Advocacy & Safety - Major U.S. traffic bottlenecks rise 40% in 5 years, study says

WASHINGTON -- The number of major U.S. traffic choke points--places where highways cannot handle all the vehicles--rose 40 percent over five years, says a study being released Thursday.

There were 233 major bottlenecks in 2002, up from 167 in 1997, said the study by the American Highway Users Alliance. It also said 7 of the 18 previous top choke points had disappeared as a result of construction projects.
The report by Cambridge Systematics Inc. of Massachusetts was commissioned by the highway group, which is lobbying Congress this year for a bigger highway-mass transit bill than President Bush wants. The current six-year highway spending bill expires at the end of this month.

"There's hope for curing congestion on our highways," said Bill Buff, a spokesman for the group, which represents automakers, oil, trucking and construction companies and state highway departments.

Bottlenecks caused by too many cars on too little roadway cause about half of all traffic jams, said the report. Traffic accidents, work zones, bad weather and poor signal timing account for the rest.

Now the worst bottleneck, but previously No. 5, is the Ventura Freeway at Interstate Highway 405 in Los Angeles, where California highway officials estimate traffic is jammed for nearly five hours every weekday afternoon. Four of the 10 worst bottlenecks are in the Los Angeles area.

Behind the Ventura Freeway, the worst bottlenecks were the Interstate 610-Interstate 10 interchange in Houston; Chicago's I-90/94-I-290 interchange (the Circle Interchange); the I-10 interchange with State Roads 51 and 202 in Phoenix; and the San Diego Freeway-I-10 interchange in Los Angeles.

The study defined a bottleneck as a place where drivers experience at least 700,000 hours of delay every year. No bridges or toll roads were included, eliminating some sites in the New York City area from the list.

The highway group argued that the cost of projects is worth the benefits. For example, it cost $293 million to reconstruct the "Big I" interchange of Interstates 25 and 40 in Albuquerque, but the total hours of annual delay dropped from 16 million in 1997 to 1.1 million in 2002, the group said.

"When you look at some of these projects the costs are colossal, the numbers will scare you, but the benefits are also colossal," said Alan Pisarski, author of "Commuting in America."

Last week, the Senate passed by a 76-21 vote a $318 billion highway-mass transit bill covering the next six years. Bush proposed spending $256 billion, and his advisers have said they will recommend he veto any bill much larger than that.

1. Los Angeles: Ventura Freeway US-101 at I-405 interchange; 318,000 cars daily; 27.1 million hours of delay per year.

2. Houston: I-610 at I-10 interchange; 295,000 cars; 25.2 million hours.

3. Chicago: I-90/94 at I-290 (Circle Interchange); 293,671 cars; 25.1 million hours.

4. Phoenix: I-10 at State Roads 51/202 interchange; 280,800 cars; 22.8 million hours.

5. Los Angeles: I-405 at I-10 interchange; 296,000 cars; 22.8 million hours.

6. Atlanta: I-75 at I-85 interchange; 259,128 cars; 21.0 million hours.

7.Washington, D.C.: I-495 at I-270 interchange; 243,425 cars; 19.4 million hours.

8. Los Angeles: I-10 at I-5 interchange; 318,500 cars; 18.6 million hours.

9. Los Angeles: I-405 at I-605 interchange; 318,000 cars; 18.6 million hours.

10. Atlanta: I-285 at I-85; 266,000 cars; 17.1 million hours.

11. Chicago: I-94 at I-90; 260,403 cars; 16.7 million hours.

12. Phoenix: I-17 at I-10 interchange to Cactus Road; 208,000 cars; 16.3 million hours.

American Highway Users Alliance

Copyright © 2004, Chicago Tribune

I love passing bottlenecks on my bike! :lol:

"There's hope for curing congestion on our highways," said Bill Buff, a spokesman for the group, which represents automakers, oil, trucking and construction companies and state highway departments.

They should call themselves the American Highway Profiteer's Alliance.

2. Houston: I-610 at I-10 interchange; 295,000 cars; 25.2 million hours.
this one was abd back in 1995-1997 (i used to live right inside the I-610 loop)

but yeah, where's the mention of REDUCING the cars or spending money to help reduce the need to drive so many miles?

as the report states, in 1997 "7 of the 18 previous top choke points had disappeared as a result of construction projects." and "233 major bottlenecks in 2002"

hmm... so how exactly did "curing" half of the previous bottlenecks by thowing money at them in the form on construction projects help the overall problem? again: 1997 had 18, almost half were fixed and 5 years later there are 233 (not to mention many others that were improved that wopuld have become problems)

duh? don't these people get it! expanding roads is not the answer (sure, you can fix a few problem points) but you need to address the PROBLEM, not band-aid it!

The highway group argued that the cost of projects is worth the benefits. For example, it cost $293 million to reconstruct the "Big I" interchange of Interstates 25 and 40 in Albuquerque, but the total hours of annual delay dropped from 16 million in 1997 to 1.1 million in 2002, the group said.

"When you look at some of these projects the costs are colossal, the numbers will scare you, but the benefits are also colossal," said Alan Pisarski, author of "Commuting in America."

Last week, the Senate passed by a 76-21 vote a $318 billion highway-mass transit bill covering the next six years. Bush proposed spending $256 billion, and his advisers have said they will recommend he veto any bill much larger than that.

Copyright © 2004, Chicago Tribune
Hmm... $318 billion...

I guess you couldn't call that money "hidden costs of automobile dependence in the United States," because $318 billion dollars would be impossible to hide.

10. Atlanta: I-285 at I-85; 266,000 cars; 17.1 million hours.
Affectionately known as, "Spaghetti Junction," there is more to this than meets the eye. There are also major exits in the immediate area which include Buford Highway and Peachtree Industrial Blvd. which combine with I-285 and I-85 to form a massive parking lot. I used to live in a triangle surrounded by all these major freeways and arteries in a little old house on Pontiac Circle, which is located across the freeway from the Doraville GM plant and was about a block away from a major gasoline depot. You could smell the gas in the air as if you were pumping it yourself sometimes.

I guess none of these things are closely connected, just strangely coincidental....

Well, I've said this before and many of you don't think it's very nice, but nothing will cure this short of a major military defeat in the Mideast and the concurrent sudden rise in oil prices. The fall of the Al Sa'ud family could help us with this problem as well.

this one was abd back in 1995-1997 (i used to live right inside the I-610 loop)

hmm... so how exactly did "curing" half of the previous bottlenecks by thowing money at them in the form on construction projects help the overall problem? again: 1997 had 18, almost half were fixed and 5 years later there are 233 (not to mention many others that were improved that wopuld have become problems)


I'm glad you noticed the increase in bottlenecks despite the fact that several were fixed at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Folks. According to the author, the answer to our problems are building MORE interchanges and tunnels like the Big Dig in Boston. The whole situation is insane but this group is lobbying Congress for more money and they'll probably get it. If you look at the numbers spent for public transportation, it's only a fraction of that amount spent for highway construction.

I'm sure that everyone who lives in a big city, not listed as having "one of the top ten" was surprised that their local bottle neck was not listed. You mean that there are places worse than than we have?! It makes one reel.

I know that it can be worse than in this sleepy backwater of Minneapolis, having lived just north of San Fransisco. One reason I moved away, was the expectation of crawling 23 miles in two hours in a car when I commuted from the city. And this stretch of Hwy 101, isn't even listed! I've more than reeled, I'm flat on my back!

2040 baby - 2040... oh how I hope that projection is somewhat accurate. I want to live to see the end of major oil sources. It will be sad to see the wars and the accompanying violence, but I'll bike my way into the woods with a tent and hope no one nukes anyone else, at least not before I can build a small house with some like-minded friends. Amazing, my dream is for something akin to an apocolypse -- what does that mean? It might happen unless we get our act in gear, collectively speaking, I dunno. Ok, I'll stop.

As for the Big Dig, ha - its nice to look at (though the tunnel leaks and froze a lane this winter)... but really it moves the traffic jams underground. Traffic seems to move nicely in the tunnel - but once you get out - especially heading south - its bad still. I had an idea for a matching funds initiative. That is to say - when you have a road project - you need to match funds in whole or in part to public transportation and bicycling initiatives, and maybe even decent AFFORDABLE housing so people don't need to drive 90 miles to work everyday. Man, I would consider living in western mass if I could take a train from there to Boston to work. I love the train.

bah! what idiots!! they already know that the more you build the more people will drive.. you'll just be in the same hole without any money.. i say let squirm!! we need better mass transit and such.. not wider highways.... if you build it they will come... and then they will whine about... "oh! but they just spent 500 million to widen this damn thing! oh me! oh my!"... dumbasses.

expanding roads is not the answer (sure, you can fix a few problem points) but you need to address the PROBLEM, not band-aid it!

I posted this before, but it bears repeating:

"German mathematician Dietrich Braess studied 23 US cities that added the most new roads per person during to 90's and found congestion rose there by more than 70%.

But not building roads won't help congestion either.

'In practical terms, what is being proposed would give people more options to travel, such as better transit, passenger ferries and new bike and pedestrian routes.'"

$318 billion is over $1000 per every man, woman and child in the US!

Now, when you consider that children usually contribute nothing and the rich contribute little (they can always fabricate losses to offset their taxes) then you see that the average Joe like you and me will likely each pay around $2000 over the next 6 years for this one bill.

duh? don't these people get it! expanding roads is not the answer (sure, you can fix a few problem points) but you need to address the PROBLEM, not band-aid it!

The only "problem" those in power see is that people might get stuck in traffic at some point before the next election and vote for the opposition next time around. The move is simply a political ploy -- fix it in the short term until the next election -- after that, who cares? Kind of like taking a headache pill to cure AIDS, but that's the way these people think.

This reminds me of someone who once said that ancient civilizations accomplish great things because they had the patience for it while now, the farthest that they'll plan ahead is until the next election.

that i'll agree with!

2040 baby - 2040... oh how I hope that projection is somewhat accurate. I want to live to see the end of major oil sources. It will be sad to see the wars and the accompanying violence, but I'll bike my way into the woods with a tent and hope no one nukes anyone else, at least not before I can build a small house with some like-minded friends. Amazing, my dream is for something akin to an apocolypse -- what does that mean? It might happen unless we get our act in gear, collectively speaking, I dunno. Ok, I'll stop.


Well, I've said this before and many of you don't think it's very nice, but nothing will cure this short of a major military defeat in the Mideast and the concurrent sudden rise in oil prices. The fall of the Al Sa'ud family could help us with this problem as well.
well, i've had the same thoughts and the IDEA is nice...

but realistically, even if we had a massive OIL crisis, it would have little long-term effect as we would simply convert to Electric or other alternative fuel vehicles (yes, i know that CURRENTLY many alternative fuel vehicles are indirectly fueled from oil-resoucres)

* ENERGY crises will not end the car-craze
* POLLUTION and environmental issues will not end the car-craze
* DEATH and INJURY will not end the car-craze

--> only TRAFFIC will!

once it is no longer "practical" to sit in the car in traffic for EXTREME periods people will demand something else and our society will develop it --- what it is i don't know, but the conversion will cost a lot (my personal prediction is a combined personal/public transit system: small motorized "pods" for short distances - i.e. to the transit interchange - and then park/"load" these onto trains/belts for long-distance travel -- and transit and walking in cities ---- with "personal pods" people don't have to interact with "undesirables" plus have their own space for radio/comfort/telephone AND have full mobility outside of the system)

--> only TRAFFIC will!

once it is no longer "practical" to sit in the car in traffic for EXTREME periods people will demand something else and our society will develop it ---

I guess "practical" is in the eye of the beholder. I don't regard it practical to sit in traffic now, and this in a place where the heaviest traffic could be described as "moderate". And to be honest I have serious doubts that people will ever be aware of it in anycase. Think about this: the majority of motorists get more annoyed at waiting for 10 seconds to pass a cyclist than they do about waiting for 10 minutes for a set of traffic lights to change, or an hour for a piece of gridlock to clear. I really think "traffic" is rapidly becoming accepted as just part of day to day life, just like the pollution and deaths stemming from auto use -- assuming this hasn't already happened.

I guess "practical" is in the eye of the beholder. I don't regard it practical to sit in traffic now, and this in a place where the heaviest traffic could be described as "moderate". And to be honest I have serious doubts that people will ever be aware of it in anycase. Think about this: the majority of motorists get more annoyed at waiting for 10 seconds to pass a cyclist than they do about waiting for 10 minutes for a set of traffic lights to change, or an hour for a piece of gridlock to clear. I really think "traffic" is rapidly becoming accepted as just part of day to day life, just like the pollution and deaths stemming from auto use -- assuming this hasn't already happened.
Chris i know what you mean. to those of us FREE cyclists we aren't mesmerized into the trap -- that wasting so much time in a car is "normal", ok and just something that you have to do -- it is already well over the limit, but the average America car commuter does not yet think it is SO bad - it is bad enough to complani about, but not to actually DO anything to change it.

what i mean is even this ability to ignore how horrible it traffic is and much time is wasted and how much stress produced EVENTUALLY, and how much "freedom" it is to drive a car, has a limit... at some point people in masse will simply be overwhelmed --- lots of people will start freaking out from stress from 4+ hours/day sitting behind the wheel in traffic... and i predict in a matter of a few years a new market will appear, companies/government will provide something, and we will have a true evolution of our personal transportation system... cycling would of course be the "best" choice in my eyes, but considering the laziness of the average person, i fear that it won't... but MAYBE it could still be something that allows cycling to grow?

what i mean is even this ability to ignore how horrible it traffic is and much time is wasted and how much stress produced EVENTUALLY, and how much "freedom" it is to drive a car, has a limit... at some point people in masse will simply be overwhelmed --- lots of people will start freaking out from stress from 4+ hours/day sitting behind the wheel in traffic...

That may be already happening to an extent. In pretty much every city in this country, there has been a recent boom in housing prices in the inner city areas -- even suburbs like Brisbane's Fortitude Valley that had poor reputations in the past are becoming expensive. People aren't driving any less, but it seems the more well-off are trying other means to shorten their commute.


and i predict in a matter of a few years a new market will appear, companies/government will provide something, and we will have a true evolution of our personal transportation system... cycling would of course be the "best" choice in my eyes, but considering the laziness of the average person, i fear that it won't... but MAYBE it could still be something that allows cycling to grow?

It could be, but I won't be holding my breath. I think about the lost productivity in most workplaces directly resulting from people sitting in traffic for hours, yet rarely is there ever a mention of other alternatives, such as Telecommuting for example. I really think traffic has just become accepted as a part of daily life, and it will get worse before it gets better.

The good news for us is that we already have discovered a way to overcome this problem, so I'll just enjoy it while I can.

... and i predict in a matter of a few years a new market will appear, companies/government will provide something, and we will have a true evolution of our personal transportation system...

Yes, and I'm afraid it's already begun. . . automakers have already introduced DVD players in cars to amuse yourself while mired in traffic (they say it's for the passengers - kids and such, but who are they kidding?). . . next it's wetbars, kegerators and lapdances in your SUV while you wait in gridlock.

OnStar will start delivering pizza. Treadmills have aromatherapy, maybe cars will be next. I'm telling you, gridlock provides many avenues (punny, eh?) for the marketing genius of auto manufacturers.

By the way, what am I doing on a bike? I should get me one of these new feature-rich SUV things I've just described :) I'm only kidding, but seriously, I'm sure the traffic "problem" is really seen as a marketing opportunity for car makers. Essentially translates to a chance to invent something and say, "Our new gizmo/feature provides relief from the grind of driving."

No wonder motorists are so wacked out. All this rain.Did not bike commute.....TOday at a busy intersection in Temecula, started to use my stop watch to see how long it took to make a right turn.Not no choice, no way around this intersection.... Four lights in about as many blocks. Very busy intersection leading to a freeway on ramp...Of course, the freeway appeared to not be moving more than 10 mph..
I counted them.Took more than 9 red lights to travel the probably 5 blocks(long blocks). Think the first intersection lights average between 2-3 minutes.Some light changes the traffic did not move.
Good Music & boredom got me distracted, so lost final time it took. Had to have been 15 minutes. How far can a bike travel in 15 minutes.

Good Music & boredom got me distracted, so lost final time it took. Had to have been 15 minutes. How far can a bike travel in 15 minutes.

If I'm not moving, I feel ugly. Good music doesn't help and I don't get bored. This makes it hard for me not to bike. By the way, 15 minutes gets me the 7 miles to work. I can get there in 5 if there is a huricane approaching from the right dirrection. Alas, it's usually 30 knots full force to the bow.

Happy riding. Next time try getting a little wet. You might get to work feeling refreshed.

If I'm not moving, I feel ugly. Good music doesn't help and I don't get bored. This makes it hard for me not to bike. By the way, 15 minutes gets me the 7 miles to work. I can get there in 5 if there is a huricane approaching from the right dirrection. Alas, it's usually 30 knots full force to the bow.

Happy riding. Next time try getting a little wet. You might get to work feeling refreshed.
Ice...Out here we do not believe in rain..We steal it from Coors Beer. Just kidding most of our water comes from the Sierra's...But, then I do not like Coors' beer so no lose there.
I do have the rain gear. But don't like the cool damp feel.Living in the western desert, water rots your skin.....Heck, probably 15 days of rain a year. Can afford to loose them... Recall, why I lost track of the time on my watch. It was our independent radio station 5:00 PM "Blues Break." They were playing Keb Moe, Johnny Lee Hooker, and Johnny Lang...That is enough to make the series of red lights not quite as bad. Even if you wonder if you might be late for work.

I do have the rain gear. But don't like the cool damp feel.Living in the western desert, water rots your skin.....Heck, probably 15 days of rain a year. Can afford to loose them...
rain cycling is a state of mind. in Texas i was pretty "weather-sensitive"... then in Portland i just did it - never thought about, never bothered me. rain was expected and i had the gear and it was no big deal.

now in munich where it rains more than SoCal but less than Portland i am sometimes "disappointed" when it rains, although after i get out on the bike it's all good...

"prepare" yourself for the rain and it's no big deal! (this is also true of the cold down to about 25F)

rain cycling is a state of mind."prepare" yourself for the rain and it's no big deal! (this is also true of the cold down to about 25F)

Up here, we like it to be below freezing if there is precipitation, because it blows off, rather than soaks in. I wouldn't mind a tropical shower just now, though.

I'll ride in just about anything. I bring the dry clothes with me.

I envy you, Z, if there are only 15 days each year that you think the weather is too icky to ride. We have about 16 or 17 per annum, that I opt out.