Report a Comment

"Which goes back to Alex's point that when you talk about highways in an urban area to marginal benefits to adding lanes (HOV or otherwise) doesn't do nearly enough to justify the increase in costs."

I agree that the case for preferring highway with HOV in this corridor over heavy rail is not the open and shut case it might be in say, Stafford County.

But I also think that the damage to communities, and general inappropriateness is not what it is for an urban highway like, say, I395 in DC. There are places where 395 is a problem, discouraging walkability and dense URBANIST development but larger areas along it where that would not have taken place anyway.

and yes, design matters. As we have discussed often, density alone does not determine transit use vs auto use. Layout, mix of uses, parking, quality of walking, etc matter. Even if the corridor along I395 had the same residential density that the RBC corridor has (which it does NOT) it would have higher auto mode share, if that density followed the 1970s design styles predominant in the corridor.

Now maybe we can blame the planners of the 1970s for not insisting on urbanist layout - yes, hindsight is 20-20.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Jun 13, 2012 4:52 pm • link • report