View Single Post
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 9:38 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 765
Originally Posted by plutonicpanda View Post
this sort if mentality makes no sense to me. How can you be in favor of supporting car based infrastructure but not expanding it? Why have it if it sits congested all the time?
That's easy.

Because removing it would then cause the need to replace all that existing capacity and incur a great financial cost.

Where maintaining it as is, is the least costly option.

There is no disagreement that you need to create new capacity to move people, as growth occurs.

The question is how those people should be moved.

How do you spend the least dollars to move the most people?

How do you alleviate congestion at the lowest cost with the least disruption?

The answer is invariably to remove 40 cars and replace them with one bus; or better still 400 cars with 10 buses or better still 1000 cars with one train, or better still 10,000 cars with 10 trains.

The incremental cost of that expansion of transit is lower, per person, than than the associated new lane-mile capacity on a highway.


Now, in a world of unlimited money falling from trees, I would certainly contemplate replacing the existing highway system with considerable more transit and fewer lanes of highway. But that is simply grossly impractical in scope and scale.

So the question is not whether to retain current capacity more or less; its where and how to add incremental capacity.