Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is looking for money to fund new road construction projects, and the need for them seems rather clear. As Rodger Jones points out on the DMN’s transportation blog, three Dallas area roads make the top 10 in a list of congested Texas roadways. But is traffic congestion necessarily a bad thing? While studies have shown (including this British survey from 2006 and this Maryland study from 2002) that widening roads and adding new roads are not effective in reducing congestion, congestion itself offers some benefits to dense urban areas that are accessible to multiple means of transport, like Dallas’ urban center. Congestion offers an incentive for commuters to use alternative means of transportation and move closer to their places of employment, while offering businesses an incentive to locate near public transportation hubs. While wider roads may make it a little easier to get out to the ‘burbs in the short run, long term congestion could mean more economic development right where Dallas wants it: in its core.
11 comments
Likely it will mean that more companies will relocate to the suburbs.
It’s about the schools, crime, and quality of life, not congestion. People aren’t going to send their kids to DISD just to avoid traffic jams.
The idea of adding more roads to fix congestion is no different than buying a bigger belt to help a weight problem. The defeat of Mt. Hood Freeway is a great example of how repealing road development in favor of density/multi-modalism contributed to greater development: http://www.streetfilms.org/lessons-from-portland/
Annecdotally, one can simply look at Fort Worth Avenue compared to McKinney Avenue (both lead to Downtown and parallel a major highway) and see where a street with 6 wide lanes plus little to no sidewalks shuns economic development while the congested street w/thin lanes, trolley and wide sidewalks is filled with outdoor cafes, restaurants, shopping, et al.
This is one of the most backward comments ever on FrontBurner and does not reflect the usual depth of this blog.
Congestion is bad because it delays trucking and deliveries, not because it makes Frisco life less attractive.
It is not the state’s role to play favorites between cities and suburbs. (But if you haven’t noticed, the suburban voters control state elections.)
This theory can also be applied to Dallas’ bad ozone & air quality… it’s good for home and business air cleaning equipment sales and allergy clinics.
But kudos to Peter for looking for the silver lining.
Houston has plenty of wide roads, and yet it still has congestion.
LA has plenty of wide roads, and yet it still has congestion.
We have plenty of wide roads, and yet we still have congestion.
Jason,
“Annecdotally, one can simply look at Fort Worth Avenue compared to McKinney Avenue…”
Annecdotally, yes. Factually, no. It’s like comparing apples to engine blocks.
So, the idea is to limit peoples freedom of movement and essentially trap them in an area to create a green, urban lifestyle? Why don’t we just build a wall around the city and set up checkpoints so we can ask for peoples papers.
Secret! There are many good and even excellent DISD schools. Most are in East and North Dallas. Five highs schools are on the Newsweek Top in America list and all are ahead of Allen.
@Doug, no, the idea is that building more roads doesn’t help free anyone’s movement because expanded capacity has been shown to be followed by increased congestion. So why throw our tax dollars at more roads?
Dallasite – You can’t lump all of your issues into making this a Dallas problem. Like fred said, they are excellent DISD schools, not to mention other districts in Dallas. I hear plenty of issues with Plano ISD…and there is crime north of LBJ. And please remind me where AIG, AT&T, Comerica, 7-Eleven, Oncor moved their Dallas headquarters…oh yeah – Downtown! So if you’re one of many who are heading north parked on the Tollway and Central in the evening for 45 minutes – how is that not a quality of life issue?
This post assumes too much I think. This logic might apply in a city ripe with public transportation alternatives already in place, or in a location where renters outnumber homeowners, and/or somewhere where this kind of long-term strategic vision from city planners is the norm.
Alas, this is not Dallas.
In the short run however, telling your constituents that you’re pushing for extra lanes sounds better than telling them to suck it up until the DART expands to Southlake. Just saying.