Transportation in Michigan is a joke. Funding transportation in Michigan is a joke. Transportation planning and vision in Michigan is a joke. However, I am proud to note that West Michigan encompasses an entirely different philosophy which has gave way to a superior model for transportation for the rest of the state.

Gives you some idea of how public money would be managed if she gets into office.

Douglas responds, “maybe it’s cuz BRT is the best transit idea?”

What?

Are you serious, crazy report author?

We found that out on the I-405 Corridor Program.

And the questioning can be done without prejudice.

Simply ask them to supply cohesive numbers.

That is, don’t let them just cherry pick a large number here, and a small dollar amount there.

An interesting view on this spending is when you compare ‘apples to apples’.

In other words, clearly define what you mean by ‘new rider’ for instance. In transit, it’s someone who moves from a non-transit conveyance. In ‘congestion relief’ you have to either assign ‘new rider’ to the capacity of the new lane used by the people in the adjacent lanes, or the ‘induced demand’. If a ‘new rider’ in a new freeway lane is good, since it reduces congestion, then the induced-demand folks are hogging up good congestion relief space. This essentially reduces the vehicle-per-hour count (from 2100 to about 1400, given that 1/3 of new lanes usage is induced demand).

A major problem I see is that we use different metrics for our different modes. We need to correlate them so that better decisions can be made.

That would be an interesting exercise. Maybe a thread on how each metric in one mode compares to another. (e.g. new rider(above), or farebox recovery vs. tolls/gas tax, etc.)

Jim

Why?

Of course, it’s possible she doesn’t really mean it! There seem to be a number of events in her past that we’re not supposed to take seriously, now.

And how is it that our candidates for public office are not expected to have informed opinions about the biggest thing in King County, roads and congestion? Is there any subject people talk more about? Aside from marijuana prohibition, is there any area in which we have more obviously created the problem ourselves by continually building more roads to “cure” congestion?

Let’s raise the bar. Not knowing something about transit should disqualify you for higher office.

While she’s claimed much more moderate views during the campaign, my concern is once elected she will return to the views she’s seemed to embrace in the past. Which for the most part seem pro-automobile, pro-sprawl, and anti-transit.

If every idiot who suggested further widening of I-5 or I-405, or who advocated for “I-605″ was forced to talk about a realistic budget and funding source for such things, they wouldn’t get very far.

Transit advocates are used to having to answer critics with specific projects, costs, funding, and construction timelines. Isn’t it about time the road advocates had to face the same level of criticism and skepticism?

However, I do take issue with what appears to be a de facto State policy of using tolls for certain projects in Seattle/King County, but not using tolls elsewhere in the state. Where, for example, are the tolls on the new Nalley Valley Viaduct/interchange or the tolls on the new North-South Freeway (Corridor) in Spokane?

Fair is fair. If we are going to use tolls in Seattle/KC, we should use them equally throughout the State.

The problem is her flirtation with these kinds of incredibly retrograde ideas.

Where in the world, except underground or on an elevated level, are you going to add extra lanes to I-5 anywhere in Seattle between Royal Brougham and 85th?

Even if you find places to tuck in a lane or two (perhaps between 50th and the Lake City Way off ramp or along the elevated section north of the Mercer interchange), you’ll have to merge the cars back in at the end of it.

And what about the Ship Canal Bridge?

I guess you could convert the breakdown lanes and narrow the existing lanes like happened in the reversible roadway to add one lane in each direction for the entire distance.

A cheaper solution would be to pay people to carpool.