Comprehensive Pittsburgh-area transportation discussion (York, Oakland: sales, real estate, movers)

[Katarina Witt]

It does seem that the demand-highway-demand cycle is a chicken and egg situation. Which came first? I'm not a huge proponent of highways, and I have seen cases where they spurred development, but there has to be a reality orientation somewhere. The Parkway is an old road. Whatever development it spurred is probably over and done with.

I really don't like the "stick" approach to getting people to stop driving, e.g. eliminating parking subsidies, etc. If a business wants to provide a benefit like that for its employees, why should it be prohibited from doing so? There are businesses around here (metro Denver, particularly in Boulder) that provide a bus pass. What's the difference?

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by Katiana

I really don't like the "stick" approach to getting people to stop driving, e.g. eliminating parking subsidies, etc.

I don't think that you can reasonably describe eliminating a subsidy as a "stick."

Originally Posted by Katiana

If a business wants to provide a benefit like that for its employees, why should it be prohibited from doing so? There are businesses around here (metro Denver, particularly in Boulder) that provide a bus pass. What's the difference?

As a matter of tax law, the difference is that an employer can provide $120/month more of free parking than free transit before you have to pay taxes on it.

Employer transportation benefits in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[pman]

Originally Posted by Katiana

It...

I really don't like the "stick" approach to getting people to stop driving, e.g. eliminating parking subsidies, etc. If a business wants to provide a benefit like that for its employees, why should it be prohibited from doing so? There are businesses around here (metro Denver, particularly in Boulder) that provide a bus pass. What's the difference?

parking subsidies are a carrot for driving not a stick. a congestion charge is a stick. I think you are misunderstanding what is meant by parking subsidies. we're not talking about benefits businesses are offering for their employees out of their own pocket, we're talking about parking capacity being built with taxpayer dollars. the saks garage and the millcraft parking monstrosity called the gardens are both subsidized parking capacity increases.at the federal level it means evening the tax deduction for parking ($250/mo) and transit ($130/mo I think) or eliminating it for both.

[Katarina Witt]

I can't argue the Pittsburgh issues w/o doing a lot of research, which I don't want to do right now. However, providing parking in cities is simply facing reality that people will drive their cars, and keeps these cars from causing a huge congestion problem as they drive around looking for street parking, park in front of people's houses, etc.

Here is some information about the bus passes our transportation district offers.
RTD

[pman]

Originally Posted by Katiana

I can't argue the Pittsburgh issues w/o doing a lot of research, which I don't want to do right now. However, providing parking in cities is simply facing reality that people will drive their cars, and keeps these cars from causing a huge congestion problem as they drive around looking for street parking, park in front of people's houses, etc.

no, it's not, it's directly encouraging them to drive which is not particularly the best use of tax dollars. while it's true that transit is also subsidized, transit raises property values, parking garages do not . worse, the larger the volume of cars the more the streets are given over to cars, the less desirable it is to live or play there. cities have already tried overcompensating for cars to disastrous effect, scaling back direct car subsidies is a relatively harmless way to stop encouraging excess auto consumption. how many spaces is pnc providing? over in Philadelphia comcast is building the state's largest tower with few parking spaces. neither of these companies have problems attracting employees.

[speagles84]

Pittsburgh CD forum... where everyone is a Civil/Transportation Engineer.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by pman

no, it's not, it's directly encouraging them to drive which is not particularly the best use of tax dollars. while it's true that transit is also subsidized, transit raises property values, parking garages do not . worse, the larger the volume of cars the more the streets are given over to cars, the less desirable it is to live or play there. cities have already tried overcompensating for cars to disastrous effect, scaling back direct car subsidies is a relatively harmless way to stop encouraging excess auto consumption. how many spaces is pnc providing? over in Philadelphia comcast is building the state's largest tower with few parking spaces. neither of these companies have problems attracting employees.

I'd like to see some evidence that "transit raises property values". I somehow don't think living next to a bus station, or a bus garage, does much for one's property value. Being near, but not on, the busilne, maybe.

Originally Posted by speagles84

Pittsburgh CD forum... where everyone is a Civil/Transportation Engineer.

Point well taken.

[speagles84]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Point well taken.

I'd love to contribute here, as I am a Civil Engineer; but the majority will whine about my proposal saying it doesn't incorporate enough public transit vs highway construction (although my #1 is a public transit project). I'm sorry, some people no matter how easy it is for them, will not take the bus. Sorry, fact of life.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by speagles84

I'm sorry, some people no matter how easy it is for them, will not take the bus. Sorry, fact of life.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

[ctoocheck]

Originally Posted by speagles84

I'd love to contribute here, as I am a Civil Engineer; but the majority will whine about my proposal saying it doesn't incorporate enough public transit vs highway construction. I'm sorry, some people no matter how easy it is for them, will not take the bus. Sorry.

Public transit is one thing, at least. But what if fewer people commute off-peak? What about more people carpooling? What if more people want to move closer to the city because we improve it? What if gas prices go up to $5 a gallon? What if our state and municipalities are no longer able to maintain a number of excessive roadways? What if AASHTO standards are BS? What if narrower lanes can actually move people faster? What if there's such support for buses that the quality becomes great, and some of these people actually want to take the bus? What if trends are changing anyway?

These are some of the things that many highway engineers of the past seem to have overlooked in favor of trying to get traffic to be at a freeflow all the time.