In reply to:
>
From: Chuck Strawser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 16:36:13 -0500
"induced demand" is NOT just, as you put it, "one of those cute little
concepts that people who
>want to run other people's lives dote on.", it is a well documented
phenomenon, also called "generated traffic" or "induced travel"........
.......
where an anonymous person said:
>If the roads are allowed to fill up, people will resort to such tactics
>as resheduling or even cancelling trips.
Such tactics as "rescheduling or even cancelling trips"? Cancelling
unnecessary trips would not be that bad.
>Governments may offer incentives
>to carpool or use mass transit. This is what you could call "induced
>demand for less desirable alternatives."
Government incentives to car pool and use mass transit ought be provided
now, and are being provided in some communities, for the sake of improved
efficiency and air quality in the community.
But let's not shortchanged folks like bicyclists and pedestrians, who
originally chose to live close enough to their place of employment, and
their other most frequently used locations [in other words, those people
who don't have to drive as much by their own design], from receiving
some of those same benefits or subsidies.
>The way to avoid this type of
>induced demand is to build road capacity sooner rather than later.
This type of "induced demand" is not induced demand at all. It is,
rather, "demand reduction", which equates to "traffic reduction" , and
"congestion relief" -- without having to build more highway
infrastructure capacity into the system. The solution ought not be to:
"build road capacity sooner rather than later"; rather, it should be to
try to avoid building the undesirable, costly and environmentally
degrading road capacity expansions at all. It should not be a foregone
conclusion that the expanded highways, such as the Verona/Beltline
interchange, the North Beltline Highway, or even a four lane (as oppose
to a two lane) U.S. Highway 12 from Middleton to Sauk City will
ultimately be needed. Those projects were planned under the assumption
that huge global problems like global warming didn't exist, and by a
public agency (Wis. DOT) who chose to ignore the fact that increasing
traffic levels in urban areas increases those urban population's chances
of getting more asthma attacks, and now proceeding to implement those
plans in spite of the latest scientific findings that people living in
close proximity to heavily used highways and roads are more likely to
come down with lung cancer, get heart attacks, asthma and asthma attacks,
and suffer strokes.
>the alternatives WisDOT is considering [for the Verona/Beltline
interchange] have one thing in common: They will
>not begin until 2009 at the earliest. This is scandalous in my opinion.
....On the contrary, it's the other way around, in my opinion, and has
been that way for some time now, unfortunately.
I authored a paper in May 2000, following the DNR secretary's decision to
not follow through with DNR's earlier (May 1999) recommendation that WDOT
assess demand reduction strategy alternatives to highway system capacity
expansion proposed in the Wisconsin State Highway Plan 2020. My paper
can be read off the danenet's web site http://www.danenet.org/bcp
[click on "advocacy" window and go to "transportation demand management",
or go directly to http://danenet.wicip.org/bcp/neuman_gw.pdf ]
If "financial incentives" (to drive less) are high enough, not only will
there be no induced highway demand, there will be no need for the highway
facility expansions in the first place.
Sending incentives back to people who demonstrate good behavior is the
best way to save fuel, cut emissions, and reduce congestion on the
highways. I support giving rewards to those who have low or no vehicle
miles travelled. It would not be that hard to implement and operate,
and it would not be a thorn to those that didn't want to participate
because it would be voluntary. I would rather see people get the
incentive rewards than giving all the rewards to industry.
But the idea did not play well here in Madison, as it was considered "too
radical" for the WDOT, and ultimately by the Governor appointed DNR
secretary back in 1999. Moreover, it was not vocally supported by any
other organization in Madison either, with the possible exception of the
organization "1000 Friends of Wisconsin" and a semi-positive editorial in
The Capital Times. So the concept of "positive financial incentives for
low annual vehicle miles travelled (VMT) by individuals and families"
died on the vine, almost immediately after it got published in the
Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel on November 30, 1999. The DNR secretary flip
flopped and disavowed any ownership of the idea, and later reassigned
instigator of the idea to not work ever again on transportation issues
for the DNR. In February 2000, he allowed the WDOT to approve its own
plan uncontested by the lead agency on natural resource and environmental
issues of the state, and the $20 billion 20-year highway plan proceeded
into development, which is where the plan is at this time.
Our fearless leaders in government decided they'd rather continue to give
the billions of dollars of gas tax money and vehicle license fees to the
road and bridge building industry for expanded highways like U.S. Highway
12 to Sauk City and the Verona Interchange, rather than return most of
taxes back to "the public" (mostly to those who don't overuse the
existing highway system) and forego the heavy environmental, social and
economic cost of relentless highway and bridge building throughout the
state, including in urban areas like the Verona Road area, and in
increasingly less rural areas (due to urban sprawl), like Dane County
between Middleton and the Wisconsin River at Sauk City.
The result is that not only are we paying more public money to the
highway industry, to pave the countryside and uproot families in areas
like the proposed Verona Road interchange, but we will end up paying for
more maintenance and upkeep of a larger concrete highway system, getting
poorer air quality and increased noise and light pollution from an ever
increasing number of operating motor vehicles accommodated by the larger
highway system, and more wildlife and pedestrian/bicycle conflicts like
the one that occurred on east washington avenue on Wednesday because of
more overall traffic in both urban and rural area, and with that
increased in traffic, an increased rate of global warming, because at the
present average fuel efficiency of automobiles, every mile driven by the
average automobile in Wisconsin and the U.S. adds one more pound of the
greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (and other trace greenhouse gases) to the
atmosphere, where it will combine with other greenhouse gases emitted
from other highway vehicles, airplanes, and other fossil fuel burning
sources, warming the planet for 100 years, or more.
"The only thing in American politics that speaks more loudly than money
is a riled-up citizenry. So get riled up!"
- Dennis Hayes, "The Official Earth Day Guide to Planet Repair", 2001.
http://www.geocities.com/mtneuman/tribute_flag.html
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
