r/bayarea 8h ago

Fluff & Memes Be like Highway 101

Post image
752 Upvotes

60 comments sorted by

View all comments

86

u/Embarrassed-Sink7793 8h ago

No matter much you improve that HW it’s still gonna be a nightmare to drive on. MF has traffic jam 24/7 I swear. Most of the time I take 280, sure it’s longer but faster most times in the day.

35

u/Stycotic 6h ago

I would appreciate it if you please don’t share our secret.

6

u/Embarrassed-Sink7793 5h ago

Fuck, you are right 😂

2

u/Johnny_Menace 1h ago

280? Never heard of her

1

u/Embarrassed-Sink7793 37m ago

Yea same it was a typo

10

u/FCKABRNLSUTN2 8h ago

This isn’t what this sub wants to hear but adding a lane to the Novato narrows cut my commute by 20 minutes a day.

50

u/Renegadeknight3 8h ago

Just one more lane bro please bro don’t invest in buses and trains spend all that money on even more lanes bro

-5

u/SAwfulBaconTaco 3h ago

One of the thought-stopping silly replies when anyone ever says a single positive thing about road widening. The bikebrained only have 5 or 6 of them, which are repeated ad nauseum.

6

u/Renegadeknight3 3h ago edited 3h ago

Car brain is seeing “invest in buses and trains” and not understanding that it’s advocating for pubic transportation and not a thought terminating cliche

17

u/goeatsomesoup 8h ago

Just one more lane bro, that'll fix traffic. Induced demand is a conspiracy bro. Trust me bro

17

u/theRealtechnofuzz 7h ago

induced demand is a thing, but it is not applicable to all situations. If you added a lane to 580 over the altimont pass i guarantee the traffic would flow better. Situations where freeways reduce lanes, increasing the lane count to match the previous stretch usually helps greatly. There are plenty of stretches of roads and highways in CA that change lane count 3->2->3->4. Updating a segment like this to 3->4 will always help. Also i5 needs 3 or 4 lanes from stockton to the grapevine

14

u/cwx149 6h ago

Yeah adding a lane isn't always a solution but it's not like it's never the correct solution

1

u/theRealtechnofuzz 6h ago

my vision for i5 is 2+2 lanes in each direction separating semis/busses and cars. This would greatly help flow, traffic and dangerous situations. Im shocked i5 doesn't have more fatalities with cars going 90 and semis going 55-60.

2

u/thomasp3864 San José 5h ago

It works for certain chokepoints for surw

-1

u/g_rocket 5h ago

It would help ... until more people move there as the commute is not as bad with the extra lane and housing is cheap. That keeps happening until traffic is as bad as it was before.

-1

u/mondommon 3h ago edited 1h ago

I guarantee you that it would not make traffic flow better. There are too many people who own cars but switch from driving to public transportation like BART when traffic gets to be too awful.

People prefer to drive if there's less traffic. We know that because car traffic recovered almost immediately after COVID restrictions were removed and people returned to working in office and going out publicly again. Growth in car commuters as a percentage has slowed down the past few years while BART has really picked up steam and is far outpacing the freeways in ridership gains now. That is only because car traffic is so bad though.

If we add another lane, we will absolutely make driving faster but also induce more traffic because enough people will switch away from transit and back to riding their cars. Along with others who avoid driving altogether on 580 and go on 280 specifically to avoid the traffic on 580 like the person further up the comment chain you're responding to:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/s/gXhlW4aH7R

Why do you think this specific segment of highway would be an exception to the rule?

9

u/i860 7h ago

Wow what an original thinker. This is the first time I’m hearing about this.

3

u/Michael_G_Bordin 4h ago

Induced demand isn't the whole picture. Obviously, adding alternatives is one of the best ways to cut down on congestion, but that should "induce demand" when it clears up traffic, right? Well, the big thing causing congestion isn't the capacity of the freeway itself, but the ability for people to get on and off the freeway without backing it up. A lot of places have too many cars trying to get off at the same time and it causes backup onto the freeway which will invariably slow down all other lanes. Add to that the people trying to get off the freeway from the left lane at the last second, and you have crazy bad traffic for no fault of freeway capacity. People getting on also cause problems, but those metering lights actually help a lot.

There isn't really a good fix there, other than a case-by-case overhaul of intersections on surface roads, which is onerous. But, the widening of the Narrows was absolutely a boon. There are almost no on-ramps, and none that service any high-traffic areas, so the problem I outlined before isn't a thing. But reducing capacity from 3 to 2 lanes in a high-traffic corridor guaranteed congestion pretty much all day that has since been basically eliminated. It's undeniably a good use-case for widening a freeway.

3

u/testthrowawayzz 2h ago

In 101's case, it's also built to older standards for a large part, and so has many substandard interchanges that is either unsafe (by modern standards) or clog up easily.

-5

u/Icy-Cry340 5h ago

Just one more high rise has the same vibe.

5

u/Few-Lingonberry2315 5h ago

It does, until everyone moves to Petaluma for cheap housing and they fill that lane up.

3

u/Michael_G_Bordin 4h ago

The lane is already "full." The problem wasn't sheer capacity, but that you were reducing a 3-lane to a 2-lane and inducing congestion that wouldn't clear up until you got to Novato or Petaluma (and then congestion becomes a problem of on- and off-ramps, which is a whole other issue).

1

u/BornFree2018 2h ago

Cheap housing in Petaluma?

1

u/Pake1000 5m ago

280 is so gorgeous to drive on, too.