even Txdot says it will probably clog back up after people discover it is a faster route.
LINK
quote:
The Texas Department of Transportation plans to turn the inside shoulders of State Highway 161 between State Highways 183 and 114 into a third lane of traffic in each direction during rush hour. It’s going to take about a year to restripe the roads and put signs in place, but officials believe it will alleviate rush-hour headaches. The problem is that three lanes of traffic in both directions narrow to two lanes for this stretch. That causes choke points that slow down drivers.
LINK
Posted on 4/25/16 at 2:03 pm to BottomlandBrew
quote:
Two things might explain why the Dallas project worked. The first is that the bottleneck on that highway was a very specific problem
which give credence to action for the Washington St. exit on I-10 east as you enter BR. that setup has been a disaster for decades
Posted on 4/25/16 at 2:09 pm to Zappas Stache
The rule shouldn't be taken to mean that it never improves traffic to build additional lanes. It just means that building an additional lane won't always solve traffic problems.
If there is too much volume for an existing roadway, I think it is beyond question that an additional lane will improve traffic flow. But if there are sufficient lanes to handle the volume, an additional lane may not improve traffic flow.
It really comes down to whether Uncle Bob is doing 45 in the left lane during rush hour. You can have the most efficient design, but if people aren't using it in an efficient way then it wont help a bit.
If there is too much volume for an existing roadway, I think it is beyond question that an additional lane will improve traffic flow. But if there are sufficient lanes to handle the volume, an additional lane may not improve traffic flow.
It really comes down to whether Uncle Bob is doing 45 in the left lane during rush hour. You can have the most efficient design, but if people aren't using it in an efficient way then it wont help a bit.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 2:11 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Efficiency of the traffic flow is far more important to eliminating congestion than adding lanes. Straighten out the lanes (as much as possible) - every curve and turn slows down traffic, even if you have 1000 lanes. And all the curves and turns stack and have a cumulative effect. Cut down on stops before turns/turning across traffic and such.
Efficient public transportation that people actually use would solve the problem also
Posted on 4/25/16 at 2:14 pm to Rouge
They are widening Hwy 59 in Rosenberg from two lanes to four. I think it is going to make a ton of difference.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News