Metro Silver Line and the Resurgence of Catoctin County (Washington: how much, construction)

[tysonsengineer]

30,000 people out of 110,000 users of the toll road is a significant improvement. The toll road is not operating like it should for the price it costs. 40 minutes for 11 miles is unacceptable. So to that point, I think it will help traffic to remove 30,000 fairfax residents from the toll road. Whether anyone in loudoun will use it I have no idea, but I think many reston/herndon/Vienna residents will use it

[globalburgh]

One could make a much bigger dent in the traffic problem with congestion pricing.

[tysonsengineer]

Explain? You mean like the HOT Lanes congestion pricing?

[farplaner]

I had to google it too, and here's what I found:
What is Congestion Pricing? - Congestion Pricing: A Primer - FHWA Office of Operations

[tysonsengineer]

Ok yea, so HOT lanes.

Well thats good, and I have my issues with the HOT lanes (mostly the exits for them) but you are probably right some levels of congestion pricing help. Except in this area, we have a 3 hour rush easily in the mornings and at night. We have played all the tricks and tried moving people around. The concept behind congestion pricing, which partially worked in Cali, was to spread out 100% of the people into smaller sections as opposed to a bell curve distribution with a high singular peak.

That won't work here, atleast i dont think it will work that great, because 1) military people have been already helping the traffic situation in this area by doing much of their work off typical peak hours, 2) You cant necessarily stroll into work at 11am and not have it impact your work ability.

It will help, but its no substitute for mass transit also. The one nice thing is that it atleast pays for itself (though jury is still out based on 50% of Calis HOT lanes).

We'll see, if you are asking which I think will be a failure? Id bet on HOT lanes being a failure before I bet on Silver Line.

[globalburgh]

Here is a story about a congestion pricing proposal in Texas:

MoPac toll lane project finally gaining speed

There are lots of forces that could reduce the number of cars on the highway. Gasoline prices could go even higher. More people embrace telecommuting. Most of them cost way less than building more Metro. I'm not interested in throwing buckets of money at a problem, particularly one that is so poorly understood:

Does Traffic Hurt The Economy? | Civic Analytics

Edit: Here is another good article about congestion pricing:

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmo...-be-unpopular/

[tysonsengineer]

But throwing buckets of money is exactly what congestion pricing is, and while you can find some partners in it, like on 495 or 95 where private companies are getting into the Toll Business game, in lesser corridors you just dont see the funding for it.

Beyond that, while it fixes those roads, it just pushes the traffic onto subdivisions and side streets, causing more damage to neighborhoods.

Mass transit is the only proven multi-generational correction that shows that it can reduce traffic when COMBINED with proper land use and the stopping of continued suburban sprawl. The further and further out we spread the more wreckless our transportation networks become.

The cheapest way to help our traffic is to stop expanding further and further out and start focusing higher density within, and in those higher density areas you create the need for alternatives to highways. The good metros of the world cost a lot, but they are a hell of a lot cheaper than continued maintenance on roads and the endless cycle of widening.

PS I would never trust any land use or traffic solutions coming from Texas or California, both of which have the worst traffic in the country. Houston has 3 outer beltways and more pavement than they know what to do with, and yet their traffic is even worse than ours. In fact when you view the worst traffic places in the country, its not where there is the most people, its where the people have been laid out in the dumbest way possible

LA, San Jose, San Diego, Houston, Atlanta, and of course Washington Metro. All are huge highway spenders, all are actually far less populated than other better run city regions as far as transportation (Charlotte, NYC, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco (though Oakland is also awful)

The california method, ie build it wider, has failed, why should we not think this latest build it wider technique is just as flawed?

[globalburgh]

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

PS I would never trust any land use or traffic solutions coming from Texas or California, both of which have the worst traffic in the country.

What a silly position to take, and a strawman to boot.

[tysonsengineer]

I have read and understood all of AASHTOs guidelines, I have read the MUTCD, these are elements that came from the california design method, and they haven't solved anything.

If anything they made things worse by not understanding induced traffic and the role of transportation in land use. It is my opinion, but it is as such my opinion as someone who is well aware of the current design method of VDOT, and its DOT model, California. Sure if you make things wider you increase capacity, but what are the negatives of that action? Not environmental BS, but how it effects the land development of a region, the additional maintenance costs created, the negative effect on communities from excessive lane widenings.

These are elements that were not considered when the US began willy-nilly widening every 4 lane road into an 8 lane road instead of reanalyzing WHY the 8 lane road was suddenly deemed necessary.

In the end goals are you wishing we were MORE like California and Texas? Honestly? I want to avoid becoming more like those two states like the plague. And to boot, I wonder why Texas is so autocentric... hmmmmm.... I wonder why

[globalburgh]

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

I have read and understood all of AASHTOs guidelines, I have read the MUTCD, these are elements that came from the california design method, and they haven't solved anything.

Good for you. That doesn't change the fact that you are looking at this issue as an ideologue. Other cities have implemented congestion pricing. Dismissing the approach because of where it is implemented lacks any semblance of reason or logic.