Great news Boston - we did it! We are number one... among U.S. cities with the worst rush-hour traffic congestion in 2018. So why is it so bad? Apparently, there are number of reasons, like too much of too cheap parking and the crumbling public transportation to name a few.
Solutions exist, just not here in America. Unfortunately, we just naively think that old-school American ways are better than anything imported and we would rather keep building more roads than dig deep to discover the true nature of the problem.
And the first step to solve any problem is to recognize there is one.
For some, such as Tim Jackson, CEO of the Colorado Automobile Dealers Association, even this task is too much. Tim, who looks like someone born in the late 40's, asks "When did driving become a problem that needs to be solved?", to which the right answer is - about the time he was born. It's pretty clear that Tim has been sitting in traffic his whole life, which is likely why he considers this to be a perfectly normal situation. This may be why it's so difficult for people like Tim to imagine that it's possible to live in a city where traffic is non-issue. It's just they would have to leave their cars behind once a while.
I'm not going to argue with Tim here or anywhere else - simply because it's impossible. I mean, you can't argue with someone who begins his editorial with "A fundamentally American freedom is under attack." Since when driving a car has been a part of the First Amendment, Tim?
Well, at least Tim understands what the goal is:
The bottom line is they want to force more residents to use alternative transportation by making driving as unpleasant as possible.
Good call, Tim. Although I wouldn't say "unpleasant" - more like "unnecessary". Nevertheless, Tim will probably love to shake hands with our local hero - Jeff Jacoby, whose brain got stuck in 1972:
The solution to this miserable congestion is not more public transit or bike lanes, which the vast majority of commuters obviously don’t want. The solution is to build more highways, and to charge motorists for driving on them.— Jeff Jacoby (@Jeff_Jacoby) February 12, 2019
https://t.co/h6ae8h443s
I honestly have no idea where he would fit those "more highways" anywhere in Boston. Maybe he's willing to give up his house so we can run a road through it?
What both Tim and Jeff fail to recognize is that (1) free space in city centers is very limited and adding more parking or traffic lanes would be extremely expensive and difficult, and (2) cars with just a driver inside are very inefficient in using this space. As Carlton Reid put it - "Motorists ride two abreast even when driving solo".
Since we have a free market economy in this country, it's time then to finally start charging drivers for goods (roads) that are in short supply (during the rush hours). This is called congestion pricing and it's very difficult to implement because nobody wants to pay for something that was always free.
I know that at this point Tim would tell me that driving is an American right and you can't charge for it. He probably very much likes our socialist transportation utopia:
Highways: publicly subsidized— David Wagoner (@dfwagoner) February 12, 2019
Parking: publicly subsidized
Gasoline: publicly subsidized
Suburbs: publicly subsidized
Auto industry: publicly bailed out
Car driver: DEFINITELY NOT A SOCIALIST
That's right - when it comes to transportation we are a very socialist country even though most drivers would be appalled if you point it out. Essentially, "the way we use roads right now is a bit like the Soviet Union’s method of distributing bread".
It's time then to find other real solutions. Congestion pricing is one of them, as it would stimulate better distribution of road usage during the day (i.e. it's unlikely that 100% of all those morning trips into city must happen at exactly the same time). Dedicated bus lanes and bike lanes are a good addition. High-speed rail as an alternative to driving and flying as well as efficient commuter rail are necessary as well.
Yet when a high-speed rail was considered around Los Angeles, a counter-proposal suggested... new highway lanes with no speed limit travel as an alternative. Seems like someone didn't get the memo that the problem isn't lack of speed but how inefficient driving "two abreast" is.
Fortunately, not every politician is blindfolded. Boston's councilor Michelle Wu suggested recently making our MBTA fare-free. While this may seem a bit radical for many of you, maybe it's not such an unrealistic idea and that's because the most important part of Michelle's argument is this:
In Massachusetts, fares from bus and subway riders contributed just over 20 percent in revenues for the MBTA budget in 2018.
If only 20% of annual revenue comes from fares, it shouldn't be very difficult to forgo fares completely. By going fare-free MBTA could potentially save the lost revenue in form of faster boarding on buses (no need to board through driver's door only), no maintenance of ticket machines, less staff, etc.
But that's probably utopia, just like limiting the "American freedom" to own a car. They do it in Japan though:
In Japan when you purchase a vehicle you must prove that you own or rent a private parking space suitable for the vehicle. There is no assumption that motorists have the right to store their vehicle in public spaces for free.
In other words, Japan does not spatially subsidise motor cars. Right. We are so much behind...
