The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[Nashvillain]

2 hours ago, downtownresident said:

The I-440 reconstruction? Not a waste at all, the roadway was rough, and the expanded capacity is needed. 

Expanded capacity will be filled by increased traffic volume, congestion will not improve. So some of it actually is a waste

[Nash_12South]

So we should not have done anything to 440? Just continue to equally expensively patch it? Do we just not not do any road work until the city has fully implemented some still unplanned mass transit system? It’s like not treating cancer until we have a total cure.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Nash_12South

[Nashvillain]

2 hours ago, Nash_12South said:

So we should not have done anything to 440? Just continue to equally expensively patch it? Do we just not not do any road work until the city has fully implemented some still unplanned mass transit system? It’s like not treating cancer until we have a total cure.

Not saying that. Improving the surface or redoing it is fine. Expanding capacity is a waste of money

[Nash_12South]

30 minutes ago, Nashvillain said:

Not saying that. Improving the surface or redoing it is fine. Expanding capacity is a waste of money

Because I'm ornery - Not expanding, not trying to do something to make 440 better, is like telling that cancer patient that this treatment may extend your life for two years, but since its expensive, and your going to die anyway, lets not do it. 

440 congestion had created worsening traffic on the alternate roads, backed up traffic on all the feeder roads/interstates. The expansion should help relieve some of that. It's not a cure, no one says that, but doing nothing isn't the answer either. 

Edited September 27, 2019 by Nash_12South

[Nashvillain]

23 minutes ago, Nash_12South said:

Because I'm ornery - Not expanding, not trying to do something to make 440 better, is like telling that cancer patient that this treatment may extend your life for two years, but since its expensive, and your going to die anyway, lets not do it. 

440 congestion had created worsening traffic on the alternate roads, backed up traffic on all the feeder roads/interstates. The expansion should help relieve some of that. It's not a cure, no one says that, but doing nothing isn't the answer either. 

Traffic engineers and planners have known for a long time that expanding capacity does nothing to reduce congestion. It's called induced demand. When you add capacity, you get more traffic. So, it literally is a waste of time and effort. Though I suppose it's good for the construction companies and workers.  

And money. It's a waste of money

Edited September 27, 2019 by Nashvillain
forgot to say it's a waste of money

[PaulChinetti]

6 minutes ago, Nash_12South said:

Because I'm ornery - Not expanding, not trying to do something to make 440 better, is like telling that cancer patient that this treatment may extend your life for two years, but since its expensive, and your going to die anyway, lets not do it. 

I'll bite, it's Friday!

I can see getting rid of all the concrete and expanding on/off ramps. But I think that video said $150 million to do all the work. How about half that goes towards more bus routes, more sidewalks, and more bike lanes? Things that pedestrians can use on a daily basis.

[MLBrumby]

But highway design has evolved since the 1970s when 440 was designed. This expansion shows continuous three lanes of through-traffic and expanded exit/entrance (merge) lanes. Certainly better way signage and traffic management too. I'd expect they'd redo the cloverleafs if they could but that appears beyond the scope of this project. That highway will continue to get more congested simply because of where it is. 

[donNdonelson2]

4 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I'll bite, it's Friday!

I can see getting rid of all the concrete and expanding on/off ramps. But I think that video said $150 million to do all the work. How about half that goes towards more bus routes, more sidewalks, and more bike lanes? Things that pedestrians can use on a daily basis.

Because tens of thousands more people will use an improved 440 in a year than would use the improved/added bus or bike lanes or sidewalks that could be built for those same dollars.

[PruneTracy]

8 minutes ago, Nashvillain said:

Traffic engineers and planners have known for a long time that expanding capacity does nothing to reduce congestion. It's called induced demand. When you add capacity, you get more traffic. So, it literally is a waste of time and effort. Though I suppose it's good for the construction companies and workers.

A congested six-lane roadway still has more capacity than a congested four-lane roadway. The point is to move people, not to have congestion-free roadways.

[Will]

The big unspoken gap with this project is that while the off/on ramps to surface streets are being improved, there is no capacity being added to the ramps to access 440 from 24, 40, and 65. So, for example, coming from the airport on 40 towards town get onto 440 going west, it's still going to be a 1-lane bottleneck to actually get onto 440W. Similar thing with coming up I-24 from Murfreesboro, except I think there are currently 2 lanes on that access ramp. 3 lanes of traffic throughout 440 isn't going to do much good to those folks who commute from the 3 interstates onto 440; there will still be massive backups almost every rush hour.

[PaulChinetti]

Just now, donNdonelson2 said:

Because tens of thousands more people will use an improved 440 in a year than would use the improved/added bus or bike lanes or sidewalks that could be built for those same dollars.

Don't disagree with you there. And I supposed it's money from the state, and they sure as hell aren't going to be pay any of those things I mentioned, ha.

All they will pay for is MOAR CARS!!!

[donNdonelson2]

I’m in favor of all those other options, by the way. But 440 desperately needed this FIX.

[MLBrumby]

20 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

A congested six-lane roadway still has more capacity than a congested four-lane roadway. The point is to move people, not to have congestion-free roadways.

We have a complete revamp of the I-75/I-24 junction just inside the state line here. TDOT has already stated it will only improve congestion by about 20% for only a few years. 

Edited September 27, 2019 by MLBrumby

[PruneTracy]

39 minutes ago, Will said:

The big unspoken gap with this project is that while the off/on ramps to surface streets are being improved, there is no capacity being added to the ramps to access 440 from 24, 40, and 65. So, for example, coming from the airport on 40 towards town get onto 440 going west, it's still going to be a 1-lane bottleneck to actually get onto 440W. Similar thing with coming up I-24 from Murfreesboro, except I think there are currently 2 lanes on that access ramp. 3 lanes of traffic throughout 440 isn't going to do much good to those folks who commute from the 3 interstates onto 440; there will still be massive backups almost every rush hour.

There is a project in the planning phase for the I-40/I-24/I-440 interchange that should add capacity and may involve a large-scale reconfiguration depending on the findings of the initial studies. It could not be done at the same time as the I-440 reconstruction for maintenance of traffic reasons. You can imagine what it would have been like coming up I-24 in the morning if they were working on this interchange at the same time I-440 could have been shut down completely.

24 minutes ago, MLBrumby said:

We have a complete revamp of the I-75/I-24 junction just inside the state line here. TDOT has already stated it will only improve congestion by about 20% for only a few years. 

Again, the reconstruction of the interchange is still going to improve capacity even if congestion stays the same. You may not be traveling at free-flow speed through the interchange but there will be more vehicles able to pass through per unit of time than in the existing condition.

[Nashvillain]

13 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

There is a project in the planning phase for the I-40/I-24/I-440 interchange that should add capacity and may involve a large-scale reconfiguration depending on the findings of the initial studies. It could not be done at the same time as the I-440 reconstruction for maintenance of traffic reasons. You can imagine what it would have been like coming up I-24 in the morning if they were working on this interchange at the same time I-440 could have been shut down completely.

Again, the reconstruction of the interchange is still going to improve capacity even if congestion stays the same. You may not be traveling at free-flow speed through the interchange but there will be more vehicles able to pass through per unit of time than in the existing condition.

Allowing more people to sit in the same crap traffic is an improvement? More people stuck in traffic rather than doing something productive? Creating more greenhouse gas emissions and burning more fossil fuels?

[Nashvillain]

Don't take my word for it: 

https://www.vox.com/2014/10/23/6994159/traffic-roads-induced-demand

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/06/21/the-science-is-clear-more-highways-equals-more-traffic-why-are-dots-still-ignoring-it/

https://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traffic-induced-demand/

https://www.vtpi.org/gentraf.pdf

https://www.brookings.edu/research/traffic-why-its-getting-worse-what-government-can-do/

I'll stop there but feel free to continue as that's only like the first five returns on a google search

 

[PaulChinetti]

Why in the world is that something that the state sets?

[downtownresident]

21 minutes ago, Nashvillain said:

Allowing more people to sit in the same crap traffic is an improvement? More people stuck in traffic rather than doing something productive? Creating more greenhouse gas emissions and burning more fossil fuels?

Would you consider the state reconfiguring Nashville’s interchanges to reduce the amount of merging required, and reduce bottlenecks a waste of resources?

[Nashvillain]

5 minutes ago, downtownresident said:

Would you consider the state reconfiguring Nashville’s interchanges to reduce the amount of merging required, and reduce bottlenecks a waste of resources?

No, did I say that? 

[PruneTracy]

19 minutes ago, Nashvillain said:

Allowing more people to sit in the same crap traffic is an improvement? More people stuck in traffic rather than doing something productive? Creating more greenhouse gas emissions and burning more fossil fuels?

People are sitting in traffic so they can get to where they do productive things, i.e., work, school, etc. That's a cost of productivity just as riding a bus or walking would be a cost, and an easily internalized one that that.

Look, I know what the implicit argument is here: people ought to be riding transit, or living where they work, and so on. That's a nice sentiment and I'd like to see it realized as much as anyone else here but it doesn't reflect the realities of what TDOT is tasked to do, who has no control over land-use policies in the state or other measures that make said sentiments feasible.

And frankly the whole thing smacks of a "let them eat cake" mentality. You can see what the first five returns are on a Google search on unaffordable housing. Many of the US cities who have enacted policies nudging people towards the sort of lifestyle that doesn't involve rat-racing on an Interstate also have the same shortage of affordable housing that Nashville has in the middle of an economic boom.

It's nice to be able to say that people need to live downtown or along high-density transit corridors but the reality of the situation is that there are plenty of working- or middle-class people who have jobs downtown but can't afford to live there. Or people who get laid off from, say, the Carlex plant and need to be able to get to their new job with one of the Nissan suppliers without taking their kids out of their school. Not everyone who sits in traffic on an Interstate is driving a Suburban in from their Franklin McMansion to their V-level job.

[PaulChinetti]

How many drivers/cars on 440 live in the city and how many are using it as a pass through onto different places? Is that something you can count effectively?

[NashWellington11]

1 hour ago, donNdonelson2 said:

I’m in favor of all those other options, by the way. But 440 desperately needed this FIX.

I must have hit my head this morning because I am agreeing with @donNdonelson2 a lot today. 

440 NEEDED this. Badly. It was designed as a "parkway" but it's not now (nor was it ever really) a parkway. It is an interstate loop. That median in the middle was a total waste of space (and for the past decade, more of an unkempt eyesore). I would have loved for the median to be replaced by some sort of mass transit (light rail, monorail, buses, peddle taverns, etc.) BUT the transit initiative unfortunately lost (for now).

Also, however, that space didn't go away. It is still there. In fact, now it is better shape to take on one of those forms of transit if they ever happen. Especially since this project is (literally) bridging the gap over I-65 which would have been the most expensive part of putting transit in there.  Also, the road was concrete which is much more expensive than asphalt but also lasts much longer without needing to be resurfaced. The concrete surface was waaaayyy past its useful life. We definitely got our money's worth out of it.

Overall, if you view the 440 project as a temporary solution that is also putting critical infrastructure in place that could be easily used for future transit, it is a win-win. Can't everyone just get along! 

[BnaBreaker]

33 minutes ago, NashWellington11 said:

I must have hit my head this morning because I am agreeing with @donNdonelson2 a lot today. 

440 NEEDED this. Badly. It was designed as a "parkway" but it's not now (nor was it ever really) a parkway. It is an interstate loop. That median in the middle was a total waste of space (and for the past decade, more of an unkempt eyesore). I would have loved for the median to be replaced by some sort of mass transit (light rail, monorail, buses, peddle taverns, etc.) BUT the transit initiative unfortunately lost (for now).

Also, however, that space didn't go away. It is still there. In fact, now it is better shape to take on one of those forms of transit if they ever happen. Especially since this project is (literally) bridging the gap over I-65 which would have been the most expensive part of putting transit in there.  Also, the road was concrete which is much more expensive than asphalt but also lasts much longer without needing to be resurfaced. The concrete surface was waaaayyy past its useful life. We definitely got our money's worth out of it.

Overall, if you view the 440 project as a temporary solution that is also putting critical infrastructure in place that could be easily used for future transit, it is a win-win. Can't everyone just get along! 

Agreed.  I am usually pretty critical of overspending on highway projects, and I do agree with the general point that widening does not relieve traffic congestion.  But in this case, I think I-440 was LONG overdue for an update/upgrade.  It really felt like an expressway suitable for Nashville in 1960, because, well, that's exactly what it was!

1 hour ago, smeagolsfree said:

I think its either 10 or 15. At least it will make people think twice about paying for a space vs. a paid lot. I think it should be $50.00. That is the max the City can charge I think according to state law.

I think they are starting to get these folks with outdated handicap placards too as I have seen a few with tickets now. A lot of people cheat the system by getting those  placards and are parking free all day at a meter. There are some people that need them that cant park because of the ones that cheat and abuse the system.

I agree with you.  I was just shocked because a fine that low is barely a deterrent at all!

[Armacing]

2 hours ago, Nashvillain said:

Creating more greenhouse gas emissions and burning more fossil fuels?

Although I agree with automobile emissions being bad because of volatile organic compounds, nitrous and nitrate compounds, sulfur compounds, carbon monoxide, heavy metals, etc... I wanted to take this opportunity to give you some good news on the question of "greenhouse gas emissions".   It turns out that the carbon dioxide is the least problematic of all auto emissions because it just gets re-incorporated into the carbon cycle.  So that's one less thing you can worry about, but it's of little comfort because of all the other nasties coming out of automobile exhaust - especially diesel exhaust.  I wish we could move more freight by rail and have more railroad competition to drive down prices.

[Nashvillain]

3 hours ago, PruneTracy said:

People are sitting in traffic so they can get to where they do productive things, i.e., work, school, etc. That's a cost of productivity just as riding a bus or walking would be a cost, and an easily internalized one that that.

Look, I know what the implicit argument is here: people ought to be riding transit, or living where they work, and so on. That's a nice sentiment and I'd like to see it realized as much as anyone else here but it doesn't reflect the realities of what TDOT is tasked to do, who has no control over land-use policies in the state or other measures that make said sentiments feasible.

And frankly the whole thing smacks of a "let them eat cake" mentality. You can see what the first five returns are on a Google search on unaffordable housing. Many of the US cities who have enacted policies nudging people towards the sort of lifestyle that doesn't involve rat-racing on an Interstate also have the same shortage of affordable housing that Nashville has in the middle of an economic boom.

It's nice to be able to say that people need to live downtown or along high-density transit corridors but the reality of the situation is that there are plenty of working- or middle-class people who have jobs downtown but can't afford to live there. Or people who get laid off from, say, the Carlex plant and need to be able to get to their new job with one of the Nissan suppliers without taking their kids out of their school. Not everyone who sits in traffic on an Interstate is driving a Suburban in from their Franklin McMansion to their V-level job.

That's a whole lot of inferences to draw from a simple statement--increasing capacity does not reduce congestion. And the caveat that yes, you increase capacity, but now you just have more people jammed in traffic. And really that's all I'm saying. Would I prefer the amount of the budget for this project allocated to expanding traffic lanes to be spent on just about anything else? Probably. Does that mean I hold a grudge against suburban Suburban-driving V-levels? I don't even know what that is. I'm also a working class guy who drives everywhere because that's what I have to do but I would much rather NOT have to rely on my car for 99% of my trips. For my sanity. For my health. For my wallet. For the future of the planet, etc. 

A lot of you guys like to argue with strawman fallacies, which I guess makes you sound smart but is actually just a conversation with yourself.

Hey, how bout those new parking fines, eh?