Posted on 12/11/2002 1:41:17 PM PST by bigaln2
Building more roads only makes the problems worse.
There, I said it. I am a native Western Washingtonian (Bremerton) and I remember how the 6th Avenue bypass in Tacoma was going to relieve all that congestion on the Narrows Bridge. I think we had to wait 2 minutes in traffic during rush hour. Years later, we have a direct connect from the Narrows Bridge to I-5, and the problem is infinitely worse.
So, what did we do? We voted in another bridge. If one bridge has a lot of traffic, two must be even better. Now, we are going to sit in two bridges worth of traffic, as the Kitsap Peninsula fills up with yuppie ghettos. All those Californians need a place to go after they destroyed the Golden State, so we will build more roads, more 1/4 acre yuppie hell holes, more cars, more strip malls, more taxes, more government, more pollution, and more politicians promoting more roads to fix the problem.
If I am sitting in two lanes of traffic, do I want to sit in 4 lanes of traffic?
The "Smart Growth" concept is never good. Our biggest problem is the Growth Management Act and the policies associated with the legislation.
For the past 20-30 years there hasn't been enough lane construction to keep up with the need. The lanes that have been constructed were not designed to be user friendly. The WSDOT and WSTC, especially the WSTC, wanted it that way so they could extract more cash from us serfs for failed public transportation fiefdoms.
I'm not a fan of the second Narrows Bridge, it's in the wrong place. The bridge should have been built from Olalla to Vashon to West Seattle. I sat on my hands during Sen. Oke's re-election because of his influence over this bad project.
I don't think we'll see the Pennisula become a yuppie hellhole, where the hell would they work? The GMA will not allow industry in the rural areas.
You could build an 8 lane floating bridge that extended I-90 across Puget Sound, up Bainbridge Island, across Hood Canal and all the way to Port Angeles. The only thing you would do is to develop every square meter of land and make it look like Manhattan or the SF bay area. Traffic would be horrendous, and we would want another floating bridge to connect Kingston with North Seattle, and on and on and on.
Eventually, the Puget Sound would look like NYC. Is that what we want?
The problem is not too few roads. It's too many people.
That's the truth. They don't know at all what they are doing. No more towns, no more communities, local roads become arterials, no place to walk to - got to drive, got to have a car - 14 trips per day.
The only reason people move out to the country is because it has become easier for them to commute to the city. If you had to drive on a two lane road from Seattle out to Issaquah, few would make the drive. If you have 5 lanes in each direction on a limited access interstate freeway, many will move to Issaquah. They will build their McMansions, dry cleaners, Taco Time, Isuzu dealership, and all the trimmings. Soon, someone moves further out to get away from it all. The road follows, as do another 10,000 yuppies. The cycle keeps repeating until you run out of land (NYC, SF, LA)
Quit building the roads, and people will not want to sit in 2 hours of traffic to get to their job. Fewer jobs, fewer people, less government, more freedom...
Limited supply = high costs. Most people don't want to live in a 800 square foot high rise apartment next to their place of work. Not to mention living like this is antithesis to the American Dream.
Restricting land use requires more government, and more restrictions on our liberties.
I never said restrict land use. All I said was building more roads only worsens the condition of urban blight and congestion.
I've tried to consider the free-market proposal to charge higher peak-hour tolls on expressways but that would mean that I've paid to build the road through my taxes, and now I'll pay to use the road through tolls. Doesn't sit right with me.
Let's build the rail system and make if free to ride the train. It's simply there, just like the road. Another way of getting to work.
To make things fair for the gasoline taxpayer, perhaps we could allow registered vehicle owners free fares, while those who don't own an insured and licensed car would pay.
Use your car if you have errands to run or if the train schedule's inconvenient -- use the train if it works for you.
Once we established the custom of building roads in common, then I think we also did away with any idea that getting from here to there is a completely independent and free market issue.
How bout that two other Western WA people on here. I agree with the point that building more roads just equals more traffic equals more roads and so on. That's why I'm keen on the idea of time tiered tolls on I5, 520, 405, and I90 near Seattle. Charge enough to reduce traffic to make it flow easier. Perhaps no tolls for HOV people.
Another aspect of the traffic in Seattle is the total lack of infrastructure to cope with blips like accidents. I5 pretty much shuts down if you have a wreck. And various agencies (Qwest, installing traffic lights, widening the sidewalk, building construction) think *nothing* about shutting down a lane. Hey it doesn't cost them a thing. Meanwhile another 10 minutes has been added to my commute.
Bottom line...more roads = more development = more houses = more people = more cars = more congestion = more demand for roads.
More people always creates more need for government and higher taxes.
When I was a kid, I-5 was virtually vacant during rush hour. Washington didn't experience a baby boom, but they did get lots of Californians and Cambodians to come in and snap up all the new homes built off the new roads.
So, what are we building new roads for? Answer: so we can have even more Californians leave the state they screwed up to come up and screw up Washington.
The only thing you ensure when you expand a two lane road to a four lane road is that within a few years you will be sitting in four lanes of traffic.
Is it really a solution to the traffic problem to pretend it does not exist and to refuse to build roads? I suspect that increasing the number of lanes available really doesn't cause more cars to magically appear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.