PDA

View Full Version : Highway congestion levels off in N. Texas



gc
30 September 2003, 11:36 PM
Highway congestion levels off in N. Texas
Report finds it's still slow going, but delays aren't getting longer
08:48 PM CDT on Tuesday, September 30, 2003
By TONY HARTZEL / The Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/latestnews/stories/100103dnmettraffic.49e47c00.html

North Texas is struggling to hold its ground in the battle against highway congestion, but local motorists still spend more than two days a year stuck in traffic, according to a national study released Tuesday.

Congestion is getting worse nationally, but Dallas-Fort Worth traffic remained relatively stable from 2000 to 2001, according to the Texas Transportation Institute's Urban Mobility Report. The study, based on 2001 data, also shows that the use of technology and public transit can ease the crush on highways.

Figures for 2002 are not yet available.

"We're getting a hair of a breather here. If you travel around the region in the last year or so, I don't think it's as bad," said Michael Morris, director of transportation for the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the regional planning agency. He argued that North Texas should use the leveling off of congestion to start expansions on LBJ Freeway and Airport Freeway.

The transportation institute, a research arm of Texas A&M University, has published its Urban Mobility Report annually for two decades. In the report's first year, North Texas motorists suffered a 7 percent delay for driving in peak periods vs. driving in free-flowing conditions. That delay grew to 33 percent by 2001, the same level as in 2000.
Nationally, congestion grew at a slower pace in 2001 when compared to traffic growth seen in 2000. The reason lies at least in part to the nation's economic slowdown.

"A lot of cities from 2000 to 2001 didn't change," said researcher and study co-author David Schrank. "What we are seeing there is the link between the economy and transportation. It will be really interesting to see what the 2002 numbers look like."

Even with relatively stable conditions, Dallas-Fort Worth motorists in 2001 spent 51 hours a year slowed behind someone else on their way to and from work. That figure, based on a national average 25-minute, one-way commute, ranks 18th in the nation.

In addition, congestion has become so prevalent that on average, every man, woman and child in North Texas spends 36 hours a year delayed in traffic. Only three cities – Los Angeles, San Francisco and Houston – have worse per-capita delays.

But there is hope, researchers say. For the first time, they measured the effects of public transportation, bus and carpool lanes and technological improvements such as signal-light timing, traffic lights on entrance ramps and the use of traffic cameras. Those efforts paid off by reducing commute times by 4.3 hours per person a year in North Texas.

"While things are getting worse in general, things could be much worse if departments of transportation and everyone else involved did not put these treatments out there," Mr. Schrank said. "All these things make a difference."

Mass-transit advocates nationally used the report to call for increased attention to federal public transportation funding. Locally, mass transit's role in reducing congestion was less than in some cities like Houston, which don't have rail lines. However, the study did not include Dallas Area Rapid Transit's light-rail extensions into Garland, Richardson and Plano, because they opened in 2002.

"This says what we've said all along: We're one of the tools," said DART board chairman Robert Pope, who added that the transit agency serves only 41 percent of the area's population.

E-mail thartzel@dallasnews.com

aceplace
01 October 2003, 10:26 AM
Anti transit people like to say that transit is carrying a smaller percentage of the DFW workforce than, say, 5 years ago.

The inference is that transit usage is falling behind, I suppose.

What it actually means is that is that the workforce is growing in the new suburbs outside of the transit areas and those workers are not getting their proper share. We need to expand transit beyond its current service area.

freewaytincan
01 October 2003, 08:17 PM
Unfortunately, the number comes out to about a minute a day for time saved out of the everyman's car. Yet people complain about the mess and how no one is doing anything about it! At the same time, they say they love their cars. Not only that, but the best way to avoid this mess altogether is to just live closer to your job! You'd think that an idea that simple would be popular...after all, it worked for over 4,000 years!

EDIT:
Adding on to what I said about that is something that frustrates me to no end. Of all people, conservatives - my crowd - should be the ones rooting for mass transit and traditional cities! We should be the ones demanding a better environment. Think about your average liberal versus your average conservative, regarding their activities, their lifestyles, everything. Even Michael Savage can see this like I do, for cryin' out loud! What I am talking about here - traditionalism to the max, with public transportation, real cities, and living near your employment - are by rights, conservative, if they can be classified. I don't understand what's wrong with people at all. I can't even tell if I'm making sense anymore.

bloodandpopcorn
01 October 2003, 11:04 PM
I agree that transit needs to be expanded out of the city, but, I think more important is making it more extensive within. People living in the city of Dallas would be more likely to ride a train near them than people in, say Frisco. Shorter trips, more locations (if we densified here instead of expanding out), etc. -- all around better. That's why I wish that DART/MATA could start on massive trolley expansions and moving in modern, fast, quiet trolley cars to make that system are really cohesive, extensive unit for the true urban part of the region. Then that can expand as that urbania grows, and maybe even preceeding it slightly. That's the best all around solution, I think.

freewaytincan
02 October 2003, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by bloodandpopcorn
I agree that transit needs to be expanded out of the city, but, I think more important is making it more extensive within. People living in the city of Dallas would be more likely to ride a train near them than people in, say Frisco. Shorter trips, more locations (if we densified here instead of expanding out), etc. -- all around better. That's why I wish that DART/MATA could start on massive trolley expansions and moving in modern, fast, quiet trolley cars to make that system are really cohesive, extensive unit for the true urban part of the region. Then that can expand as that urbania grows, and maybe even preceeding it slightly. That's the best all around solution, I think.

Precisely. And sorry about the tone of my previous post. I was listening to Greg Knapp at the time, and he was going on and on in a rather antagonistic manner, which is actually the first time I've disagreed with him.

aceplace
02 October 2003, 09:48 AM
Urban, Blood,

I agree with the idea of streetcar transit, but there is one thorny problem.

DART is not going to lay track on city streets. They will build commuter rail, pseudo commuter rail using LRVs, or they will operate buses. It is politically impossible for them to lay more track in Dallas if it doesn't connect to other municipalities.

Who should lay track? The Dallas City Council. Maintenance and upgrade of city streets is what a muni does. The next time they rebuild a street, go to the additional expense of laying track in it.

DART will then have the optopn of using buses on its routes or using trolleys. On center city routes, the trolleys are a better choice. The suburban munis will have no complaints because they lose nothing...

freewaytincan
03 October 2003, 01:54 AM
Wow, that's actually an incredibly good idea. This would cement the relationships between the cities and DART in the most permanenent way. Not only that, but the two components of the service would be provided by different sources, therefore making for a more diverse investment.