From: mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Save the Planet and the Economy at the Same time!
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:48:12 GMT
Reply-To: mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

---: Re: A Simple Way to Save the Economy, and the Planet, Too!
---: 
---: Gentlemen:
---: 
---:      Believe it or not, there is a simple way to save our economy,
---: restore social equity, and save the planet, with one act!
---: 			...
-- 			...
---	It is currently cheaper (in most urban areas) to commute
---via car than to use other means, and furthermore, most areas are

Not true. It's $.39/ mile by car, according to my latest source.

---underdeveloped with regard to mass transit.  Suburb-to-suburb mass
---transit is woefully undeveloped, and due to the growth of the
---suburban business district and the decay of the central city business
---core (read "Edge City"), suburb-to-suburb commuting is at least on
---the same level as suburb-to-core.  Until this inequities are addressed,
---simple taxing of car usage will only further add to the burden on the
---poor- and middle-classes.
   
Not so. they mostly use transit, or at least live where it is possible.

--I'm not falling for that chicken-&-egg stuff. 
-
-	But you have to determine cause and effect.  Treating the 
-effect without addressing the cause will not be an effective or 
-politically viable solution.  What has happened in many areas has been 
-development without thought to transportation.  When most workplaces
-were centrally located, so that many people were making parallel trips
-to work, mass transit lines could be set up that would serve many
-people.  But now, businesses have been scattered in the suburbs, so
-often there are many routes to work, each serving a small number of 
-people.  In such a case one cannot define mass transit routes that 
-will attract significant ridership.  And it is unfair to penalize 
-people who have no practical choice but to drive.
 
EVERYONE has a choice. I choose to live near transit. So could you.

-	To encourage mass transit, one cannot simply impose rules on 
-the existing traffic patterns.  It is necessary to start at the time 
-new development is being planned.  An area plan must be developed in 
-concert with a transportation plan, ensuring that when the commercial 
-and residential development is complete, significant commuting 
-will occur along a limited number of routes, which can be used for 
-mass transit lines.  Then, when mass transit is readily available, one 
-can discourage use of cars by such steps as restricting parking in the 
-commercial areas and making it expensive.  Such measures also target 
-those who actually have a reasonable mass transit alternative, 
-without targeting the suburb-to-suburb commuters who have no choice.
 
But they have the resources to move to where transit is viable.

-	Sticking to the plans requires involvement.  Once you have a
-plan, for example, many developers will follow the practice of buying
-land that (usually for good reasons) has been zoned low-density and
-getting it rezoned commercial, because the price is usually much
-lower than that for land designated commercial in the original plan. 
-They use political clout to get these rezonings through.  The result 
-of this practice is a scattering of office parks and a diffuse flow
-traffic pattern that makes it impossible to design a mass transit
-network to serve a significant number of people effectively.  Once the
-area is developed, it's too late to close the garage door. 
 
So your answer is that it's impossible to fix? I doubt it.

--Making it more expensive 
--to drive will cause some ex-drivers to begin asking for better 
--transit etc. 
-
-No, they'll just throw the people who raised the rates out of office 
-at the next election.  So mass transit won't have been improved and 
-the pro-car people will be back.
 
So what? Taxes, once begun, are rarely eliminated.

--Now, they ignore it because it's "not their problem". 
--It is cheaper to use transit than to drive.$.39/mile, according to 
--the latest from the IRS (or the EPA?). 
--
-
-Two things here.  We have to be careful about averages.  For suburb to 
-city commutes, mass transit will certainly be less expensive, 
-particularly if parking in the city is costly.  For suburb to suburb 
-commutes, where parking is free and mass transit routes circuitous, 
-the comparison tilts differently; it is closer.  Average the two 
-together and mass transit comes out ahead.  The second point is the 
-value of time.  For many suburb to suburb commutes, the time by mass 
-transit can easily be double that of automobile commuting, even after 
-the delays from congestion are taken into account.

But you forget that driving time is WASTED time. Transit time is USEFUL
time, hence more valuable.