An occasional update on items from Motordom – the world of auto dominance
______________________________________________________________
THE WAR ON THE CAR …
Eric de Place at the Sightline Institute traces the origins of a meme.
There’s also a good line in the Comments:
Hotels charging exorbitant prices for parking can’t be linked to anything done by government; (that’s) like calling expensive drinks at hotel bars a war on drinking.
______________________________________________________________
… AND OTHER MYTHS
From DC.Streetsblog.org:
The myth of the self-financed road meets its match today in the form of a new report from the U.S. Public Interest Research Group: “Do Roads Pay For Themselves?” The answer is a resounding “no.” All told, the authors calculate that road construction has sucked $600 billion out of America’s public purse since the dawn of the interstate system.
The post also takes on the congestion myth, i.e. building more roads not only pay for themselves but address congestion:
Do new roads cut congestion, or do they “pay for themselves”? Highway lobbyists try to have it both ways, but the truth is that neither of these propositions hold water.
Highway expansions are often justified as projects that relieve traffic and, believe it or not, reduce pollution. So if a highway widening achieved its stated aims, it would cut congestion and fuel consumption, which would mean fewer gas tax dollars and roads that don’t pay for even a fraction of their construction costs. However, we know that new highway capacity doesn’t actually reduce driving – it induces more driving.
The additional traffic created by expanding highways does generate more gas tax revenue, but still not enough to come close to covering the costs of new roads.
U.S. PIRG cites the Pew Charitable Trusts’ SubsidyScope project, which found that “user fees paid for only 51 percent of highway costs, down 10 percent over the course of a single decade.”
______________________________________________________________
PITTSBURGH MOTORDOM
“Motordom” – the auto-dominant city – is about the transformation of the 20th-century city as it accommodated (and then became designed for) the motor vehicle. The ‘Shorpy’ blog is chock full of examples; here’s one from Pittsburgh – a street in the financial district in 1905:
And then a contemporary view; the street adapted for the car:
Regarding roads paying for themselves:
I’m as much in favour of reducing car use as anyone, but I think this article misses the point that roads allow for efficiencies in economic activity. They may not be as great as the efficiencies allowed by other modes of transportation, but they are not zero. In order to address the myth of roads paying for themselves, I think this subject needs to be considered.
Sorry – I should have said that “motorized transport” allows for efficiencies in economic activity.
Note to Gordon: an “edit” feature would be most welcome!