New study looks at ways to reduce traffic congestion, travel times in Northwest Arkansas

Make your voice heard

Planners are working to update the region’s traffic congestion management plan. The draft 2022 Congestion Management Process is open for public comment through Friday . Here’s a link to the draft: .

Written comments can be sent to [email protected]

The Technical Advisory Committee of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission will consider the draft Thursday .

The group’s Policy Committee will consider approval of the draft May 25.

Source: Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission

Nobody likes sitting in traffic losing time and money, including regional planners who are studying ways to ease congestion on the region’s major roadways.

“The study basically analyzes where this congestion is occurring in the region,” said Tim Conklin, assistant director of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission. “Overall, we still have a lot of work to do in Northwest Arkansas as we continue to forecast significant growth in population over the next 25 years.”

Population projections for the region predict about a million people living here by 2045.

“We’re really blessed having our population grow over 100,000 people per decade over the last 30 years, but with that comes increased travel demand on our roadways and interstate,” he said. “If we were not growing, and the population was declining, and there were fewer people and fewer cars here, it’d be getting better.”

Traffic congestion, or gridlock, can cause more than just travel delays making a person late for work or school in the morning and late getting home in the evening. Other problems range from economic losses such as lost time and delays delivering goods to quality of life concerns and even safety.

Gridlock makes it harder to estimate how long it’s going to take to reach a destination, results in more fuel being burned, contributes to road rage and slows emergency response times. Sitting in traffic also eats into leisure time and time to do other tasks.

“When a region addresses traffic congestion well, it reduces commuting times and it cuts the cost of transporting goods. It strengthens the region’s business environment,” said Nelson Peacock, president and CEO of the Northwest Arkansas Council. “Northwest Arkansas must add highways, expand public transit and embrace transportation technology to effectively manage traffic congestion and remain one of the nation’s best places.”

Congestion management plans are required for areas with populations of more than 200,000, according to the Federal Highway Administration. The plan for Northwest Arkansas was last updated in 2015. The administration defines congestion as an excess of vehicles on a road at a particular time resulting in speeds that are slower — sometimes much slower — than normal or free flow speeds.

Out of the 826 miles of road network in the region analyzed in 2019, about 71 miles were identified as congested.

“This year we’re updating it, the analysis year however is 2019, due to the pandemic and the impact on people commuting within our region,” Conklin said. “So, we have a snapshot in time of 2015 and 2019, and it helps us identify corridors in the region that are the most congested and the region should really focus on.”

The region’s 2015 congestion management plan identified about 228 miles of congested corridors in the region. A corridor is a generally linear area containing one or more modes of transportation. Many of those have since been addressed with transportation improvement projects, many in cooperation with the Arkansas Department of Transportation.

Improvements to the Arkansas 265 corridor and widening of Interstate 49 and improvement to its interchanges are examples. Those roads are no longer identified as congested corridors in the new study, Conklin said.

Conklin said there are plans for more than $1.5 billion in regional transportation projects over the next 20 years to address growth and the four cities with voter-approved bond projects have over $500 million in work of their own.

“We have studies of the major corridors that have identified projects. It’s just going to take additional resources and planning to address our needs in Northwest Arkansas,” Conklin said.

The proposed Arkansas 1112 widening and improvements and the 612 Bypass project that is currently being planned and will be constructed over the next five or 10 years are a couple of examples, Conklin said. Another example is Arkansas 265, where the ultimate build-out is for a four lane facility through Rogers.

“We’ll update it again in a few years. There’s a lot of discussion about are people going to go back to the workplace and what is the new normal,” Conklin said. “I think post-covid, we’ll see how this all settles out and see how that impacts the transportation system. It’s been interesting to see that impact on the transportation system the last couple of years.”

Growth in Benton County is significantly impacting the transportation system around Bentonville and Rogers, particularly U.S. 62 and Arkansas 102 and Walton Boulevard, north and south.

In Washington County, significant congestion occurs on U.S. 412 in Springdale and on Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and the Wedington Drive/I-49 interchange area in Fayetteville.

Research has shown congestion is typically the result of six root causes often interacting with one another: limited physical capacity, poor traffic signal timing, traffic incidents, work zones, bad weather and special events.

Congestion management identifies areas congested, along with the causes, and then develops and implements solutions. The process includes measuring transportation system performance and reliability and evaluating how effective solutions have been.

An example would be syncing traffic signals across the region. Other strategies could include managing access to highways, adding traffic signals and adding capacity by widening roadways or building roads.

Defining and addressing congestion

Congested corridors are identified by the Federal Highway Administration as those roads which experience the worst (top 15%) congestion during any of four peak periods, including morning and evening rush hours, afternoons and weekends.

“For this study we used a two hour a.m. and p.m. window versus four and the reason for that is obviously in some of the bigger metro areas you have a longer duration of congested conditions,” Conklin said. “In Northwest Arkansas, you’re typically not having four hour periods of congestion.”

Several road projects which could address the congested corridors are identified in the study.

The congestion management process will also draw from a number of existing plans and studies, including the Regional Transportation Plan, Transit Development Plan and the Northwest Arkansas Bike-Ped Plan.

“As we continue to grow, we’ll improve our two-lane roads that have no sidewalks and open ditches and narrow lanes and curves with more of a complete street cross section that accommodates all users and modes of transportation,” Conklin said.

Complete streets are roads designed to include sidewalks, bike lanes and public transit accommodations.

In addition to streets and highways, planners will look at land-use planning, such as more mixed-use development, infill and greater density and plans to limit sprawl. They’ll also look at adding safety measures and including facilities such as bike lanes and dedicated paths to get people moving on bicycles and walking more. Expanded public transit service across the region will also figure significantly in the plan, such as bus rapid transit systems and routes connecting various cities.

Two other plans are in the works to complement the congestion management process by using technology to manage traffic, according to Elizabeth Bowen, a senior planner at Regional Planning. The idea is to modernize traffic signals to improve traffic flow using electronic monitoring and automation to provide real-time traffic and transit management.

Advanced traveler information systems could also be used to provide an extensive amount of data to travelers, such as real-time speed estimates on the web or over wireless devices, and transit vehicle schedule progress.

Traffic control systems, often housed within a traffic management center, could monitor the volume and flow of traffic using a system of sensors and cameras and analyze traffic conditions to spot developing problems. Then the system would make adjustments to traffic signal timing in order to optimize traffic flow.

Equipment could also change posted traffic speed limits approaching areas of congestion, bottlenecks, traffic incidents and other conditions that affect traffic flow.

The cost of sitting in traffic

Nationally, traffic congestion in the U.S. cost drivers more than $53 billion in 2021, a 41% increase from 2020, according to the Inrix 2021 Global Traffic Scorecard, released in December. Inrix specializes in global transportation analytics.

The average American driver lost 36 hours due to congestion-related delays, costing $564 in wasted time. That was a 10 hour increase from 2020, but 63 hours below prepandemic levels.

With many people stuck at home, driving fell significantly, dropping 40% in April 2020, according to Inrix.

Economic costs were calculated based on a report by the Federal Highway Administration which calculated a driver’s time is worth $15.60 an hour, according to an Inrix news release. Inrix calculates time loss as the difference between driving during commute hours versus driving at night with little traffic.

“Covid-19’s impact on transportation has continued through 2021, transforming when, where and how people move. Although congestion climbed 28% this year, Americans still saved 63 hours compared to normal,” said Bob Pishue, transportation analyst at Inrix. “The most notable change to commuting during the pandemic — other than reduced travel times and volumes — was the lack of downtown travel.”

A 2012 study commissioned by the Northwest Arkansas Council found sitting in traffic was costing Northwest Arkansas residents more than $103 million a year in wasted time and gas. Since that study was done, some improvements have been made to address congestion, but more cars have also been added to the mix because of the region’s population growth. The study hasn’t been updated.

Eliminating traffic congestion may not be possible, particularly in fast growing regions, the congestion management study concludes. Moreover, eliminating congestion may not actually be desired if it comes at the expense of economic vitality, community livability, or bicycle/pedestrian access. Therefore, it’s important to define what is considered “unacceptable congestion” and set appropriate objectives for congestion management that supports regional goals.

  photo  Traffic moves south Thursday, May 12, 2022, on College Avenue in Fayetteville. Regional Planners got their first look last week at a draft of a new traffic congestion management process for the Northwest Arkansas metro area. The study provides a basic assessment of traffic conditions and lays the groundwork for developing strategies to ease congestion on the region?s major roadways. Visit for today’s photo gallery. (NWA Democrat-Gazette/Andy Shupe)
  photo  Traffic moves Thursday, May 12, 2022, through the intersection of Joyce Boulevard and College Avenue in Fayetteville. Regional Planners got their first look last week at a draft of a new traffic congestion management process for the Northwest Arkansas metro area. The study provides a basic assessment of traffic conditions and lays the groundwork for developing strategies to ease congestion on the region?s major roadways. Visit for today’s photo gallery. (NWA Democrat-Gazette/Andy Shupe)
  photo  Traffic moves Thursday, May 12, 2022, along College Avenue in Fayetteville. Regional Planners got their first look last week at a draft of a new traffic congestion management process for the Northwest Arkansas metro area. The study provides a basic assessment of traffic conditions and lays the groundwork for developing strategies to ease congestion on the region?s major roadways. Visit for today’s photo gallery. (NWA Democrat-Gazette/Andy Shupe)


Source link

Crash causing heavy traffic congestion on I-26 westbound | WJHL

GRAY, Tenn. (WJHL) – Westbound on Interstate 26 is currently closed near mile marker 14.2 due to a crash, according to the Tennessee Department of Transportation Traffic Map.

An indicator on the map says there has been a multi-vehicle crash at mile marker 14.2.

The crash was reported at 3:19 p.m., according to the traffic map.

This is a developing story. News Channel 11 will bring you more details as they arrive.

Source link

Traffic congestion leads to massive delays on I-40 on Friday | News

NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) – Drivers were stand still in Lebanon on Friday afternoon after there was slow going on Interstate 40 at least three different locations. 

Tennessee Highway Patrol reported they were not made aware of any crashes, but the interstate was “hazardous and moving slow.”

Traffic plagued the I-40 roadway following the record-breaking snowstorm on Thursday. The entire interstate was stopped for more than one hour. There are currently no injuries reported.

Driver Ronnie Moore told News 4 he was stuck in the traffic for three hours.

“I was coming from Arkansas and into Nashville and it’s been bumper to bumper to bumper,” Moore said.

I came the back street because they gave me another route now. I’m back over here in traffic.”

For majority of the drive on I-40 east near exit 245, drivers were in stop and go traffic because of multiple wrecks.

“It’s dangerous. You can get killed out here,” Moore said. “I saw a big wheeler turned over like eight miles up the street.”

Over in Sumner County, cars spun out and several were left abandoned on Highway 386 between Indian Lake Boulevard and Saudnersville Road in Hendersonville.

Moore said Friday night he’s not going to take the risk of finishing his road trip and advised others to avoid the icy conditions.

“If you don’t have to come out don’t come out,” Moore said. “The only reason I’m going is because I got to go to Virginia because my son is having an operation-if you don’t have to come out please don’t come out.”

Temperatures this evening are expected to remain below freezing so many of the roadways will iced over again.

After several accidents yesterday, TDOT officials continue to survey the roads to see if they are safe for drivers to travel

Source link

DC-area traffic congestion remains below 2019 levels

Nearly two years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, traffic analysis indicates that many in the D.C. area who commuted each day are still working from home.

Nearly two years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, traffic analysis indicates that many in the D.C. area who commuted each day are still working from home.

Traffic congestion remains about 65% below 2019 levels, according to INRIX, a company focused on traffic analytics.

Driving fell off significantly in Northern Virginia, suburban Maryland and D.C. in March 2020, when the region went into pandemic lockdown, with schools closed to in-person learning and many government and private employers stepped up telecommuting policies.

INRIX estimates that traffic bounced back a bit this year compared to last year.

The company measures traffic congestion in hours lost to commuters. INRIX estimates D.C.-area commuters are losing 44 hours this year in congestion during peak commuting periods, compared to off-peak conditions. That compares to 124 hours lost in 2019 and just 29 hours lost last year.

It ranks D.C. 13th on the list of U.S. cities (compared to 12th in 2020) for the amount of hours lost traffic congestion. The top three cities for hours lost in traffic congestion this year are New York (102), Chicago (104) and Philadelphia (90).

The company also detects reduced demand for travel specifically into downtown D.C. According to the INRIX study, while downtown D.C. is home to 13% of the region’s jobs, travel demand there remains 38% below the level in 2019.

The traffic analyst also placed Interstate 95 south in the area of Lorton Road as the 21st-ranked worst corridor in the nation for congestion, with travelers typically delayed by 11 minutes each day at 5 p.m.

Like WTOP on Facebook and follow @WTOP on Twitter to engage in conversation about this article and others.

Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

© 2021 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

Source link

Experts on New York City congestion pricing

Oliver Gao, professor of civil and environmental engineering, is the director of Cornell’s Center for Transportation, Environment, and Community Health. Gao developed a Post-Processing Software that the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council uses for its transportation conformity assessment required by the EPA. He has done research specifically on how congestion pricing in NYC would impact traffic congestion, public transit ridership, greenhouse gas emissions along with other environmental and health impacts.

Source link

The People speak: Fix traffic congestion and provide reliable travel times

Ninety percent say ‘minimizing costs’ was important to extremely important

The Interstate Bridge Replacement Project (IBRP) has an Executive Steering Group (ESG) providing oversight of the team running the day-to-day operations of the effort. They meet monthly and at the Feb. 17 meeting the group members received feedback on a community survey taken by FM3 in November and December. Another community survey was about to be launched as the IBRP staff were holding multiple virtual “Open House” events, which included an online survey.

Not surprisingly, citizens on both sides of the river are frustrated with traffic congestion. Seventy percent of respondents said “we can’t wait any longer to develop plans to help fix our region’s long-term challenges with traffic and transportation,” according to the report. They are concerned about the cost of the potential multi-billion dollar project.

The unofficial results are in from the February online survey. Overwhelmingly, the people say traffic congestion and reliable travel times are their number one priority. That’s not surprising as the INRIX March 2020 travel study reported the Portland metro area has the nation’s eighth worst traffic congestion. That was consistent with their 2018 report. In 2019, Portland had the 10th worst congestion in the nation.

Yet feedback and direction given by ESG members at the end of the meeting appears to be the opposite of what people say they want.

Portland Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty said “We have a commitment to getting people out of their automobiles as much as possible.” Her focus is on racial justice. She wants to prioritize the impacts of any policy decisions on black, indigenous and other communities of color. “We’re absolutely committed to climate mitigation, and looking at green technology that we are prepared to put in place for the future.”

“The Portland region has a policy of only three through lanes in each direction,” said Metro President Lynn Peterson. She had previously served as Secretary of Transportation in Washington. “We are still working on the rest of our system to make sure that there are three lanes in each direction,” she said. “This portion already has three lanes in each direction. And so in terms of the future, and maybe this is getting into the values, but somehow I believe our Purpose and Need (statement) needs to reflect more about moving people and goods and services and less about the vehicles.”

The surveys of citizens

The recently completed IBRP survey provided people the opportunity to add their own remarks and concerns in a number of areas. These included concerns regarding equity, bike and pedestrian facilities, transit, transportation safety, impared freight movement, and earthquake vulnerability. People were given a road map and allowed to mark locations of traffic congestion, safety problems, connection problems, the need for transit, and much more. They were allowed to describe in their own words the problems they encountered.

“Congestion and reliability” was the first choice. Unofficial survey results as of about 11 p.m. March 1 showed 6,285 voters listed congestion. That was 2,434 more than second place transportation safety.  Earthquake vulnerability was right behind transportation safety with just 21 fewer votes. It should be noted in ranking priorities, people were allowed to rank order their top three categories of six.

At the bottom of the list was “Inadequate bike/pedestrian path” with just 1,670 votes. Impared freight movement received 2,342 votes and limited public transit received 2,939 votes. 

This was the second IBRP community survey. 

A formal, more scientific survey was conducted in late November and early December by FM3 Research. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percent. The results appear to mirror other government agency surveys on people’s priorities, and were reported to the ESG in February. 

Traffic congestion topped voters’ concerns, with 68 percent saying it is very or extremely concerning. A major earthquake was second with 51 percent very or extremely concerned. The survey canvassed 917 registered voters in Clark, Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties. According to IBRP staff, they over-sampled people of color and Clark County citizens. 

Overall, the cost of the project was people’s largest concern when asked an open-ended question. Fully 35 percent of respondents stated cost concerns. Next was “continued delays” at 22 percent and “government mismanagement” at 19 percent. At the bottom of the list was “will not include public transit” at just 2 percent. 

IBRP staff reported traffic congestion was the top concern and risk of an earthquake was people’s second concern in the fall survey by FM3. Reasons for opposition was the cost or concerns about mismanagement or delays. Graphic IBRP
IBRP staff reported traffic congestion was the top concern and risk of an earthquake was people’s second concern in the fall survey by FM3. Reasons for opposition was the cost or concerns about mismanagement or delays. Graphic IBRP

The end of the survey asked people how they traveled prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The overwhelming majority, 84 percent, said they regularly drove alone. Half the respondents crossed the Columbia River on a bridge. The bottom responses were 21 percent rode a bicycle and 27 percent rode public transit. A larger number used a rideshare service like Lyft or Uber at 31 percent.

The 84 percent number mirrors a 2018 PEMCO survey of Oregon and Washington drivers, where 94 percent preferred their cars.  Rep. Vicki Kraft (Republican, 17th District) cited that survey in a 2018 letter to Gov. Jay Inslee. “When asked their preferred method of transportation was to commute to work, 94 percent said they prefer to drive,” wroke Kraft. “They noted it was faster and more convenient than other modes of transportation.”

In 2012, a Metro survey indicated 84 percent of Portland-area drivers preferred using their cars.

An April 2018 Oregon Transportation Commission survey found 51 percent of citizens want to “expand and improve interstates and interstate bridges;” another 14 percent want expanded arterials.

A January 2019 Metro poll showed the number one priority was roads and highways. They reported 31 percent of citizens want “widening roads and highways” as their top priority. The Portland Tribune summarized: “On its own, improving public transit is a lower priority than making road improvements and the more overarching goal of easing traffic — voters still overwhelmingly rely on driving alone to get around,” reads the poll’s conclusions.

In the FM3 survey for the IBRP, people were asked are things in the Portland/Vancouver region generally headed in the right direction, or are they on the wrong track? The majority, 56 percent said “wrong track,” with just 29 percent saying “right track.” Fifteen percent chose to not answer.

Asked to rank a list of nine issues as problems or concerns, “lack of public transportation” came in dead last, with only 14 percent saying it was extremely serious or a very serious problem. One up from the bottom was “lack of transportation choices other than driving” at 19 percent. Traffic came in fourth at 49 percent, with unemployment and the cost of housing as the top two at 67 and 66 percent.

Respondents were allowed to list what they had heard about the IBRP project and the main issues. Disagreements about who is paying (OR/WA) was the top issue at 27 percent. The plan being expensive or having tolls were cited by 14 and 13 percent. Only 8 percent cited public transit and the bridge is too old or not safe came in last at 2 percent. Ten categories were cited in the report.

People were read a statement specifically citing the age of each bridge, citing the cost of maintenance through 2040, and stating the bridge is not safe in an earthquake (no magnitude). With that prompting, they then answered that earthquakes and/or safety were the largest reason for the project, at 38 percent. It was “necessary or needs to get done” came in second at 29 percent. The expense of the project came in 3rd at 15 percent and traffic congestion was 4th at 13 percent.

Ranking the overall importance for a project, 68 percent chose growing traffic congestion as their top priority. Half were concerned about a major earthquake, and the bottom issues were transit and bike/pedestrian related at 42 and 34 percent. 

Asked about tolling to help pay for the bridge, 34 percent felt tolls were “very unacceptable.” Whereas 24 percent felt tolls were “very acceptable.” Overall, people were split on tolling.

On their political view, 39 percent of respondents indicated they were somewhat or very liberal whereas just 23 percent were somewhat or very conservative. In the middle were 28 percent saying they were politically moderate.

A 2020 INRIX report stated drivers in the Portland metro area lost 89 hours being stuck in traffic. In 2017, ODOT’s “Value Pricing” team told the Vancouver City Council that 72 percent of Oregon citizens say congestion is a very serious problem. The Interstate 5 corridor was congested over 12 hours a day. There were 35 bottlenecks in the region at the time.

In remarks to the Dec. 2020 Bi-state Bridge Committee of legislators, Sen. Lynda Wilson (Republican, 17th District) emphasized similar points. “We can’t lose sight of the fact that the primary purpose is to serve the commuters and freight haulers,” she said. She listed three primary concerns — commuters, freight mobility, and safety.

Later in the meeting Wilson added: “it just concerns me that we’re not keeping our eye on the ball here with freight mobility and congestion relief and the safety of the bridge.”

In her 2018 letter to Gov. Jay Inslee, Rep. Kraft stated: “I ask you to stop pressing mass transit on our citizens and instead support a 3rd bridge for the benefit of our commuters, freight community, and statewide commerce.”

Citizens might wonder, will the IBRP administrator Greg Johnson follow the desires of the people on both sides of the river? How will he significantly reduce traffic congestion and improve the movement of freight?

At the Feb. 17 ESG meeting, there were some surprising statements from members of the steering group providing direction and oversight of the project. During a lengthy discussion about what had changed from the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) until today, there was a lot of discussion about equity and climate change.

Peterson mentioned the cost of lost time to people. “Let’s just put on the table that there is a cost right now to the level of congestion,” she said. “And that cost is incredibly high to people in terms of their time, as well as whatever fuel they’re burning while they’re on that bridge.”

But later Peterson emphasized the need for high capacity transit. “One of the big things that’s different on both sides of the river in terms of travel demand is that conversation around tolling; as well as high capacity transit and the value that both sides have on high capacity transit now and getting that across both sides. So I think these two things are extremely important to get into the Purpose and Need statement.” 

This is contrary to the FM3 survey showing public transportation at the bottom of citizens’ concerns. When given an open ended opportunity to state their biggest concern, only 2 percent of respondents mention public transit.

Furthermore, the survey showed 77 percent felt “maximizing bridge lanes to carry more vehicles” to be very to extremely important. Only 10 percent said that was not important.

Scott Hughes, chair of the Regional Transportation Council, mentioned a population growth of 27 percent in Clark County since 2005. He went on to say “we can’t forget that this bridge will be here for another 100 years, if it does get replaced. The population growth in 20, 30, 40 years from now is going to be significantly higher.”

Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny Ogle also mentioned the growing populations of Vancouver and Clark County which in turn increased congestion. But she focused on C-TRAN’s expanded Bus Rapid Transit system and their efforts at bus on shoulder. She said two separate times the growth has triggered residents demanding reliable transit. 

The demands for transit the mayor mentioned were not reflected in the survey results, nor in declining cross-river C-TRAN bus ridership numbers. 

Last October, Rep. Kraft asked Bi-State Bridge Committee members “what is the need for transit?“  Recall that over 300,000 vehicles cross the two bridges across the river on an average day.

C-TRAN offers seven express bus lines from Vancouver to Portland. They travel both the I-5 and the I-205 corridors. C-TRAN recently provided the following data on express bus ridership from 2016 through the end of August. (See previous Clark County Today story here.)

Average weekday boardings (one person boards two times a day).

• 2016 – 3,040

• 2017 – 2,874

• 2018 – 2,844

• 2019 – 2,892

• 1/1/2020 – 8/31/2020* – 1,213 

C-TRAN provided the following statement in response to those ridership totals: “Commuter ridership has declined 58.2 percent (due to COVID-19). Commuter ridership includes Express bus routes only.” Asked how much express ridership has increased from its lowest levels, C-TRAN reported: “The sum of the average previous five weeks ending May 16, 2020 compared to the same period ending the week of Sept. 26, 2020 reflects a 23.7 percent increase in commuter boardings.” 

In wrap up remarks, many ESG members echoed each other’s comments about equity and climate change. Yet in open-ended responses, only 3 percent of survey respondents mentioned the environment or impacts on communities of color or low-income communities. 

In those open-ended responses, cost concerns were number one, mentioned by 35 percent of respondents. Delays or postponement were the next two at 22 and 19 percent. The impact on traffic was 4th at 13 percent.

Respondents were split on tolling with 52 percent finding tolls acceptable and 47 percent saying they were unacceptable.

When asked for priorities for the design of the bridge, respondents were given a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 was not important at all and 7 was extremely important. “Reducing traffic congestion” was important to extremely important for 93 percent, and 90 percent said maximizing lanes to carry more vehicles. When it came to efficient movement of freight, 93 percent said it was important to extremely important. Minimizing cost also rated extremely high at 90 percent.

The verbal discussions of the members of the ESG seemed to mention traffic congestion as the excuse for pushing transit versus citizens desire for more lanes and for reliable travel times in their own cars.

IBRP staff responded, via email, to a Clark County Today question seeking more information and clarification about a statement that there is a “growing demand for modal choices.” 

Frank Green, assistant program administrator of the Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) program responded.

“The comments on slide 46 of the Feb. 17 Executive Steering Group presentation, including the reference to growing demand for modal choices, were highlighting some of the feedback we have received from partners on potential changes that should be taken into consideration as the program works to update the Purpose and Need and establish the community Vision and Values.

“The program is committed to identifying a multimodal solution that accommodates all people and modes of travel to provide equitable access to jobs and critical services. As the program moves into alternatives development, traffic analysis and travel demand modeling will be conducted to reflect current and anticipated future demand for different modes of travel including vehicles, transit, and active transportation including bikes and pedestrians.”

Green’s comments follow Portland metro voters rejecting a $5 billion transportation package last fall, where over half the money was going to a light rail expansion project. Clark County voters have rejected light rail multiple times as well.

Source link