- 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 1:42 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 1:45 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 1:58 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 2:20 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. Transportation officials could see this anomaly as a Texas-sized reason to build more highways—but shouldn’t.
You can widen a road all you want, but congestion will always be with us due to cell phone usage. The base premise is normal driving requires that your focus be directed outward. When you are on your cell phone, your focus is inward, so you tend to go slower. In my opinion, cell phone users even go slower when they are not on the phone.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 2:37 pm to Street Hawk
Posted on 4/25/16 at 2:54 pm to Street Hawk
At some point, adding additional lanes HAS to decrease congestion. That's a mathematical certainty. "Studies" saying that doesn't happen are retarded.
Take the logic to its extreme: If I have 4 million drivers and add 3,999,997 lanes then congestion stays the same?
Take the logic to its extreme: If I have 4 million drivers and add 3,999,997 lanes then congestion stays the same?
Posted on 4/25/16 at 4:05 pm to Street Hawk
I'll have to pinch myself once the 290 widening is complete. It's such a headache right now. They said it'd be ready in time for the Super Bowl. We'll see about that 
Posted on 4/25/16 at 4:08 pm to Street Hawk
My wife commutes outbound on 290 in Houston (3-4 lane state highway with no shoulders). Accident happens on either side and the backups are huge. They are widening for extra lane and shoulders I believe. Just moving an accident to a shoulder still allows the designated lanes to continue moving.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 4:43 pm to Street Hawk
it sure the frick didnt work on I-12 westbound...
before the widening, traffic would back up to denham or juban, and crawl in to airline.
after the widening, traffic backs up at denham or juban and crawls in to airline.
before the widening, traffic would back up to denham or juban, and crawl in to airline.
after the widening, traffic backs up at denham or juban and crawls in to airline.
Posted on 4/25/16 at 4:55 pm to Street Hawk
quote:
Widening Highways Never Fixes Traffic. But Darnit, It Did in Texas
Most research like that has a caveat that widening highways eases congestion when there is a capacity constraint and there aren't other system inefficiencies.
Widening I-10 or Airline through Baton Rouge, for instance, would probably ease congestion. Widening a road with a 90 degree bend or traffic lights that are out of sync may not solve everything.
This post was edited on 4/25/16 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 4/25/16 at 6:29 pm to Street Hawk
I can't wait until Verot is done being widened 
Posted on 4/25/16 at 7:13 pm to Street Hawk
Steers and queers
Posted on 4/25/16 at 7:52 pm to Street Hawk
Adding capacity does increase MOEs such as speed and vph. But, it's only as effective as the next restriction "bottleneck" down stream. Capacity added to intersection approaches does help immensely.
The capacity addition westbound I-12 out of BR worked, but it goes back to the restrictions being further downstream and traffic volumes bleeding off along that stretch.
The capacity addition westbound I-12 out of BR worked, but it goes back to the restrictions being further downstream and traffic volumes bleeding off along that stretch.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News