A couple points related to this article in the Everett Herald on a dreadful problem with suburban congestion:
1) The story isn't particularly well reported. The headline and much of the text focus on increased bus use as the supposed solution to the traffic woes in question. However, the component of the plan most likely to reduce or mitigate congestion is buried in the last sentence: "the county also plans to better synchronize traffic lights and consolidate business driveways in future years."
Better traffic management on the existing roadway - which I can personally attest is mind-numbingly wretched - is much more likely to be effective than expecting local bus service to dramatically improve traffic on a major suburban arterial. Those that think otherwise are living in a special place, for which there is professional treatment in our modern world.
2) Is anyone surprised that the Growth Management Act coupled with inconsistent oversight from a multitude of different - and sometimes competing - local governments didn't lead to desirable results?
Posted by Eric Earling at December 18, 2007 07:49 AM | Email ThisHowever, the biggest blunder was made by Brian Corcoran and the Democrat County Council when they refused to vote for another east-west arterial at about 180th St. SE. Today, just think about it and how much better traffic would be if they had the foresight to build that east-west corridor.
When your kids are your age, you will be regaling them of similar stories, especially abut the third north-south freeway east of Bellevue that could have and should have been built but wasn't because of Democrats.
Posted by: swatter on December 18, 2007 08:56 AMI've started to ride the busses recently because I moved teams to work in the downtown Seattle area. There's no way I can get there in a timely manner, so I have to ride the bus. The bus is much more uncomfortable than the busses I rode in Korea, which were apparently built in the 40s and 50s and stink like leaking diesel. I would much rather see competition in the bus service market so that I can choose which bus to ride and how much I pay.
But you know what? Without roads, the busses get stuck in traffic all the same.
Remember, based on the democrats positions on taxes (they want to raise rates and lower revenue) and congestion (don't build any new lanes anywhere) it's apparent that they want to see everything fall apart so that they can usher in a new age of socialism and communism. They don't stand for anything that's good for the people, not anything.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on December 18, 2007 10:23 AMThe GOP needs to come out and articulate the disaster that is the GMA. It will help the GOP in elections, help the environment, and help the poor. The GMA is a massive failure, and so is the Washington state GOP for not being more vocal against it.
Posted by: AP on December 18, 2007 10:33 AMLast time this topic came up some joker told me that I was not being patient and that just because they took my money does not mean that the roads magically appear. To address this proactively, they have completed the I405 construction from I90 through Kirkland and no more is planned. I got nothing for my money.
Posted by: Carl on December 18, 2007 11:01 AMNot loud, often, or articulate enough. It should be one of the top issues in the GOP platform and should be in the daily talking points.
Posted by: AP on December 18, 2007 11:13 AMWhat a great place to live!
Posted by: Smoley on December 18, 2007 11:24 AMBe weary of the words “traffic calming” that are newspeak meaning hostile to vehicles. Traffic calming measures include: speed bumps, rotaries, bike lanes on both sides of the street to take a full car lane and no parking.
What they are creating is air pollution, road rage and lost tax revenues from businesses due to gridlock.
Mass transit and getting people to ride it is an illusion. The only places where mass transit pays for itself: New York, London and Tokyo. /I bet there are some other cities on the world where it pays for itself./ But the point is, the only US city where it pays for itself it New York. Notice that the list of cities sited above has a very high concentration of population.
I still believe that the American dream is alive and well. I work to own a home and a car!
Posted by: kim in vancouver on December 18, 2007 11:37 AMJust my two cents.
Posted by: tc on December 18, 2007 12:02 PMI'm probably understating it but there must be at least a dozen major north south corridors within the City of Seattle. The east side between the two lakes has maybe half that?
Don't build more new roads out in the middle of nowhere, build more roads inside of where our region has already developed.
That will ease congestion, and expand choice, without creating ever increasing areas of ill-served sprawl.
New York has a lot of mass transit, they also have a lot of parallel corridors of traffic lanes serving different kind of transportation patterns.
Posted by: BA on December 18, 2007 12:45 PMAnd BA, ever been to North Bend and Issaquah lately. Hardly pristine "nowhere".
Posted by: swatter on December 18, 2007 01:15 PMNow let's hope one of our Ferries don't sink! 0-:
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on December 18, 2007 01:30 PMLOL, what a great idea, but I do dive there? Hmmm
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on December 18, 2007 01:47 PMAnd Medic, I think the ferries were at least two of BAs north-south throughfares from South Seattle to North King County.
Posted by: swatter on December 18, 2007 01:57 PMThen look at the subsequent impacts of all the approved growth over the last couple decades, and ask yourself why government planners didn't see it coming with their "trusted" traffic models and get the roads improved?
The answer to both questions is the same. Government is more interested in revenue generated by permits than doing honest analysis or meeting its commitments to enhance capacity to support growth. In fact, government literally does the opposite of what it should do to enforce the law, and perform honest impact analysis. And I do mean the opposite.
Posted by: MJC on December 18, 2007 01:59 PMMy point being lots and lots of choices.
I've been to Issaquah recently - you're right Swatter - nothing pristine any more there.
The last set of studies I believe I saw for I-605 looked at corridors that ran from Centralia to Mt. Vernon - out around North Bend. I think where we need more lanes are not between North Bend and Monroe, but between those towns and the ones with jobs - Bellevue, Seattle, Redmond, Kirkland, etc.
Posted by: BA on December 18, 2007 02:16 PMIf I am going to Green Lake/ Sonics, I'll slip off I-5 at 80th and wind around to Aurora. But, those roads ain't pretty.
But, the third freeway, which, again unfortunately, is dead but I will continue to bring it up. Maybe it will sink in.
And while I agree that more lane capacity is needed in the density center, Freeman did predict that it would reduce congestion by 18% for the same cost as light rail for the same price but only a 1-2% reduction.
Posted by: swatter on December 18, 2007 02:25 PMI'm about to "go all hippie on ya".
I note that the worst traffic time on I-5 in Seattle is Saturday afternoon. People filling their lives and living rooms in a futile search for the perfect fluff from Ikea and Nordstrom.
The traffic problem is caused in large part by advertising, ennui and hope the missing thing or experience. Perhaps the solution to traffic problems would involve re-directing our hunter gatherer instinct to encompass the whole 24 hour clock.
How green I am.
Looking forward to seeing the mayor doing his shopping after 9 PM.
I recall a study that compared Wallingford with the Crossroads area of Bellevue. Same land area, same overall population, same commercial concentration (roughly for all of these). Vastly different road patterns.
Wallingford had more streets, which meant more choices to get around by car, on foot, bicycles, etc. Crossroads had a couple of arterials, (at least 156th has been expanded at least twice), with more congestion and limited choices that made getting around on foot or by bike, let alone by car, tough.
Arguably more "transportation" choices in Wallingford are better than fewer choices. Seems like that's the problem with our region too.
We generally know where development is happening and will happen. GMA said we were to get "concurrancy" of infrastructure to serve development.
Did that happen? Generally no.
That's not a failure of the rule, but a failure to implement the rule.
I'd pay for the couple of big ticket items that need to be replaced. I'd pay to see that they are built with some space for growth.
I'd pay for the thousand of little fixes we all know about that would make real improvements fast in what we have now.
Then I'd stop, and let market forces react shaped by what exists. That's what's happening now in Seattle, Bellevue and other centers.
Posted by: BA on December 18, 2007 03:22 PMI90 to SB I405 is a great example. Remove the collector distributor lanes and the backup will lessen. Merge people one direction at a time.
NB I405 to SR167 is another example. The entire exchange needs to be redone, but in the mean time give NB Rainier Ave its own exit after the SB 167 exit. That will lessen the backup to at least mimic the slightly better SB I405 to 167. Then, remove the collector distributor on the 167 side and the problem is mostly solved.
In the arterial world, use more roundabouts.
And another point from 4 above. My uneducated opinion is that we should barely care what asphalt costs. We should be using concrete for roads, not asphalt. I understand it lasts way longer and so is cheaper in the long term. (Of course, that means a less effective jobs program for the union members that build the roads...)
Posted by: mykela on December 18, 2007 07:04 PMOr what about the school that lowers the number to 18? That school must physically enlarge (usually they hype the need for a new school) and they then need to hire more teachers and more administrators, and on and on.......
Posted by: Ken Howard on December 19, 2007 09:33 AMThis should have been done already but they just had to capitalize on some gridlocke to get their lexus lanes first.
All over the original corridors are performing to slowly and lack capacity.
I think WSDOT is getting the hang of the idea of getting more local traffic off the interstates and onto the original corridors where they belong.