 |
Re: Brigthline to Las Vegas by 2022-I would, > however, suggest that investing in expanding auto routes is no longer worthwhile.
Author: BOB2
Date: 09-19-2018 - 10:32
david vartanoff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> building the rail line is a good idea. I would,
> however, suggest that investing in expanding auto
> routes is no longer worthwhile.
And this is based on what analysis?
I would issue a toll franchise tomorrow to add two lanes each direction on I-15 to Las Vegas,, "ditto" with the I-5 from the 5-99 split to the 580.
Both, am "auto route" toll tunnel from 118 to 14 (with the opportunity to be shared by HSR/ML/Brightline) and, a toll financed 710 tunnel under the "nimby's" in South Pasadena "pencil out" with huge savings in travel time, route miles, fuel, and CO2 emissions, paid for with private investment.
We did analysis of the cost of the 10 lane "plus" freeway alternative to the Wilshire subway back in the mid 80's that showed it would cost over $10 billion, in 1980 property acquisition and construction costs, which have more than tripled since then, so we do have many cost effective and worthwhile rail investments. Many routes like the 14 corridor have rail alternatives that are very cost and travel time competitive than major freeway expansion, and are needed.
I support rail when it is beneficial and cost effective. But, I don't buy into this latest "fad of the week" "new urbanist" party line about how the "evil car" is ruining our cities, and that we must punish these "petite bourgeoise" "evil" auto users, with more congestion, travel time, fuel costs, and pollution.
But, killing cost effective and much needed highway improvements is not enough for this "evil car" faction. Lately, this "evil cars" "movement" has been advocating so-called "road diets", which increase travel auto times, intersection delays, fuel consumption, and pollution levels, by actually reducing road capacity by taking away lanes on major arterials.
I like to call these "road diets" for what they really are "traffic dams", which back up traffic, causing spillover into residential neighborhoods, which then circulate the petitions to recall the dumbass Councilperson who was foolish enough to listen to such nonsense...….
-------------------------------------------------------
> building the rail line is a good idea. I would,
> however, suggest that investing in expanding auto
> routes is no longer worthwhile.
And this is based on what analysis?
I would issue a toll franchise tomorrow to add two lanes each direction on I-15 to Las Vegas,, "ditto" with the I-5 from the 5-99 split to the 580.
Both, am "auto route" toll tunnel from 118 to 14 (with the opportunity to be shared by HSR/ML/Brightline) and, a toll financed 710 tunnel under the "nimby's" in South Pasadena "pencil out" with huge savings in travel time, route miles, fuel, and CO2 emissions, paid for with private investment.
We did analysis of the cost of the 10 lane "plus" freeway alternative to the Wilshire subway back in the mid 80's that showed it would cost over $10 billion, in 1980 property acquisition and construction costs, which have more than tripled since then, so we do have many cost effective and worthwhile rail investments. Many routes like the 14 corridor have rail alternatives that are very cost and travel time competitive than major freeway expansion, and are needed.
I support rail when it is beneficial and cost effective. But, I don't buy into this latest "fad of the week" "new urbanist" party line about how the "evil car" is ruining our cities, and that we must punish these "petite bourgeoise" "evil" auto users, with more congestion, travel time, fuel costs, and pollution.
But, killing cost effective and much needed highway improvements is not enough for this "evil car" faction. Lately, this "evil cars" "movement" has been advocating so-called "road diets", which increase travel auto times, intersection delays, fuel consumption, and pollution levels, by actually reducing road capacity by taking away lanes on major arterials.
I like to call these "road diets" for what they really are "traffic dams", which back up traffic, causing spillover into residential neighborhoods, which then circulate the petitions to recall the dumbass Councilperson who was foolish enough to listen to such nonsense...….
