3 ms·

Cars suck though. Seriously. Roads take up a ton of space, traffic meets whatever capacity we provide it. They're pretty dangerous. I would much prefer to reima

Cars suck though. Seriously. Roads take up a ton of space, traffic meets whatever capacity we provide it. They're pretty dangerous. I would much prefer to reimagine cities with fewer cars, and take care of long distance transportation with other (clean) means. Cars are getting greener, but they still have a ton of other negatives.

ummonk 8y ago
>traffic meets whatever capacity we provide it So the infrastructure investment actually gets utilized?
- zanny 8y ago
  What train systems, priced for volume and built in areas that aren't restricted from growing in response to the available transit, have failed to cause economic growth where they were built? All the examples I've ever heard have basically come down to one of those two conditions - either, if the trains weren't well built to provide for existing demand, they were crippled from causing growth where they were built due to zoning and building restrictions preventing natural build up around them, or due to a lack of immediate success (and projects like these take time to cause economic and behavioral shifts) were priced out of competitiveness with less efficient modes of transit and thus doomed from a bizarre need to "profit" from infrastructure.
  - ummonk 8y ago
    I'm highly supportive of rail transit. I'm just saying it's backwards to argue that expanding freeways just because to traffic will just fill up capacity. The same will happen if you expand successful rail transit as well. Capacity being filled up is a good sign in terms of efficient infrastructure investment - it means the infrastructure investment is being put to good use, and you should probably build more. As to your question though, VTA seems to have failed to spur economic growth, despite being priced for volume and built in areas that aren't restricted from growing in response to available transit.
    - TACIXAT 8y ago
      I think it would be far more effective to restrict entire freeways to be HOV rather than add a lane so a few more 4+ person vehicles can carry solo drivers to work. They simply aren't being used efficiently. I take VTA everyday to work. The stations aren't in great spots. The one I take to work isn't surrounded by high density apartments. It's mostly industrial to one side, and a pretty long walk if don't live in the closest complex to it. As well, if it didn't drop off directly at my work it could easily double my commute time. The density just doesn't support it here.
- paranoidrobot 8y ago
  In developed nations, you can't build your way out of traffic congestion. It's called Induced Demand[1]. Shifting journeys to higher capacity platforms is the only solution to moving people around. [1] https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/09/citylab-university-induced-demand/569455/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/09/citylab-unive...

ummonk 8y ago

>traffic meets whatever capacity we provide it So the infrastructure investment actually gets utilized?

zanny 8y ago
What train systems, priced for volume and built in areas that aren't restricted from growing in response to the available transit, have failed to cause economic growth where they were built? All the examples I've ever heard have basically come down to one of those two conditions - either, if the trains weren't well built to provide for existing demand, they were crippled from causing growth where they were built due to zoning and building restrictions preventing natural build up around them, or due to a lack of immediate success (and projects like these take time to cause economic and behavioral shifts) were priced out of competitiveness with less efficient modes of transit and thus doomed from a bizarre need to "profit" from infrastructure.
- ummonk 8y ago
  I'm highly supportive of rail transit. I'm just saying it's backwards to argue that expanding freeways just because to traffic will just fill up capacity. The same will happen if you expand successful rail transit as well. Capacity being filled up is a good sign in terms of efficient infrastructure investment - it means the infrastructure investment is being put to good use, and you should probably build more. As to your question though, VTA seems to have failed to spur economic growth, despite being priced for volume and built in areas that aren't restricted from growing in response to available transit.
  - TACIXAT 8y ago
    I think it would be far more effective to restrict entire freeways to be HOV rather than add a lane so a few more 4+ person vehicles can carry solo drivers to work. They simply aren't being used efficiently. I take VTA everyday to work. The stations aren't in great spots. The one I take to work isn't surrounded by high density apartments. It's mostly industrial to one side, and a pretty long walk if don't live in the closest complex to it. As well, if it didn't drop off directly at my work it could easily double my commute time. The density just doesn't support it here.
paranoidrobot 8y ago
In developed nations, you can't build your way out of traffic congestion. It's called Induced Demand[1]. Shifting journeys to higher capacity platforms is the only solution to moving people around. [1] https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/09/citylab-university-induced-demand/569455/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/09/citylab-unive...