I would rather zip through a city I was not actually going to vs. being forced to waste a couple of extra hours slogging through city traffic.

Not to mention some cities are NOT navigation friendly, nor are they necessarily places you would want to wander around lost, or even with GPS.

Take Detroit for example, I75, I96, and I94 all go through it, and if you are on them you can be through the city in a matter of minutes, 30 if the traffic is snarled, easy, no muss, no fuss, and reasonably safe as long as you keep moving, please gas up before you leave the suburbs, you do NOT want to end up on Detroit's surface streets, let me tell you why:  Detroit has no concept of a straight line, let alone a logical grid system, the streets of Detroit are a maze, no of them go in a straight line for more than a mile or two (with few notable exceptions like Gratiot) before they randomly end or veer off, you also have the lovely randomly distributed dead ends and one ways.  Now just to make it interesting most of the street signs are either missing or have been stolen for scrap, and many of the remaining ones are deliberately wrong, moved by the ghetto goblins to lure you into one way streets or into endless circles where they have ambushes set up (no, I'm not kidding, I narrowly avoided one when they tried to block me in by rolling a truck tire across the road behind me on a one way dead end street (Detroit is the only city I know that has one way dead end streets).  Now add to that random missing manhole covers (likely stolen for scrap) opening up holes in the middle of main roads, debris, rubble, and burned cars in the streets, generally bad condition roads, constant random construction, and in the winter unplowed streets.  If that wasn't enough add normal congested city traffic and bear in mind most people in Detroit can't drive for shit and treat what few road signs that remain and traffic signals as mere suggestions if they don't simply ignore them entirely.  Just to make it even more fun, the pedestrians are just as bad, not only do they have no concept of using cross walks or waiting for the lights, they don't even bother looking both ways before they randomly step out into the middle of traffic, when you lock up your brakes and swirl to avoid hitting their stupid asses they will Blair at you as if it is your fault.  Now add to all that a very high crime rate, Detroit statistically is more dangerous than Baghdad and Kabul combined, it is one of the most dangerous cities on Earth.

No, they should not get rid of the freeways.

There is another aspect of freeways as well, they act like concrete rivers, they become like natural barriers, this is the "negative" effect of dividing neighborhoods that you mentioned, but it's actually a positive, look at a crime map sometime, the freeways tend to keep the crime contained, the scumbags rarely cross the freeways, Detroit is also a great example of this, one side of the freeway can be a third world hellhole, and the other is actually pretty decent, now what do you suppose would happen if the freeway wasn't there?

No where else to build in Miami. We have to Atlantic to the East and the Everglades to the West. Everything between that is already built. We have what we have. To demolish it means all we have is surface streets and nothing else.

 
My car is my freedom of movement. Cars next to guns are one of the ultimate expressions of American Freedom. My car is what allows me to work in South Florida and travel back North Florida. Without that I'd be fucking stuck making shit wages and flipping burgers.

LOL....

 

The Surface Streets of South Florida in no way can support the volume that the Expressways do.

Hmmmmm. Big suburban ranch home with my own lot versus skinny shotgun town home style housing wih not lot. Oh, suburban housing is a free standing building versus the urban one being interconnected row housing.

 

Fuck that.... I love my yard, my fence, my privacy.

Everything in South Florida is a toll road. Still doesn't change anything. We have no more room to build except up.

 

Here's a shocker:

I live where I can afford the property, while avoiding the ghetto.  I cannot currently afford to live within your "ideal commute of my job."  So I commute.

I don't know what to tell you, but if I cannot afford to live as close to my job as you think I ought to....it's not going to happen.  I'd love a shorter drive, but I'm also damn sure I'm not going to spend all my earnings on a shit place to live in a ghetto just so that I can reduce my commute.  Not to mention that I'm also damn sure I'm not going to live next so any "rich and vibrant communities."  (commenting on ability of my neighbors to abide by laws, etc. rather than race, etc).

We are pretty much stuck with what we have right now as there is no way to rebuild the interstate system to go around cities while still providing services to the cities. At one point in time some of them were outside of the cities but not anymore. The main problem is that when you remove the interstate system in certain parts and you still need to have the commercial traffic go through there then you have issues with non driving idiots who think that they an drive a care. Heck even some of the commercial drivers shouldn't be driving. One answer is make more bypasses around cities to keep the traffic not needing to go into that city from going into that city.

and there have been talks for years about tearing it out, replaced with nothing.

The one good thing about the toll roads in Illinois is that they allow you to drive through the state without ever entering Chicago.

All of the expressways run through Chicago.

i was gonna respond to Combat Jack with "do you know how I know you don't know shit about getting from point A to point B across a city?" because miami.

I have seen all of the great cities of Europe and the United States, but my only experience with Latin American cities is Houston, I have yet to visit Miami.

I've not suggested that you be prohibited from buying what you want, just that you shouldn't be entitled to have your chosen lifestyle subsidized.

That's a choice that Florida made, and a bad one.

And you should be allowed to have it, if you can afford it.

None of your whining changes the fact that taxpayers subsidize your commute, allowing you to live further away from that "richness and vibrancy" you speak of (which contradicts your earlier claim, btw. You can afford to live closer, but not with the type of neighbors you want to have).

And how is a suburban lifestyle subsidized?  Just because .gov can collect more tax revenue from specific population densities does not mean the lesser revenue producing areas are being subsidized.    It just means those areas produce less revenue.....supposedly.

I've seen what mixed use denser development looks like and it does not work in DFW.  Addison circle was supposed to be a mixed use Eutopia that turned into an area that can't support the businesses that open in it and has a very transient population.  When they built Virtruivan the only argument Addison had for mixed use was the land was too expensive for anything else which was bullshit.

I've seen these "mixed use" arguments before they are all the rage with city managers and urban planners.  Mainly because city planners are desperate for more revenue streams because like any other form of government there is never enough money.  

As to the "car lifestyle" cities like Paris only work because of their very efficient mass transit system.  Something DfW does not and most likely will never have.  DART is a miserable failure that after billions spent still couldn't get the Cotton Belt rail line going where the tracks already existed.  

Show me a single case where downtown wasn't bypassed by a new expressway and the area by the new expressway developed with further decline of the inner city rot. Just one case. Just one.

Simple rule of thumb, "If you can't get there to spend $$$, you're going to go somewhere else to spend $$$$ " If there was value to be had in the city, the immutable laws of the marketplace would keep them there. Downtowns rot because they're subsidizing the FSA with all its rich and vibrant culture. Another clue, people don't want to run the gauntlet of the FSA and other ghetto goblins that infest the wonderful socialist paradise to shop at stores that think that they own the market with substantially higher prices.

Given the Louisiana level of corruption in Dallas City Hall, that land is going to be turned over with multiple Mercedes Benz bought with the resultant payoffs and kickbacks. Traffic lanes torn down, real estate sold off, and nothing to show for it. Sounds like SOP for (D).

Yet another clue, I enjoy the quiet of suburbia where I don't have to listen to the neighbors fucking on one side, the ones on the other involved in a pre-DV shouting match, and the new neighbors down the hall from SomeShitistan has the whole place funked up with ethnic spices on refried goat labia. If someone wants to prove how caring and tolerant they are to live there, GO FOR IT! Just don't expect me to subsidize your public transportation and buildings just to prove that you're tolerant and open and carrying enough to be part of the synergistic pulse on the street.

Suburbia costs more to build and or maintain than it pays in taxes. It ends up being subsidized by cities or more commonly, paid for on credit.

I'd fully support bypasses around every major city even if it's a toll road like they did to bypass Austin, TX.

Atlanta, GA needs one bad. I know they have a bypass, but it's too damn crowded and out of date.

Considering the amount of taxes  I pay, the fact that all major freeways around me are toll roads combined with the fact that most suburbanites use very few if any .gov services I seriously doubt that assertion.  

I'll counter that when Addison tore down the apartments to build their new mixed used developments emergency services calls went down once the apartments were vacated.    Once that brand spanking new development began to be populated calls began to climb to their pre -demolition levels.  So going from section 8 to "supposed" high end development made no difference in city services uses mainly police.  Funny thing was your favorite high density development was built with parking garages and there was no major employers to speak of in the area that didn't require a car to get to.  

Now who wrote this study you're relying on?

I can see this working wonders in the greater Los Angeles area.  Yeah, really... great idea.  Dam, those liberals are so darn smart.

Yay!

More city trash to vote Democrat!!!

I missed your reply, the Pike is the only alternative that I can use for the most part. And as you said, it is useless after 5pm (or most times).

Go to Tallahassee... that place is only 250,000 folks and even they have traffic issues with surface streets.

 

Tolls.... I pay tolls on every fucking road I travel on. No one is paying for me.

 

Big difference between Europe and some of the NE Cities versus the rest of the US. The older places were established before the era of the auto. Their mass transit works since it covers a smaller area and had the chance to develop. Places like Miami, Dallas, LA, etc... all really came into being after the auto became a stable item in society.

European ideas won't work in the USA simply because of geography.

Fuck cities..........I lived and worked in some of the biggest cities in America.............if I never see another one it will be too soon.

Except that local governments then allow development around the perimeter highways, making them local and adding local traffic.

you also can't build your way out of congestion.  Look up "induced traffic" if you want to find out more.

Want a interstate highway system that works?  Limit access points to one every 10 miles.  That would make sure that only long-haul traffic is using it...

How much time would you say you spend on 345?  By that I mean wheels of the vehicle you are driving on the concrete of 345.

How much time would you say you spend in Dallas?  By that I mean daily.

What would you say is the biggest concern for Dallasites right now?  And how much will it cost to repair that problem?


I live in Dallas, I take 345 everyday, and so do thousands of others just like me.  I've heard the 65-35% split, but when you press the anti-345'ers they really have nothing to support that figure. They admit it, only after they've cursed you out. They like to narrow the scope of the percentages by using "Depart and Arrival Dallas", but the Dallas they are using is City of, not County of. If they were to use County of, the numbers would wouldn't support them.  Their supporting numbers would fall even further when you factor "Depart OR Arrive Dallas" (City of or County of).

I also laugh at the anti-345'ers who claim that without it, people just will delete their planned trips.  No they wont.  In this shallow of a city, you think people are going to not do what they want?  Telecommuting?  Not in the neighborhood I live, which mostly consists of industry type jobs.  Transit?  DART is OK, but if you work across Dallas (live SE, work NW) you each way trip will be two hours.  And then there's the surface street cry, yes, "Just take the surface streets", that is the stupidest argument of them all against 345.  Have you seen Dallas surface streets?  They are abysmal.  Potholes with rebar sticking out of them, that tear tires to shreds, and often worse.  In fact it is estimated by the city itself that repair of existing surface streets will cost $900,000,000.  And anti-345'ers want to put MORE vehicles on the sub-standard streets.

And when you point to the ecological impact deleting I-345 will have on a city that already has multiple ozone alerts per year its even worse.  What pollutes more, vehicles in on city streets stopping at traffic lights the city admits it cannot figure out how to time, or what the appropriate algorithm is, or vehicles on a freeway?  Oh I know, those people from the south will just Interstate 20, link up with I-635 to go around the east side, or I-20 to Spur 482 to Loop 12 to I-635 around the west side.  If you know Dallas like I do, you're laughing at the mention.  But wait!  We can send people up Interstate 35 into the heart of Dallas, because the old Mixmaster there can handle a few extra thousand vehicles, and that new Mixmaster they are building to replace the old one will surely handle it.  No it wont.

If you want the elevated I-345 taken down, fine.  Come up with a replacement, because a deletion is stupid.  

So now we're back to the whole, just move Interstate 30 south schtick from the 80's and 90's?  And how would we do that?  And what would that cost this time?  This time are we talking I-30 through Dallas and Tarrant counties, or are going to include Rockwall and Hunt?  What about Interstate 20, which just happens to be a "few miles south" Interstate 30?

Really?  Are you sure about that?

I think you're probably right when it comes to new development and expansion, at least when it comes to using credit (bonds, etc.) for the growth.  But just in the Austin, San Antonio, Houston, and Dallas/FW areas, I can provide countless examples of how wrong the rest of your statement is.  Affluent areas which are more mature pay significantly more into the community coffers than the money they receive.  It's a lot like income taxes on the upper middle to wealthy class at a national level.

Also of note, the cry for the deletion of I-345 didnt start until early last decade when well-off people started moving to Deep Ellum.  They became instant NIMBYs once they moved in.  Before that, they didnt care it was there.  And if you ask them how often they take I-345, some of them will still tell you the truth.  You'll also see many of the at Dallas City Hall meeting complaining about the traffic and potholes on the various streets through Deep Ellum.

This...when they re-did 75/635 it was designed to handle 80% of the capacity at that time.  Only a civil engineer could do something so stupid.  When are people going to realize roads drive development not the other way around.  Extend a freeway residences and business spring up around it.  

No one is developing land on the side of a FM but they sure as hell will build around a freeway.  

A nation is only as strong as its roadways. Rome became as powerful as it was due to it's vast road network that was relatively advanced for its time.

What we need to do is increase the amount of lanes we have to handle the increased traffic density our road network has seen over the past half century. The biggest issue I have seen everywhere is there are too many vehicles for the roads they travel. This is what causes traffic jams.

There have been multiple studies done on this. Our road network is no longer adequate to handle the traffic that is on it.

It's still possible.  Start at Centralia and straighten/widen 507 to a direct connection to 512.  Straighten 512 to a direct connection with 18.  Extend 18 north of I-90 and intercept I-5 again near Everett.

Whoever designed the north/south merge through Columbus needs to be swinging by his nuts from the tallest bldg. in town.

I have never seen a worse design on any highway anywhere than that.

From Polaris all the way to the south merge of the beltway is bumper to bumper and makes that roughly 30 mile trip an absolute nightmare at rush hour.

And that's on a good day and there's damn few of them.  

An issue for many areas is that you can't add more lanes. The major routes when planned forty years ago had breathing room. Now, housing and business have surrounded it. You can't add another two lanes because there is no more space to do so.

 

I-95 and SR826 is a prime example of that in Miami.

Was this the memo you meant?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304281004579222442197428538

It doesn't paint the rosy picture you claim. It will take about five years for those delightful young persons they hired to realize that #justice costs the taxpayers an assload of money and their employer's corporate tax breaks don't apply to them. The real estate market is already stable and rising. While they drive up the local tax rate, they'll find out that they can't afford those nifty apartments because there are 60,000 people who want to rent 40,000 apartments and the price rises accordingly.

Meanwhile, the stockholders will figure out that Frankie (female) and Jasper (male) aren't really productive when they spend half their day on facebook and twitter and demand raises so they can destroy the company's bottom line when they fly first class to the Climate Change ^{tm sm} Reg US Pat Off protest.

The Wall Street Journal article says that 40% of the Fortune 500 maintain some kind of urban presence. That means that 60% of them don't. Given the amount of silliness we've seen in large cities in the last five years, I'm surprised that anyone wants to do business in a city.

I was just in Seattle having lunch with my sister yesterday. We were talking about how the city is doing everything it can to force people onto mass transit while at the same time allowing, even encouraging "rallies" by activists that disrupt mass transit.

I live in Houston. I spend about 40 days a year in Dallas.



That is not the impression that I got when I talked to Patrick Kennedy.



And yet that is what has happened in all the other cities that have done this.



The replacement is a boulevard.  

And yet you can't "see" tax dollars, but when people like Joe Minicozzi make 3D graphics showing inflows and outflows it is the downtown areas that show the profit and suburbs that show the loss.



Rome existed before railroads, and if they had been able to invent railroads they wouldn't have worried so much about roads.

Did it ever occur to you that we have more vehicle traffic because we design cities that require cars? And that no city has ever built its way out of congestion?

When you look at the census data it shows that neighborhoods get poorer as they age.  You can't grow out of that problem.

They start out nice and they get poorer and then the money moves out a little further and the cycle repeats itself.



There is an existing TXDOT right of way that runs south of Dallas. There would be no land purchase and no eminent domain. Just build a road, connect it on both ends, and move in.

Again, they had auditors run the numbers and they came up with an additional $30B in construction over the next few decades.

I-345 may be ugly, but it is a necessity.  The anti-345'ers are just NIMBYs with a cool cause.

Dont ask if any of them have a financial interest in the proposed $1B Trinity tollroad.  You might get cussed out, or curtly dismissed.


"It's always shady in Dallas", as a friend named Brian likes to say.

Yeah, it's expensive to build surface street grids like in Arizona in a place like San Antonio, land of a thousand roaring creeks after a heavy rain. The loop system is pretty good, especially now that 410 has been widened to handle the traffic.



1604 otoh is only 2 lanes while the government tries to coerce us into accepting toll roads. With all the weak minded foreigners moving here, it will probably work.