18-lane highway going up in Houston

[Greens!]

Well the freeway that is in question is I-10. It crosses the country from Jacksonville to Los Angeles. Much of the traffic is just passing through, but since there is only one more controlled access lane along this route, the congestion is nuts. So on top if it being heavily used by trucks, travelers, etc., adding 1million+ commuters per day makes it a nightmare.

More food for thought, the freeway is actually so congested that its dangerous. It is tough squeezing into traffic at 55mph in a narrow lane and an 18 wheeler inches away from your side mirrors. Accidents happen there all the time and hopefully the project will help traffic move.

[Sabretooth]

Yes, but the segments in question are in urban areas. Just because the highway runs from JAX to LA doesn't mean that's where all the users are going. If that were the case, it would only be at most 6 lanes wide (rural section).

Adding lanes only exacerbates the weaving process beyond a certain point, which was 7 lanes if memory serves (I'm a highway engineer). You literally get to a point where you're going more sideways than forward, and the delays caused by one weave are bad enough, let alone when you have x lanes doing it; the delay rises exponentially.

[Greens!]

Yes but the controlled access portion is only 5 lanes in each direction.

[Billpa]

Originally Posted by Greens!

Yes but the controlled access portion is only 5 lanes in each direction.

only?
I reject the idea that these super, super-wide highways are the only solutions to the problems faced in some of these growing sunbelt metro areas.
As the mayor of Tempe said in that story: "...Hutson support(s) rail service and want(s) to see how much it could change freeway use.

“That would relieve a lot of that traffic,” Hutson said. “I’d be interested in looking at that before I’d buy off on 24 lanes.”

[jmancuso]

Originally Posted by latennisguy

tiny and overpriced? haha...anything inside the loop is still so freakin' cheap!! well, at least compared to other parts of the U.S. I've been living here in Houston for a few months, and honestly everything is like dirt cheap.

single people with out any kids tend not to live in katy and can get away with living in a small apartment inside the loop. not so for a family of four.

Originally Posted by Billpa

"Possibly" commuter rail? I think if its already been decided that 18 lane road systems are the way forward, I wouldn't hold out a lot of hope for much of a commuter rail system....unfortunately.

a commuter rail can be integrated into that new freeway (i think) but the people behind the I-10 expansion are not the same group hashing out the proposed commuter rail.

Originally Posted by latennisguy

I think many people have suggested other ways to deal with Houston's woes other than highway building. I mean there are bigger metro areas in this country, and around the world as well, WITHOUT 18 lane highways so we all know it can be done.

Let's put it this way...I don't think this is doing enough to get people off the roads:
image hosted on flickr

houston is not new york, boston or san fransisco nor will it ever be so it's foolish to act assume what may work for those cities should work for here as well. houston was allowed to get this way far too long for there to be any dramatic changes in mobility. the car is king here and will remain so for the foreseeable future.


greens' pic answered the last part.

Originally Posted by Greens!

Well the freeway that is in question is I-10. It crosses the country from Jacksonville to Los Angeles. Much of the traffic is just passing through, but since there is only one more controlled access lane along this route, the congestion is nuts.

not true. I-10 is crowded because the interstate traffic flowing in and out of houston as well as the daily commuters.

[Blitz27]

I wish I could be positive about the transit situation in the US. But I can't. I live in Tempe right now and live in an area that is about as close to urban as it gets in Arizona. I have to say, as someone who grew up in Texas and spent a lot of time in Houston, the Phoenix area makes Houston look like NYC as far as density and urban thinking. It simply is not the mindset of people out here. The car is king and despite the measly light rail line they are going building here in Phoenix, nothing is going control the sprawl here.

If we really want to change the way development happens in this country we have to adequately price in the costs of transportation via the car and change the way we run our zoning boards (think metro-wide zones). Until that happens, you are going to see more 18 lane highways, more pollution, more global warming, more cookie cutter homes, more strip malls, more big box stores...more sprawl.

I think I need to move to Europe.

[Larre]

I do know that there is an 18 lane section of freeway in Salt Lake City, Utah. Just found out about it yesterday (it was built in 2001).

The best way to build an 18-20 lane freeway is to divide it up in sections. The SLC freeway which is I-15, consists of 2 4-lane sections on each side (C/D lanes), and the main 10 lane road in the center. Also the 2 sets of 4 lanes can be carpool (HOV or HOT) lanes as well (HOT lanes are free carpool lanes for more than 2 people in a vehicle with the option of single drivers paying a monthly toll and receive a sticker to access the lanes). Just some ranting advice.. peace!!

[Middle-Island]

I've always read on these urban sites that additional lanes don't really do much to relieve congestion in time, but invite more. I'll bet it's real fun getting across 9 lanes at rush hour.

[TampaMike]

You're right, it doesn't. Because unlike buses or light rail where you're eliminating cars and traffic, widening the highways and roadways just give the cars more space to clog up and not eliminate the cars. And down the road (no pun intended), traffic will only increase and what should Houston do next, 24-lane highway? No thanks!

[diablo234]

You guys do know that Houston has plans to expand the light rail system and adding a commuter rail line along I-45 and U.S. 290 correct?


http://www.metrosolutions.org/posted..._10.669691.pdf

Anyways this is old news.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by TampaMike

You're right, it doesn't. Because unlike buses or light rail where you're eliminating cars and traffic, widening the highways and roadways just give the cars more space to clog up and not eliminate the cars. And down the road (no pun intended), traffic will only increase and what should Houston do next, 24-lane highway? No thanks!

Yet, Houston was the only major city in America to reduce traffic congestion since 2000. And that's with over 1.2 million more people in the metro area today than in 2000. There goes that theory.

[mhays]

The theory is that roads temporarily reduce congestion, but then add more congestion as people move farther out, etc.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by mhays

The theory is that roads temporarily reduce congestion, but then add more congestion as people move farther out, etc.

So, the solution is to only build rail and not improve on the freeways as well? Why not do both (which is what Houston is doing)? There is something to be said when a metro area with minimal rail options now is able to reduce congestion, even after growing by over 1.2 million people from 2000-2009.

And the people are going to move further out anyway. We can build all the rail options we want intown, but a lot of people still want that "suburban dream". Not building/expanding a freeway isn't going to stop them. There are plenty of examples like this in Houston. I-10 was one of them, before it expanded, and it's actually quite nice:



I do wish the middle tollway lanes was commuter rail instead (with an HOV each direction), but they made the center support columns strong enough to hold that in the future. Even then, many of Houston's Metro transit agencies commuter buses use it every weekday, as well as carpools.

[Hia-leah JDM]

Originally Posted by Trae

Yet, Houston was the only major city in America to reduce traffic congestion since 2000. And that's with over 1.2 million more people in the metro area today than in 2000. There goes that theory.

Is there a link to back that up?

[nerdly_dood]

I think the best option is not to build bigger highways, but more of them, like maybe a bypass or something. Different options are different colors: The red line would put a bypass far from the city so that I-10 could be less crowded with traffic that's just passing through, and it uses the routes of existing roads. The dark blue line would put a highway far from the city center, but still going through the northern burbs. The light blue line puts a bypass closer to the city center, but would put additional traffic on the northern side of the loop. The green line is essentially widening I-10 and putting half the lanes a few miles north. The purple line is the best I can think of for a south-side bypass.

[diablo234]

Originally Posted by nerdly_dood

I think the best option is not to build bigger highways, but more of them, like maybe a bypass or something.

Houston also have been doing that with SH 99 (Grand Parkway) which is a third beltway that will eventually suround Houston. When this is completed, Houston will probably have more beltways/bypasses than any other city in the country.

http://www.grandpky.com/home/

http://www.texasfreeway.com/houston/..._parkway.shtml

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Hia-leah JDM

Is there a link to back that up?

I'll find the link later (when I have more time), but it's at Houston.org, under infrastructure.

[mhays]

Surely you're not suggesting that highways aren't part of adding sprawl.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by mhays

Surely you're not suggesting that highways aren't part of adding sprawl.

If the people are going to move here and the sprawl is going to come anyway, how is expanding the freeways going to bring in a lot more sprawl? It does encourage a little, but the growth is coming either way (with or without reconstruction). Houston actually has a pretty good infrastructure plan.

[cajun504]

Wow