TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND A PROPOSED WAY OUT

Most Americans have some first hand experience with our Nations traffic congestion problems. So the preface here neednt be very long. But heres a few facts from a 5 year old report that help put the congestion problem into a broader perspective. These points are precursors to the primary purpose of this blog note: to propose a technology solution and seek some critique, for an idea I havent found discussed in any of the sources Ive consulted.

A FEW FACTS REGARDING THE PROBLEM

The cost of traffic congestion is large and growing. In 2005, congestion cost $78.2 billion in Americas 437 urban areas, up 7 percent from 2004. Population growth and the ensuing urban sprawl is worsening - resulting in continuing increases in commuting times, cost, and wasted fuel. (1) The average urban driver now spends more than 100 hours commuting to work, compared to just 16 in 1982--an increase of 525 percent. (2) The Texas Transportation Institute's annual study of traffic congestion found that in 2005, Americans spent 4.2 billion hours delayed in traffic and wasted 2.9 billion gallons of fuel. Thats enough wasted capital to fund all cancer research in America for the next 13 years. (3) Aside from time wasted and fuel consumed, traffic can have larger economic consequences. Traffic congestion in Atlanta has become so bad that the Chamber of Commerce called it the greatest threat to the city's economic prosperity. (4)

SOME FURTHER FACTS FROM STATE-CITY-LEVEL STUDIES CALIFORNIA : With five of the nation's 20 most congested metro areas, Californians wasted 871 million hours and 673.5 million gallons of fuel sitting in traffic in 2005. In the San Fernando Valley area, the average morning rush-hour speed of 31 mph is expected to fall to 16 mph by 2025 as new drivers crowd the already saturated roads. (5) FLORIDA : Total vehicle miles traveled doubled in the last 20 years and are expected to rise a further 50 percent by 2020. (6) TEXAS : Traffic is growing so quickly that even if public transit use were to double, the gain would be canceled out by population growth in as little as three months (per the Texas Public Policy Foundation. (7) CHICAGO : Rush hour now lasts almost eight hours a day. If time is money, each year Chicago commuters waste $3,014 per person while killing time in Chicagos traffic jams. Wasted gas adds an addition $402 to the bill. Meanwhile, the freight industry loses an estimated $1 billion per year due to traffic congestion. (8)

REFERENCES For Charts #1-3 REFERENCES

1 2. http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16917&security=1601 &news_iv_ctrl=1009 Stephen Buckner and Joanna Gonzalez, Americans Spend More Than 100 Hours Commuting to Work Each Year, Census Bureau Reports, U.S. Census Bureau News, March 30, 2005. How Big is $80 Billion? (bigger than you think!), Coalition Against Insurance Fraud, June 2005. Larry Copeland, Traffic Nightmare Beginning to Cost Cities, USA Today, October 18, 2002. Jim Wasserman, "2020 Traffic Report: Growth Means More Time Behind the Wheel for Everyone," Associated Press, September 19, 2002. Jennifer Audette, "Losing Patience," The Ledger (Lakeland, Florida), January 7, 2001. Thomas A. Rubin and Wendell Cox, "The Road Ahead: Innovations for Better Transportation in Texas," Texas Public Policy Foundation, February 27, 2001. Jon Hilkevitch, Traffic congestions toll is $7.3 billion a year in Chicago area, Chicago Tribute, August 05, 2008.

3. 4 5.

6.

7.

8.

WE KNOW THE PROBLEMS - - SO WHAT ARE THE SOLUTIONS ?

Unfortunately, political considerations often dominate the development and presentations of information to the public. These considerations are often dominated by the desire of environmental groups to force citizens out of their cars and into mass transit with little regard to the costeffectiveness to Citizens as taxpayers or as users of Americas multi-modal transportation systems. Yet, systems is the governing word, because the best overall solutions must be subject to the broad , structured approach of systems engineering which includes a reasonably rigorous cost-benefits analysis of the various options available. Unfortunately, in many instances systems engineering is not part of the process.

CONGESTION POLITICS

For several decades, there has been much political infighting regarding whether congestion relief is best achieved by: improved road capacity vs added bus routes vs a light-rail track system.

What we are after is mobility, and whether it is achieved by private or public means is less important than having it achieved speedily, efficiently, and at least negative impact on the environment 78
..Jonathan Richmond, A whole-system approach to evaluating urban transit investments, Transport Reviews, Vol.21, No. 2, 2001

With some clever design, the idea presented in this note might offer the opportunity for a non-political, better integration (as quoted in: Past Performance vs Future Hopes , Ted Balaker, Reason of these transportation modes, Institute, Policy Study #321) so each component can be optimally utilized for the benefit of the total system.

MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORT IS HERE TO STAY

Urban rail is often touted as the solution to congestion for many U.S. urban-suburban centers. However, although many dozens of cities have turned to expensive urban rail, they have yet to realize any significant congestion relief. Moreover, Americans love their suburban homes and their cars - - and for good reasons, including : quality of life; commuting journey times; shopping convenience; better weather compatibility; and many others

FIRST, A CAVEAT RE THIS PROPOSED IDEA

This blog is not intended to substitute for a thorough analysis of any specific proposed transit project.

Rather, as an engineer but a layman in the Transportation field, I am just trying to throw an idea out that I think might have some merit. But the concept certainly needs a great deal of critical study to see if the merits withstand the many dis-merits that an objective analysis might bring forth.
In the interim, Im seeking input from any reader of this blog, who might add some insight into the pros and cons of this idea. So with that caveat, the following charts hopefully explain the concept and some of the issues that I know remain unanswered here.

A TOO FAMILIAR EXPERIENCE FOR MOST CITIZENS

ALTHOUGH IM NOT A TRAFFIC EXPERT BY PROFESSION, I AM ONE, SADLY, BY VIRTUE OF MY REGULAR WA DRIVING ROUTES. TO THE RIGHT IS A SEGMENT OF INTERSTATE-405, RUNNING N-S, EAST OF SEATTLE. BELOW IS A SEGMENT OF STATE HIGHWAY 167 ALSO RUNNING N-S FROM RENTON TO PUYALLUP.

BOTH OF THESE HIGHWAYS OFFER MORE CONGESTION EXPERIENCE , MON-to-FRI, THAN NEARLY ALL CITIZENS CARE TO PARTAKE OF.

INTRODUCING THE T R A M M I CONCEPT - - IN AN NUTSHELL

THE BASIC TRAMMI IDEA IS TO EXPLOIT EXISTING ROADWAY AND RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE BY BUILDING ADDITIONAL UPPER LEVELS. THIS SHOULD EASE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY CONFRONTATIONS AND TAKING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY, UNDER EMINENT DOMAIN, WHICH HAS PROVED A STUMBLING BLOCK FOR MANY ROADWAY PROJECTS. THE MULTI-MODAL TRAMMI, WITH INNOVATIVE DESIGN PRACTICE, SHOULD OPTIMIZE MANY COMMUTING TRIPS WHICH ORDINARILY ARE COMPRISED OF TWO MODES. WITH GOOD COOPERATION BETWEEN OPERATORS OF DIFFERENT MODES OF TRANSPORT, THERE SHOULD BE OPPORTUNITY FOR EACH MODE TO RECEIVE PRIORITY ON THOSE TRIP SEGMENTS WHERE IT IS MOST EFFICIENT AND/OR MOST POPULAR FROM A TRAVELER VIEWPOINT.

SOME ISSUES NOT ADDRESSED AT THIS TIME

WILL THE THREE-RISE ADVANCED MULTI-MODAL INFRASTRUCTURE (TRAMMI) INTEGRATE WELL INTO THE VARIOUS CURRENT SEGMENTS OF URBANSUBURBAN TRANSPORTATION ? WHO WILL PAY FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING COSTS ?

CAN THE TRAMMI BE COST-EFFECTIVE? HOW WILL ANSWERS TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS BE ESTABLISHED ?
WELL PRECEDE SOME THOUGHTS ON THESE ISSUES UNTIL A LITTLE DISCUSSION OF THE CONCEPT .

THE STRUCTURAL TECHNOLOGY SHOULDNT POSE TOO MUCH DIFFICULTY - - THE ISSUE IS COST-COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATION USED IN THE INTEGRATED DESIGN.

A HIGHWAY-BASED 3-LANE, THREE- RISE CONCEPT

A RAIL-BASED 2-LANE, THREE- RISE CONCEPT

SOME DIFFICULTIES MIGHT BE ANTICIPATED AT LOAD AND UNLOAD JUNCTURES, WHERE ONLY A SINGLE MODE OF TRANSPORT IS DESIRABLE. BUT SUCH JUNCTURES ARE IN USE TODAY.

SOME ISSUES NOT PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

WILL THE THREE-RISE ADVANCED MULTI-MODAL INFRASTRUCTURE (TRAMMI) INTEGRATE WELL INTO THE VARIOUS CURRENT SEGMENTS OF AUTO-BUS-TRAIN
THIS WILL TAKE SOME WELL-ROUNDED ENGINEERING STUDIES - - BEST FOLLOWING THE a) PRELIMINARY DESIGN; b) DETAIL DESIGN STAGES USED FAIRLY ROUTINELY IN LARGE ENGINEERING PROJECTS. THE TEAM WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE REPRESENTATION BY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS FROM ALL OF THE MODES INVOLVED.
THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN CAN ADDRESS , IN LIMITED SCOPE, THE TOP LEVEL DESIGN, COST AND PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE ISSUES. IF THE INITIAL STUDY RESULTS ARE POSITIVE , THESE CAN THEN BE ASSESSED IN GREATER DETAIL WITH THE HELP OF ADDITIONAL EXPERTS.

SOME ISSUES NOT PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

WHO WILL PAY FOR DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING COSTS ?
THE FEDERAL DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION SHOULD COVER THE INITIAL PRELIMINARY DESIGN COSTS. THE FEDERAL GOVT CAN CONTRIBUTE THE AIRSPACE ABOVE ITS MAJOR INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM AND BE REWARDED WITH ADDITIONAL LANES OF CAPACITY. DITTO FOR STATE GOVERNMENTS. THE RAILROADS CAN CONTRIBUTE THE AIRSPACE ABOVE ITS EXISTING RAIL LINES AND BE REWARDED WITH AID IN REDUCING ITS COSTS OF DISTRIBUTING PASSENGERS AND CARGO. WITH CAREFUL CONSIDERATION AND DESIGN, THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR EACH MODAL OPERATOR TO REDUCE THEIR CURRENT COST STRUCTURE OR EXPAND RIDERSHIP , DUE TO THE EASIER TRANSFERABILITY BETWEEN MODES.

SOME ISSUES NOT PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

CAN THE TRAMMI BE COST-EFFECTIVE?

OF COURSE THIS IS TOTALLY UNKNOWN AT THIS STAGE, AND DEPENDS ON THE INNOVATIVENESS AND SKILL OF THE DESIGN TEAM IN EXPLOITING THE MULTI-MODAL TECHNOLOGY

SOME ISSUES NOT PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

HOW WILL ANSWERS TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS BE ESTABLISHED ?

MANY OF THE ANSWERS WOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN STAGE.
THIS WOULD ALSO INCLUDE, AS THE DESIGN PROGRESSES, SOME INITIAL MARKETING SURVEYS TO HELP ESTABLISH TRAVELER THOUGHTS, PREFERENCES AND IDEAS

READER THOUGHTS

IF YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS TO CONTRIBUTE (POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE) , OR KNOW OF SOME PERTINENT REFERENCES, PLEASE JOT THEM DOWN AND SUBMIT THEM. THEY WILL ALL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.

THE END
ACTUALLY, ITS NOT THE END - - YOUR VOICE IS IMPORTANT TO OUR NATION. CITIZEN INTEREST, DIALOG AND DATA ARE CRITICAL TO GOOD CIVIC OUTCOMES. AND THAT INCLUDES OUTCOMES WHICH SIMPLY ASSURE PROPER CONDITIONS FOR THE FREE MARKET TO WORK.