The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain • Hacker News Board

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#251

Post by lenocinor » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:20 PM UTC

gpm wrote: post #184

nickles wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taxis, Ubers, trucks and cars owned by people who opt to pay hundreds of dollars a month in parking are who will be taxed. Given the unusability of our streets, this seems closer to an economic reckoning than a political money grab. Taxis and Ubers are forms of public transportation, and likely reduce the overall number of cars on the road. Simultaneously, they reduce the incidences of drunk driving, providing posi…

> Taxis and Ubers are forms of public transportation, and likely reduce the overall number of cars on the road. This doesn't make sense to me. IME - the vast majority of time there is a single customer or group in a taxi or uber. Assuming this is in fact the case. Taxis and ubers increase the number of trips taken by vehicle, but let's pretend in their favor that they leave that number flat. While they have a passeng…

It lessens the amount of car storage needed too, though, which is also important. It would be nice if multi-person trips like UberPool would be exempted to encourage their use, but I don't know if that's technically feasible.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#252

Post by ibm5100 » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:21 PM UTC

sek wrote: post #43

This will be absolutely necessary when cars are self-driving. Instead of parking they will just drift around the block when you buy something for example. Also there will be empty Uber cars drifting around to be close if somebody needs it. On top you won't worry so much about traffic if you can sleep in you car or do something else. Driving was always limited by the costs of somebody sitting behind the wheel. Look ho…

I would be shocked if the city council didn't ban the commercial use of self driving vehicles. Too many unemployed, would breed a Paris riot situation.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#253

Post by wccrawford » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:22 PM UTC

CaptainDecisive wrote: post #196

clairity wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe just speak for yourself? the seniors i know walk more than the juniors i know. senior folks will happily share their opinions with you, so no need to speak for them.

Your comment is interesting because it hadn't even occurred to me that the parent comment might be being sarcastic. I thought the emphasis on love was being serious. My experience is older folks (maybe 80 and up? Not really sure) start to lose confidence or ability with driving and give it up. Hence need to walk and take public transport. So less cars and a more walkable neighborhood is a win for them as well as ever…

It was sarcastic because many seniors can't walk long distances. The idea that if they want something they "walk to get it" is ridiculous.

The missing component is that when you ban cars, you have to have good public transit to replace them, especially for the elderly and disabled.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#254

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:22 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #190

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Congestion pricing doesn't actually fix any of that, it just squeezes even harder on the people who the lack of alternatives Every other city's experience with congestion pricing shows decreased car use in favor of alternatives. Effects on local grocery prices were minimal. And in the end, revenues paled in comparison to the health, infrastructure, policing, quality of life and economic costs of traffic congestion.

> Every other city's experience with congestion pricing shows decreased car use in favor of alternatives. Suppose the forest is on fire and instead of spending money to put the fire out, we just ignore it. Then a bunch of wolves come into the city to flee from the fire. Someone suggests that we introduce bears to the city in order to drive out the wolves. Many people point out what a terrible idea that is, but some c…

[deleted]

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#255

Post by francisofascii » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:22 PM UTC

jimmaswell wrote: post #76

bjourne wrote: post #17

I wonder if we (as a society) in the not too distant future can make driving embarrassing? My hope is that if someone sits alone in their big SUV stuck in traffic, pedestrians, cyclists and others will look at that person disparagingly. Like how people look at dog owners not picking up their dogs feces, cigarette smokers or how they look at obese people buying ice cream... Or how hypochondriacs who go to the doctor w…

Shame me all you want, I'm not biking my commute in 90/20 degree weather with a backpack full of stuff including a laptop and no reasonable way to listen to music when I have such a comfortable SUV-type car.

Buses work well for hot days, and you can actually use your laptop rather than driving. Buses should have dedicated lanes and arrival times every 5 minutes.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#256

Post by mjevans » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:22 PM UTC

perennate wrote: post #222

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every other city's experience with congestion pricing shows decreased car use in favor of alternatives. Suppose the forest is on fire and instead of spending money to put the fire out, we just ignore it. Then a bunch of wolves come into the city to flee from the fire. Someone suggests that we introduce bears to the city in order to drive out the wolves. Many people point out what a terrible idea that is, but some c…

So, what is the better alternative? Doubling the number of roads? Building ten or so elevated highways crisscrossing Manhattan?

Probably some mixture of the following tactics.

## Fix the subway (by which I mean make it more like Japan's rail):

  * Make loitering illegal, enforce it
  * A 'short loop' everything recorded space
    This is anti-vandalism / for crimes within a day
  * Since this is the US, safety barrier the train
  * In-city Automated circuits, automated schedule.

There'd also need to be baked in maintenance, but I'm not an expert in subway repair so I'm not sure what's actually required vs nice to have. If the subway is down, surface buses should run to replace it.

## An interface between the subway and the rest of the world:

Large parking silos close enough to the city to be on the subway grid (with good service), BUT, far enough out to have good use of the land. These too should have somewhat short loop subservience for security (maybe a 7-day rotation here). Parking can be charged for, but it should be less than the cost of having an automated driver take you in to the city, drop you off, and pick you up later.

## Every-day Freight backhaul:

As a transportation utility, during the more downtime hours the subway could be used by semi-automated transport cars to route pallets (or a replacement transfer unit) of things classified in several storage classes: Frozen, Refrigerated, 'room temp', not conditioned, 'special'. (Special being an un-conditioned, but ventilated with normal air, room that provides power for local regulation.) The transfer pods would be ferried along normal subway lines between cars during the downtimes. The stops would probably mostly be off of the normal ones, but exceptions might be made. Nearby storage rooms would receive the contents and buffer them. Those rooms are a city owned public utility (somewhat like paid parking spaces are now). Again, subservience on short loop, with added restricted access via RFID fobs and needing to show faces. Automated logging of who's checking in and which pallets they're taking out. At this point they may be close enough to hand/forklift transport, or maybe form an airport luggage style electric powered tram delivery.

## Reducing friction of desired transport methods:

Probably the free# (for people; #paid for with taxes) transport, and keeping the costs of the last-mile backhaul minimal for commercial ideas would be the biggest reduction. The increased patrols, and automated subservience backup (to trace fault after humans identify issues) are also supposed to reduce friction. In the narrative I've setup the civil enforcers are only supposed to be providing help, not hassling random people asking for papers.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#257

Post by amanaplanacanal » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:22 PM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #91

bluescrn wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you introduce high enough congestion charging (to significantly reduce congestion), those rich bankers will get back in their cars and small businesses relying on the roads will be forced to close. We really do risk heading into a ‘roads are for the richest’ future. We need to accept that the car isn’t going away, that public transport cannot work well in many situations, and build more road capacity for an electr…

Building more road capacity to fix congestion never works. Ever. This is highway planning 101: more roads/lanes creates induced demand until travel times are exactly what they were before construction, and so you just spent a billion dollars to go nowhere. For an illustrative example, look at what Houston did to the I-10: they thought like you did and decided to just build and build until the traffic went away. There…

Which, if you think about it, makes perfect sense. Everybody has some unconscious limit of how long they are willing for their commute to be. Am I willing to commute for 30 minutes? Probably. What if it was two hours? No way. I'd either find a closer job or move closer to work.

Average that over the whole population, each with their own individual unconscious time limit. The result is: if commuting is faster, people are willing to live farther from their jobs. If commuting is slower, people live closer to their jobs. Adding more capacity doesn't change this.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#258

Post by kadendogthing » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:24 PM UTC

akira2501 wrote: post #241

Jorge1o1 wrote: post #31

The streets were never free. We paid for it with our tax money. (Not to mention our 22 trillion dollar public debt) I don’t think people expect streets to be free in the same way you don’t expect the police department to be free, the fire department to be free, public schools, etc. In any case, my point is, we paid for the streets with our tax money and our debt, so don’t masquerade this as some kind of “economic rec…

> where the people are FINALLY going to have to pay for those roads the government’s been giving away for free for so long. The article also makes the annoying case that there are those who live in apartments and dwellings that have to pay for parking by code, but don't use that parking because they don't drive; however, this entirely fails to take into account the effect on the city as a whole. Parking and road acce…

>Parking and road access isn't about individuals, it's about making an entire metropolitan area functional.

You don't need cars for a metro to be functional. This is purely a 1st world construct that we've burdened ourselves with. It can and should be undone.

>where do they get their groceries and other goods?

From stores in the neighborhood. There is typically truck access and back alley ways for things to get unloaded. If there is not, most roads have some wiggle room to them where the truck can pull over.

>how do they expect medical services to reach them in an emergency?

Via the road. But you don't need parking for emergency vehicles. Not sure what world you're in, but emergency services don't just throw their hands up in the air if all the parking spaces are taken. Not sure why you think they'd act any different with less parking. It's a really funny example, to be honest.

>How do they expect commerce to occur within an arms reach but at reasonable prices?

Not having a car free's up a lot of money. Assuming you think the cost of goods would rise to some absurd amount, it'd still be way, way cheaper to pay for those goods in comparison to getting cheap goods because you own a car, and forcing the entire community to pay for miles and miles and miles of road.

>We all pay for the roads because we all use them

Roads aren't going away. We just probably need less of them, and we need to not construct our cities and metro's with a "car's first" attitude. Because it just shifts the costs elsewhere, for absolutely no gain and quite a few negatives.

You know what's great? Not having to drive 30 minutes somewhere. That's 30 minutes I can spend walking out in the sunshine. Not dealing with traffic while risking life and limb, and not paying a boat load of money to go buy $20 worth of goods.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#259

Post by ellard » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:25 PM UTC

bhupy wrote: post #178

ellard wrote: post #128

I'm disappointed that motorcycles/scooters and lane splitting aren't brought into the conversation more when discussions about traffic congestion come up. It feels like a win/win for nearly everyone to promote two wheeled transportation and allow them to split lanes or filter through traffic. Those who do not want to ever ride on two wheels still get the benefit of others doing so and essentially taking themselves ou…

Do you have links to some of these studies? Asking as a motorcyclist...

The study that I remember off the top of my head is the one that came out of UC Berkeley. News article: https://news.berkeley.edu/2015/05/29/motorcycle-lanesplittin...

There's been a couple of others that I remember seeing, but I don't remember them or which sources I saw them at.

Re: The Streets Were Never Free. Congestion Pricing Finally Makes That Plain

#260

Post by strictnein » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:26 PM UTC

UnFleshedOne wrote: post #204

hcurtiss wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, unless they're driving an electric car, wouldn't we expect that they do in the form of gas taxes?

When was the last time US raised gas taxes? I understand those weren't indexed to inflation for a long while, not to mention adjustments for changing usage patterns.

The vast majority of road maintenance and construction is paid for by the states, counties, and cities. Those entities raise gas taxes all the time, or raise property taxes to pay for the roads.