::  Posts  ::  RSS  ::  ◂◂RSS  ::  Contact

We should be testing street removal

April 2nd, 2012
transit  [html]

I had heard that removing a street can speed up traffic, but I hadn't really internalized it until I read:
When a network is not congested, adding a new street will indeed make things better. But in the case of congested networks, adding a new street probably makes things worse at least half the time, mathematicians say.
Half the time? Then there's a very cheap way to reduce congestion in our cities: test which roads speed up traffic when closed (or heavily tolled) for rush hour. If we can use simulations to get a good idea which ones to test, all the better.

That quote is from 1990, based on a 1983 paper. Why aren't we testing closures yet?

Comment via: google plus, facebook

Recent posts on blogs I like:

How Fast New York Regional Rail Could Be Part 3

In the third and last installment of my series posting sample commuter rail schedules for New York (part 1, part 2), let’s look at trains in New Jersey. This is going to be a longer post, covering six different lines, namely all New Jersey Transit lines t…

via Pedestrian Observations October 21, 2019

Strong stances

I. The question of confidence Should one hold strong opinions? Some say yes. Some say that while it’s hard to tell, it tentatively seems pretty bad (probably). There are many pragmatically great upsides, and a couple of arguably unconscionable downsides. …

via Meteuphoric October 15, 2019

What do executives do, anyway?

An executive with 8,000 indirect reports and 2000 hours of work in a year can afford to spend, at most, 15 minutes per year per person in their reporting hierarchy... even if they work on nothing else. That job seems impossible. How can anyone make any im…

via apenwarr September 29, 2019

more     (via openring)

More Posts:


  ::  Posts  ::  RSS  ::  ◂◂RSS  ::  Contact