Found here: https://twitter.com/CarsRuinedCity/status/1677005785862406144?t=Xolo43mUk4GnegFQE19q3g&s=19
Caption: Photo collage of a beach in Alexandria, Egypt, showing a progression in 3 images:
- Alexandria “Problem” - empty beach + walking street + 6 lane road with medium traffic + dense mid-rise buildings (likely housing)
- Alexandria “Solution” - empty beach (doesn’t seem to matter) + narrower walkway or sidewalk + 10 lane brand new and empty road + tiny sidewalk + the same buildings
- Alexandria “Results” - crowded beach + crowded beach walkway + traffic jam on the 10 lane road
Well yes, but no.
An infinity wide road has no traffic, but the first time you try to connect your magic highway to real exits and local streets, you are stuck again.
By this I’m pointing out that it isn’t the road itself causing traffic in isolation, it’s the real world bottle necks anywhere this new highway connects to things.
Add in induced demand (people taking new trips) and now you have more people trying to fit down the same offramps, local streets and parking lots than you did in the first place.
An infinitely wide road couldn’t be effective unless it was also infinitely long. Cars enter and edit at one edge, and transferring lanes reduces capacity, so adding lanes had diminishing returns.
Indeed, but the width of the highways doesn’t create that effect, the logic surrounding “exits at the edge” does. Totally agree with the diminishing returns
More capacity on the roads will make driving a more attractive option to more people, both for journeys they previously made by other means and those that they wouldn’t have taken, which leads to more cars on the roads until the congestion is as bad as it was before.
I’m aware of induced demand, but the issue with more drivers simply isn’t them inhabiting the new lane, it’s the increased population of the highway still trying to use the same offramps, local streets and parking.
It’s both.
all you’ve illustrated is that the only place my statement doesn’t apply is in a theoretical (and impossible) fantasy, but you do then go on to explain the means by which what I said is true.
so… thanks?
It’s a conversation bro. We agree about some parts and have other thoughts about other parts.
It’s not the width of the highway that CAUSES the traffic alone, it’s the bottlenecks and access. It’s not the induced demand alone that causes the issue, it’s the offramps and local streets that ruin the new highway.
I’m pretty sure I thanked you explaining how my initial statement was correct.
and I’m enjoying the conversation, bro. your “other” thoughts seem to be an explanation of how my statement is correct and why.
Ok