Most Congested Cities
Traffic delays will increase 65 percent and the number of congested lane-miles on urban roads will rise by 50 percent over the next 25 years, according to a new Reason study.
Los Angeles, home to the nation's worst traffic today, will continue to have the longest delays, with trips during peak hours taking nearly twice as long as they do when roads are free-flowing. But LA won't be alone. Several cities face the dubious honor of having Los Angeles-like gridlock.
By 2030, drivers in 11 metro areas – Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Las Vegas, Miami, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Portland, San Francisco-Oakland, Seattle-Tacoma, and Washington, D.C. - will be stuck in daily traffic jams that are as bad as or worse than today's infamous bottlenecks in Los Angeles, according to a new Reason Foundation study. In those cities it will take at least 75 percent longer to make a trip during peak hours than off-peak periods. So, for example, a trip that is supposed to take 30 minutes would take over 52 minutes.
Today, only four cities (LA, Chicago, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C.) experience travel time delays of even 50 percent. But, because road capacity is failing to keep up with demand and population growth, the Reason study finds that a whopping 30 cities will be experiencing daily delays that make rush hour trips 50 percent longer than off-peak journeys. Los Angeles and the other 11 cities listed above will be joined in congestion purgatory by Austin, Boston, Bridgeport-Stamford (CT), Charlotte, Dallas-Fort Worth, Detroit, Houston, New York City-Newark (NJ), Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix-Mesa, Riverside-San Bernardino, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Diego, San Jose, Tampa-St. Petersburg, and Tucson.
The full study, with in-depth analysis of long-term traffic congestion levels and the road capacity needs in every state and over 400 U.S. cities, are available as PDF documents.
Cities With 2030 Travel Time Delays Worse Than Today's Los Angeles
- 1. Los Angeles-Long Beach
- 2. Chicago
- 3. Washington
- 4. San Francisco-Oakland
- 5. Atlanta
- 6. Miami
- 7. Denver-Aurora
- 8. Seattle-Tacoma, WA
- 9. Las Vegas
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related News Stories
Despite Lower Gas Prices, Americans Driving Less - Nov 21, 2008
Infrastructure Funding Boosts Likely in 2009 - Nov 18, 2008
GM Killed Mass Transit: Now it Must Help Repair it - Nov 17, 2008
U.S. Rail Renaissance - Nov 14, 2008
Has SF Opened the Door for Tax-Free Transit Benefits? - Nov 13, 2008
mmmmm...Libertarians! (except ......)
This study comes from the same organization that publishes an annual "Great Rail Disasters" report. Planners should read it with a grain of salt, as their calls for radically expanding roadway lane miles demonstrates the obsolete working model of the structure of urban areas left over from the 1950's and 1960's. They dismiss the benefits of density, and minimize, if not outright omit the true costs of automobile-dependent development patterns, praising suburban automobility as it were the organic result of the free market. It isn't. Government's hand has always been in the proverbial cookie jar, but I suppose that as long as the policies are skewed to promoting low-density car-dependence, which Reason and some other folks confuse with 'the very essence of the American Way of Life,' then it's okay. If, however, as policymakers are slowly but surely doing, policy begins to favor more sensible urban area land use and transportation planning, then such policy becomes the heavy-handed government intervention in the marketplace, that most "Un-American" of activities.
The Automobile On Welfare
Exactly right. The Reason Foundation believes in:
- Capitalism and rugged individualism for everything else.
- Welfare for the automobile.
Charles Siegel
Something Else The "Reason" Foundation Forgot To Study
There is a way to deal with the congestion that the Reason Foundation projects without the massive road-building that they recommend - region-wide congestion pricing, as described in http://www.planetizen.com/node/20546.
The cause of congestion is free use of roads. Road space (and the urban land the roads are built on) are scarce and valuable commodities. If we give them away for free, we will cause a shortage.
We would have shortages of gasoline if we gave gas away for free, but the market price of gasoline acts to reduce demand to the level that is supplied. Likewise, congestion pricing would reduce demand for road space to the level that is supplied.
The Reason Foundation's projections of congestion are all based on the levels of traffic without congestion pricing. That is like basing projections of demand for gasoline on the demand that exists when gas is given away for free.
Since the Reason Foundation says it backs free-market economics, it should understand this lesson from Economics 101.
Charles Siegel
What The "Reason" Foundation Forgot To Study
In their next study, the so-called Reason Foundation should also calculate what impact their recommendations will have on global warming.
They say we should invest in freeways rather than transit because people want to drive. But they don't mention that people also want a stable climate and that people also want attractive cities to live in.
People want many incompatible things. To decide which of these incompatible desires is most important is the role of reason - but apparently not the role of the Reason Foundation.
Charles Siegel