Congestion toll in Boston?

Kinopio said:
A congestion toll is not "unfair" to people who choose to commute by car. What is unfair is the billions drivers have taken out of the pockets of non drivers. What is unfair are the pedestrians run down in crosswalks by drivers. What is unfair are suburbanites driving into Boston and spewing toxic exhaust that shortens the lifespans of Bostonians. What is unfair is all the valuable property and money Boston gives to drivers who don't even live in Boston. Drivers have gotten enough welfare. Time for them to start paying for the damage they cause and the resources they hog.
Click to expand...

They more than double the population and make Bostons economic output as powerful as it is. I dont think youd like to see what the economic output cut in half or more would look like.

Boston has very small borders and also has the govt and economic center in 1 place, not really leaving anything to the other cities. We take all the jobs of the state and even most of New England... so people that dont even want to work in Boston have no choice... Mass doesnt really spread much around, at least if the centrally located Worcester had the government there not EVERYTHING would be in Boston, but thats the way it is. Thats why telling people to keep out is insane.

All that stuff you say they “take” without giving anything back is flat out false when they more than double the economic output of the city. The commuters are good for the city, the commuter rail just needs to be brought into the 21st century so people can use it as a real alternative to cars. Again... lots of people are not “choosing” they have no other option. A choice is deciding between things. If the commuter rail is electrified, nsrl, and 30 min headways it becomes a real alternative.

Not everyone can afford to live in the city, we cant build fast enough either, yet most jobs are there. Its ridiculous to say if youre too poor to live here, keep out, residents only. Alll cities have commuters. Howabout we bring the transit system out of the 1900s into the 21st century like so many other cities around the world. Commuters are not the problem, transit is. Theres room for everybody we just need to bring the transit network up to par.
 
Kinopio said:
A congestion toll is not "unfair" to people who choose to commute by car. What is unfair is the billions drivers have taken out of the pockets of non drivers. What is unfair are the pedestrians run down in crosswalks by drivers. What is unfair are suburbanites driving into Boston and spewing toxic exhaust that shortens the lifespans of Bostonians. What is unfair is all the valuable property and money Boston gives to drivers who don't even live in Boston. Drivers have gotten enough welfare. Time for them to start paying for the damage they cause and the resources they hog.
Click to expand...

Just curious, who is the audience for this post? Because that sure as hell isn’t a winning argument to get the majority of people (drivers) on your side.
 
Yea I think he just needs to get a pass on that 1. We all have off days and make mistakes, sometimes we say something absolutely ridiiiiiiiiculous as hell. Ill just pretend that didnt happen, welcome him back to reality, n move on lol. Im sure once he came back the next day and looked at that comment.. he was like hmmmm... welp, what a freakin disaaaaster of a comment that was. He gets a pass haha.
 
Kinopio said:
A congestion toll is not "unfair" to people who choose to commute by car. What is unfair is the billions drivers have taken out of the pockets of non drivers. What is unfair are the pedestrians run down in crosswalks by drivers. What is unfair are suburbanites driving into Boston and spewing toxic exhaust that shortens the lifespans of Bostonians. What is unfair is all the valuable property and money Boston gives to drivers who don't even live in Boston. Drivers have gotten enough welfare. Time for them to start paying for the damage they cause and the resources they hog.
Click to expand...

i agree we must strive to be kind to the environment; And for a fair price, Vision Motorsports of Laguna Hills, CA will stuff the biggest one of these into the smallest, lightest thing with 4 wheels, and the lowest coefficient of drag....

https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/07/v8s-rule/

*speaking of shoehorned V8's, would you spend ~$300,000 to turn your 944 into a demonic track machine? Even scarier than Tony's track exploits–is the ascent up his driveway in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mtns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T10ru5GOYV0
 
DominusNovus said:
Just curious, who is the audience for this post? Because that sure as hell isn’t a winning argument to get the majority of people (drivers) on your side.
Click to expand...

I think the audience is people who appreciate facts
 
Kinopio said:
A congestion toll is not "unfair" to people who choose to commute by car. What is unfair is the billions drivers have taken out of the pockets of non drivers. What is unfair are the pedestrians run down in crosswalks by drivers. What is unfair are suburbanites driving into Boston and spewing toxic exhaust that shortens the lifespans of Bostonians. What is unfair is all the valuable property and money Boston gives to drivers who don't even live in Boston. Drivers have gotten enough welfare. Time for them to start paying for the damage they cause and the resources they hog.
Click to expand...

So....you're not going to open with this, are you? :D :D :D

jass said:
I think the audience is people who appreciate facts
Click to expand...

Or loons. ;)
 
We're talking at cross purposes here but don't really have to be. It can be true that driving creates externalities that we haven't priced yet, AND, obviously, that drivers are not going to be persuaded by hearing about all the ways in which they're bad. Those aren't answering the same thing. Kinopio hasn't said anything false per se; it feels important that we be clear that the ensuing pushback is a political disagreement.

It's the same way none of you would like me very much if I spent all my time pointing out that your jeans are made by children and the minerals in your phones are also mined by children. "I don't want to hear it" =/= "that's not true"
 
cadetcarl said:
We're talking at cross purposes here but don't really have to be. It can be true that driving creates externalities that we haven't priced yet, AND, obviously, that drivers are not going to be persuaded by hearing about all the ways in which they're bad. Those aren't answering the same thing. Kinopio hasn't said anything false per se; it feels important that we be clear that the ensuing pushback is a political disagreement.

It's the same way none of you would like me very much if I spent all my time pointing out that your jeans are made by children and the minerals in your phones are also mined by children. "I don't want to hear it" =/= "that's not true"
Click to expand...

Kinopio hasn't necessary said anything that's true either. That's not facts, its opinion. How are drivers costing non-drivers billions? How many people are dying of smog, which is relatively light on Boston vs other cities (been to Atlanta lately? You can actually see when you hit the cloud of smog on the highway and you're not that close to the city when you do). If the "non-drivers" are using Uber, aren't they then killing themselves? Or if they have their groceries delivered?

The last time we gave credence to extreme opinions without significant pushback the country elected Trump President! :eek: Let's not repeat the same mistakes.
 
cadetcarl said:
We're talking at cross purposes here but don't really have to be. It can be true that driving creates externalities that we haven't priced yet, AND, obviously, that drivers are not going to be persuaded by hearing about all the ways in which they're bad. Those aren't answering the same thing. Kinopio hasn't said anything false per se; it feels important that we be clear that the ensuing pushback is a political disagreement.

It's the same way none of you would like me very much if I spent all my time pointing out that your jeans are made by children and the minerals in your phones are also mined by children. "I don't want to hear it" =/= "that's not true"
Click to expand...

I mostly agree, except that the analogy breaks down a bit. Kinopio is making a moral judgement on the matter, and that is far less cut and dry than “commuters increase traffic congestion by X%.” It is not automatic that that is either fair or unfair. Making a moral judgement on the matter requires a villain (or villains)

I happen to agree that we would benefit greatly from a program that both dramatically improved our passenger rail infrastructure and implementing a more uniform tolling regime to both incentivize it and pay for it. But I’m not on board with casting the voters that will be both paying for it and voting for it as the villains. We don’t need a villain, we can make the argument that such a system would be better for everyone - including the people who will still drive in - without invoking one.

The idea that drivers, cars, and the roads they use, are bad does so much harm.
 
^Exactly the point.

I think everybody agrees less drivers would be much better for the city/state as a whole. Drivers agree with this. A whole lot of commuters wish they could take the train, but they just cant (yet) in its current state. Trust me those people sitting in endless traffic wish the train was a viable option. Thats why making the commuter rail much more efficient, extensive, and frequent should be one of the top priorities in the state. Shitting on the people who have to drive, because they have no other choice makes no sense. There are definitely people who could use the train but still choose to drive, but most people who drive have to because the commuter rail is out of the way, slow, and there are hours between trains. This CAN be fixed and should. It needs to be made as or more competitive than driving. It can be, and that needs to be a top priority. Our rail network is huge for a state this small, its just not used anywhere near its potential.

Lots of people dont even want to work in Boston, but they have to. Boston is the economic and govt center of New England. Thats where the jobs are. Its not anyones fault that ALL companies move to Boston instead of Worcester, Springfield, Providence, Manchester. So people have no choice but to go to Boston.

Taking ALL the jobs, making housing expensive as hell, and then saying keep out is absolutely ridiculous.

Theres room for everybody and nobody is more or less important than anyone else. Everybody contributes to Bostons economic output commuters, walkers, bikers, transit users.

The fact that Boston has been made the economic, govt, cultural, knowledge, sports, science, entertainment... capital of ALL new england means that not only is everybody entitled to come here, but they HAVE to come here for these things. We just need to focus on the rail network that we already have and get it up to 21st century standards so we can get drivers off the road. THEN, as I said before, if people still choose to drive when they have another option, they should be tolled during peak hours.

I like to operate in reality and reality is that people from outside of Boston will continue to commute, because Boston has been made into the capital of NE so people have no choice but to have to go there. So that being the case if we want less drivers we need to improve the commuter rail or else your unfairly tolling people that youve given no viable alternative to. If your going to force people to have to go somewhere, you cant then toll them for going there unless they have options.
 
Last edited:
stick n move said:
^Exactly the point.

I think everybody agrees less drivers would be much better for the city/state as a whole. Drivers agree with this. A whole lot of commuters wish they could take the train, but they just cant (yet). Trust me those people sitting in endless traffic wish the train was a viable option. Thats why making the commuter rail much more efficient, extensive, and frequent should be one of the top priorities in the state. Shitting on the people who have to drive, because they have no other choice makes no sense. There are definitely people who could use the train but still choose to drive, but most people who drive have to because the commuter rail is out of the way, slow, and there are hours between trains. This CAN be fixed and should. It needs to be made as or more competitive than driving. It can be, and that needs to be a top priority. Our rail network is huge for a state this small, its just not used anywhere near its potential.

Also, looots of people dont even want to work in Boston, but they have to. Boston is the economic and govt center of New England. Thats where the jobs are. Its not anyones fault that all the companies move to Boston instead of Worcester, Springfield, Providence, Manchester. So people have no choice but to go to Boston.

Taking ALL the jobs, making housing expensive as hell, then saying keep out is absolutely ridiculous.

Theres room for everybody and nobody is more or less important than anyone else. Everybody contributes to Bostons economic output commuters, walkers, bikers, transit users. The fact that Boston has been made the economic, govt, cultural, knowledge, sports, science... center of new england means that not only is everybody is entitled to go there, but they have to for these things. We just need to focus on the rail network that we already have and get it up to 21st century standards so we can get drivers off the road. THEN, as I said before, if people still choose to drive when they have another option, they should be tolled during peak hours.

I like to operate in reality and reality is that people from outside of Boston will continue to commute, because Boston has been made into the capital of NE so people have no choice but to have to go there. So that being the case if we want less drivers we need to improve the commuter rail or else your unfairly tolling people that youve given no viable alternative to. If your going to force people to have to go somewhere, you cant then toll them for going there unless they have options.
Click to expand...

Stick, I get where you are going, but even where it currently sits the Commuter Rail isn't as bad as you state. Most of the time it is faster than driving into the city at rush hour, and the schedules at rush hour tend to have trains every half hour or so (depending on the line of course). For office workers (people who go to work and leave work during rush hour) the commuter rail is pretty convenient.

Could it be improved, yes. But I still think it is a viable option for anyone who works in the Back Bay, Downtown, or even the Seaport (not a bad walk from South Station) and commutes during rush hour.

Of course one of the biggest problems is the location of North Station, it isn't ideal compared to the lines that hit Back Bay and South Station. Getting to the job growth in the Seaport is hard. However some companies have started paying for a ferry boat, the MBTA should take that over and offer it to everyone at a frequent schedule (every 10 mins would be best).

Of course NSRL is best, but that's another discussion.

And honestly, more so than the schedule, I think the cost is a bigger impediment to commuter rail use than anything. It costs 300+ a month from many zones to Boston.
 
It only is when you look at it from a one way commute, from the suburbs to Boston, during 9-5 hours, for someone that lives on the correct line for the correct station, that it is a viable system. If you fall into that group great, but for the ever increasing amount of people who dont, its not.

Once you take into account reverse commutes, commutes from one suburb to another, and outside 9-5 times it crumbles. The reality of modern day 21st century America is that lots of people do not fit that model anymore and thats why it doesnt hold up and why traffic is so bad. The numbers dont lie, traffic has been getting worse every year and we now have the most time stuck in traffic out of every large city. This is directly due to the changing ways that jobs work in the 21st century and the inability of our network to suit it.

Then add to the fact that its not even up to par with the old school model of 9-5 commuting from the suburbs to the city, because you cant even take it downtown, to the opposite station, or through town. North side commuters with NSRL could go right to downtown, South Station, back bay, Fenway, Boston landing, soon to be Allston. They dont even have that, its not even up to standards with the old model, because the NSRL hasnt even been done. With the NSRL someone can not only commute from Natick to downtown, but also from Natick to GE aviation in Lynn, someone in Chelsea can commute to Quincy, or even the reverse commute that people do from Boston to Waltham is a mess because of the single track. Its not anywhere close to being a viable commuter rail system in the 21st century and even as 20th century its not even up to that standard without NSRL.
 
Last edited:
I explained it above. The fact that we have the worst congestion in the country with one of the most extensive commuter rail networks IS proof enough that its not working up to its potential at all.

Not only has NSRL never been done, but the 9-5 commute from the suburbs to the city and back at the end of the day model doesnt match the 21st century commute.


fattony said:
I'm not sure what your definition of "viable" is, but 123,000 people per day find it "viable."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_commuter_rail_systems_by_ridership
Click to expand...

What those numbers tell me is that 123,000 people that live in the suburbs have a train that runs on the time they need, to a station they need.

What having the worst congestion in the entire country tells me is that a HELL OF A LOT more people could be taking the commuter rail who arent. Thats who fixing it targets, not those already using it.
 
Last edited:
I would like to see the city and the state apply a hefty daily congestion tax to limit the amount of driving throughout the state.

The only issue I have with the congestion tax is you need to actually upgrade the T-System at some point to accommodate the groups that will switch from auto to MBTA .
 
TheMagicMan said:
The only issue I have with the congestion tax is you need to actually upgrade the T-System at some point to accommodate the groups that will switch from auto to MBTA .
Click to expand...

Yes...

Its not even an issue though.

It just needs to be upgrade (electrify, raised platforms, increased freq, dbl track where needed, NSRL, etc) the MBTA, then do a congestion toll. With all of the upgrades needed to the commuter rail, done, you can toll 90, 93, inter-state commuters, etc because they have a proper alternative.
 
stick n move said:
What those numbers tell me is that 123,000 people that live in the suburbs have a train that runs on the time they need, to a station they need.

What having the worst congestion in the entire country tells me is that a HELL OF A LOT more people could be taking the commuter rail who arent. Thats who fixing it targets, not those already using it.
Click to expand...

Although, for many of those 123k people the commuter rail does not run directly to a station they need. They may have to transfer to a bus or to another train. Tons of people going to the Back Bay for example transfer to the Orange or Green Line at North Station. Go to the pedestrian tunnel at North Station and you'll see how common this is. Empty Green Line trains often are packed when they move out of North Station at rush hour.

There's also people who take buses from North Station to Kendall, or ferries to the Seaport (though that's new).
 
When we talk about congestion pricing, it should apply to Downtown, Back Bay, etc where transportation is good. It shouldn't apply to suburb to suburb commutes.
 
stick n move said:
Yes...

Its not even an issue though.

It just needs to be upgrade (electrify, raised platforms, increased freq, dbl track where needed, NSRL, etc) the MBTA, then do a congestion toll. With all of the upgrades needed to the commuter rail, done, you can toll 90, 93, inter-state commuters, etc because they have a proper alternative.
Click to expand...

The supposed best practice is to float bonds for the transit upgrades, get most of the upgrades in place (some can still be in process, but clear progress needs to done) then implement the congestion toll to pay back the bonds.
 
Exactly. Not only can it happen, but theres literally no choice. Theyre currently in the process of the rail vision study right now.
https://www.mbta.com/projects/rail-vision

I fully expect NSRL, high level platforms, and electrification to get moving fwd after this concludes. Unless we want the metro to grind to a halt and stagnate, it has to happen and I expect its going to.

Bostons projected population in 2050 is 800,000 people. 2030 is projected at 724,000 people. Its 2020 next year. NSRL will take 10 years. Thats just Boston... not including Cambridge, Somerville, Brookline, Chelsea, Quincy, just Boston. If we want to be able to keep moving forward we have no choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top