"Lexus Lanes" will not cure traffic congestion

[primative1]

When you hear proposals like "congestion fees" and the like remember to call them what they are ... lexus lanes.
An alarming number of cities have taken to advancing proposals that call for charging staggered fees depending on amounts of congestion at any given time, they are now working to converting the old "car pool" lanes to PAY UP BIG lanes so that only the wealthy will be able to move around in reasonable amounts of time ...
How does this address traffic congestion? It will just make it worse for the rest of us while allowing the TO DOs yet another opportunity to inoculate themselves with money ....
Dont let them change the name for these proposals to something that sounds more palatable .. they are LEXUS LANES

[papau]

1. what other way is there to cut down the congestion? New roads are impossible, so it is either fees

or permits.

Permits require more Police and even then are ineffective as folks will "take their chances".

Mass transit is not a bad thing to begin with and it already saves money. At some point the money saved moves enough people off the roads so that pollution/congestion is reduced.

[primative1]

2. Do you actually support this?

Like the constitution says, all men are created equal .. Why does the rich mans shopping trip merit more service than some working slobs daily commute? Congestion is a problem we all must deal with. The way to deal with it is NOT to let the rich use money to avoid the problem ... They are in the same boat as the rest of us, they should work to fix it the same as the rest of us and I will fight any effort that lets them off of that boat simply by doling out cash which in all likelihood they hold solely because they used their richness as leverage to extract further wealth.
The rich are equally required to work to help fix congestion, not inoculate themselves from it.

[papau]

5. Cutting demand means increasing cost - yes I "support" the toll concept n/t

n/t

[Sapere aude]

13. Not everyone is paying the toll, those who can afford it will pay those who can't won't

It will not have the effect you want. Also people can't not go to work or school or what ever. If there is no alternative they will drive.

You are advocating another feel good law. It feels like you are doing something yet there will be no effect on the problem. Feel good laws are the laws if the ignorant elite!

[sharp_stick]

6. What would your option be?

I really don't know what else we can do about it besides making city cores car free. That would be kind of nice if it would work, imagine Manhattan without cars blowing blue smoke and honking at every imagined issue.

[primative1]

11. Imagine ... car free ...

Wouldn't that be cool?
My folks have a place on a lake and the town tried to pass an ordinance limiting the horsepower people could put on there boats, so people could enjoy things like canoing and such without getting swamped by people in 30 foot cigarette boats and fisherman "trolling" at 50 MPH with 260 HP pushing them. Of course the measure failed, they wouldn't want to infringe on peoples right to flaunt ..
On a side note ... remember after 9-11, when they stopped flying planes for a couple of days ... how clean the air was, how quiet it was ... wonderful memory ... maybe it was just me, wouldn't want to get in the way of commerce. That might imply people were actually serious about addressing problems instead of exempting themselves and inviting in 50 million more immigrants ...

[bunkerbuster1]

24. I'd offer a bigger carrot to carpoolers.

Right now there are too many highways with one just stinkin' lane, and it's not even protected.

It has to be made a lot more painful for one-person vehicles before it'll ever get better. I'd mandate double HOV lanes, separated, with their own entrances and exits. Cuts into one person vehicle lanes? Too bad.

People can change their behaviors if there's enough of an incentive. Right now there isn't enough of one.

[MistressOverdone]

3. Sounds like a good idea to me

and I'd pay it and I sure don't ride in a lexus!

[underpants]

4. No more like they are making it too expensive to drive

I had never heard or thought of it as a "Lexus lane" and I can class warfare with the best of them. This is mainly getting people to park-and-ride or take whatever rail system you have going. One downside is that delivery trucks that have to come in from outside of an urban area will have to pay these fees which will either drive up costs to us or drive people from that business in which case economies of scale will mean that only the big companies can afford it.

[TreasonousBastard]

7. Can't speak for other cities, but we already have...

a version of "Lexus Lanes" in NYC.

You may or may not pay a toll to get into Manhattan, but you will pay close to four bucks a gallon for the gas and could pay up to 20 bucks to park for a half hour. Lots of "ordinary" people hire car services for quick trips into the city so they can avoid the hassle. And avoid mass transit.

One real answer is what many European cities have done-- ban cars from many areas of the city and leave them as walking zones.

Ain't gonna happen here, though. When such a thing was discussed back in the Barnes era, NYC shopkeepers went ballistic. Harry Winston's customers would not, apparently, ever considering walking an extra block to get there. And there's the delivery problem-- trucks would only be allowed in at night, but that idea always dies when businesses whine about having someone there at night to accept deliveries. And handicapped access... and...

It just ain't gonna happen. "Lexus Lanes" are the American answer to American stupidity.

[msongs]

8. we already have ENOUGH freeway space. the problem is ->

too many people want to use them at the same times 7 Am and 5 pm, while the freeways sit mostly empty fro 10 at night to 5 in the morning. staggering job hours more effectively would eliminate or reduce choice of hours congestion.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm
for dems 2008 tees

[primative1]

9. Like Flex Hours Might Aid Car Pools ..

Flex hours were almost normal a decade ago but now corps mostly wont flex their aimless blustering (called the 8 am meeting) for a single second .... My take is its the same people who want "lexus lanes" that are the ones who insist on standard work hours for peons one and all.
Nice "democratic" take I see here for the concept in general. Glad you all are so compliant.

[RamblingRose]

10. I disagree with paying for the use of HOV lanes, however I think there are a lot of people that

would buy these permits, thus making the HOV lanes useless and ineffective. The more people that buy them the more useless they become. And in the case of an accident in the HOV lane, it could make it difficult for drivers to exit the lane. I think they're dangerous during rush hour traffic anyway because cars have to cross over 5 lanes of traffic to get to the exit ramps.

[Stargazer99]

12. Just another way the well to do make the common man

pay for their perks.

[The_Progressive]

14. There maybe a better idea ...

How about indexing the sales tax on a car based upon it's price. A $14,000 Chevy Cobalt would have a 5% sales tax and a $65,000 Lexus would have a 20% sales tax.

Then index annual registration cost on the EPA mpg. A 35 mpg Corolla would coast $100 and a 8 mpg Hummer would be $2000.

Take all the money and help improve the roads.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. Or better yet, build mass transit, because

improving the roads relieves traffic congestion only temporarily. In city after city, better roads only encourage people to drive more, so they end up just as congested as the old roads within three months to a year.

[The_Progressive]

18. Mass Transit Would Be Nice ...

If Americans liked mass transit. Cities that have installed light rail have been nothing but boondoggles. Subways in large cities work well. In Singapore, and now London, you must buy a special permit (by the day or week) to drive in the main part of the city. If there was a mass transit option it would have to be augmented by a realization that we like cars, yet a cost that is associated with driving cars in cities.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

19. Who says light rail has been a boondoggle?

Not in Portland. They've built four lines with 2/3 popular support and ever-increasing ridership. It's well coordinated with the bus system and is now the transport of choice for people attending downtown events or Trail Blazers games, not just a way to commute to work.

Minneapolis has been slow to adopt rail transit, due to the peculiar structure of our Metro government, but the first line has been successful. It's becoming increasingly popular (as buses never were) as a way to get to the airport and the Mall of America. If our idiot Republican governor hadn't vetoed a transportation bill, we'd be on our way to two more lines.

People who wouldn't be caught dead on a bus will happily ride light rail.

[The_Progressive]

20. Light Rail ...

I like light rail. I went to graduate school in Belgium. I wish we have the mass transit system in the US they have in Europe.

But the reality is light rail isn't very popular here. The system you have up in the Twin Cities is a good example. It's great for tourists/shoppers going from the Nicolette Mall to the Mall of America. But not much else. The light rail system in St. Louis is another example. If you fly into Lambert and want to go down town - it's great. If you want to use it for a work commute you are still looking at several bus transfers per day.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

21. Yeah, if you have only one line, that's the case

That's like phones were an expensive luxury when only a few wealthy families in each city had them. Most people in those days would have thought, "Why would I need a phone? I don't know any of those rich folks."

However, as more and more households and businesses installed phones, they became the near-necessity they are today.

Light rail lines are like that. When Portland had only one rail line, running from downtown to Gresham, it was useful only for people living on the east side of the city. It didn't even go to the airport. But the opening of the West Side Line, followed by the line running to the airport, really made ridership increase. The northside line added even more riders. It also helps that Portland's transit system is extremely well thought out, with excellent connections between buses and light rail. I lived there comfortably without a car for ten years. That system is the single thing I miss most about Portland, because after ten years of car-free living, I have now relearned what a pain and expense driving is.

As for the usefulness of the rail line in the Twin Cities, I rode it to the MOA last week when my Norwegian cousin was visiting (a bus that runs past my apartment connects to the rail line), and we saw lots of people with suitcases getting off at the airport. In fact, I'd say that more people were going to the airport than to the MOA.

I myself use it for going to the airport, and after my last discouraging and frustrating encounter with Super Shuttle, I will now use it for coming back from the airport as well, no matter what the hour. Whatever you say about the light rail, it will never mistake the name of my street for a well-known hotel chain and put me on the shuttle going in the wrong direction.

[The_Progressive]

22. I agree with you

If we had more light rail people would use it. But the way our post WWII cities are structured - an inner hub surrounded by suburbs - dictates just about everybody has a lengthy commute each day. If we all lived in concentrated urban areas and worked in the city a euro-style mass transit plan would be great. But we live in a different reality.

If fuel prices keep going up the future for the American worker may be telecommuting.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

25. Tokyo sprawls more than any American city and only rail keeps it from

breaking down completely. I was there during a (pre-announced) rail strike many years ago, and the strike made highway conditions so bad that many companies ordered in futons and asked their workers to prepare to camp out in their offices for the duration.

Like Los Angeles, Tokyo is a conglomeration of formerly independent cities, each with its own business district. Development clusters around the train stations, and a housing development's proudest boast is that it's close to a train station. In fact, suburbs that don't have rail service beg for it.

If comprehensive rail systems were in place, they would drive development. The car-oriented structure of the American suburb is not ordained by God or Nature. It was built up through cumulative human decisions and can be undone in the same way. There is so much infill land available in our cities and inner suburbs that we could forbid all further exurban growth and there would still be a land supply for a decade or so.

[Pied Piper]

28. I love Portland's transport system

I was there last year for a job interview, and I just loved the public transit. I live in Boston now, where we have a decent system. In Portland, they've thought it all out and make it work. The system maps are great and easily pocketable. Granted, I was only there for 5 days, and I'm sure there are a few trouble spots, but I liked what I saw. People in Boston bitch about the T, but I love it. I haven't had a car for more than 10 years, and I don't miss it a bit. I can rent a car relatively cheaply if I need to, but for the most part, I ride the trains and buses. I am lucky enough to live close enough to work that I can walk each day, and that helps. Cars are a liability in Boston - I don't think I'll own another one again.

[Solon]

26. The St. Louis Metro is expanding, rapidly...

It goes to south county, north county, downtown, Lambert, St. Ann, Bridgeton, etc. They are doing constant construction, and are even beginning to expand it into other counties surrounding St. Louis county, unfortunately not my county, our county struck it down and opted for a highway expansion instead.

[MindPilot]

15. How about keeping trucks off the freeways during the commutes?

I understand there are a few cities that have either proposed this or implemented it. Anyone know?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

16. London has congestion pricing

It costs about $16 a day to drive in central London, unless you're driving a bus or taxi.

Of course, London HAS alternatives, such as the Tube system and a large and frequent network of buses. That's what transit does: provide alternatives for people who don't want to drive in traffic. People may still be stupid enough to drive in central London (having been there, I can't imagine that anyone but an idiot would do iit, since the traffic is bad enough without private cars), but that will mean that they're volunteering to pay $16 a day, when they can get an Oyster card and ride around on the Tube and buses for far less.

But otherwise, traffic fills up whatever space is available for it. There was recently an article in the Minneapolis paper about how the addition of new lanes to a local freeway had eased congestion--for a few months. Now that stretch of highway is as crowded as ever.

[AngryAmish]

23. Traffic sux

Would I pay extra to get people out of my way? Hell yes.

[Solon]

27. I feel its putting the cart before the horse...

In a City like New York, it may be practical to have a "car free" downtown. Generally because affordable and plentiful alternatives are already in place. However, I do not feel this can be done nationwide at this time. What we should do is offer alternatives for local travel through federal funds provided to cities to improve their public transit systems. We then expand the systems for regional/state, and national travel, I go into much more detail here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=232796&mesg_id=233156