General Infrastructure

So you're going with "things that are going well Obama can't take credit for, and things that are going poorly show that he's a failure"? And Shmessy's the cheerleading partisan apologist? /offtopicsosorry
 
I think some posts might need to be moved to the petty arguments thread.
 
Just came across this New York Times Article and found it rather interesting. A NYC transit advocacy group proposing congestion pricing for the CBD of Manhattan. It'd be good to see some more tolls implemented coming into Boston, particularly on I-93 north & south of town.


Screen-Shot-2015-02-18-at-8.29.50-AM.png
 
^ Get the waivers from the Feds first. States can't impose new tolls on interstate highways without federal permission.
 
The interstate bridges are already tolled. This will toll the city bridges but they still need an OK from Albany and it's never been a popular idea up there.
 
The State House might more open to the idea of tolling Boston to pay for Boston infrastructure/transit - it wouldn't impact western Mass which is their usual (and sometimes legitimate) complaint. Open-road all-electronic tolling eliminates any possible congestion from tolls, as well as physical tollbooths (which, due to the 80s accident in CT, were the main federal opposition to tolls.)
 
The EGE said:
The State House might more open to the idea of tolling Boston to pay for Boston infrastructure/transit - it wouldn't impact western Mass which is their usual (and sometimes legitimate) complaint. Open-road all-electronic tolling eliminates any possible congestion from tolls, as well as physical tollbooths (which, due to the 80s accident in CT, were the main federal opposition to tolls.)
Click to expand...

Tolls are in place, so commuters have an incentive to take the MBTA.

If the tolls were removed, the incentive is to not take the train because cars tend to be faster than trains at times.
 
There's no way this would ever pass. It would be political suicide for any Pol that supports adding more tolls on drivers.
 
I think a lot of Pike, Sumner/Callahan, and Tobin users would be THRILLED to see riders on the Expressway finally pull their weight with some tolling.
 
underground said:
I think a lot of Pike, Sumner/Callahan, and Tobin users would be THRILLED to see riders on the Expressway finally pull their weight with some tolling.
Click to expand...

If tolls are on all highways going out of the city and in the city, wouldn't it be a protectionist policy? Also, Wouldn't it just divert traffic to side roads and avenues, but allow more congestion to main streets? Also, Wouldn't people just not want to go into Boston anymore?
 
vanshnookenraggen said:
The interstate bridges are already tolled. This will toll the city bridges but they still need an OK from Albany and it's never been a popular idea up there.
Click to expand...

I was responding to the suggestion that we do this in metro-Boston.

NY's interstate tolls were all grandfathered in I believe. Albany's ability to curtal NYC's agency to raise needed revenues is maddening. NYC, more than any other American city, should have gotten the Hanseatic Free City treatment a long time ago...
 
Assuming tolls were put on 93 both north and south of the city, is there another American city where every major highway into and out of the city had a toll on it?
 
kevtron2000 said:
If tolls are on all highways going out of the city and in the city, wouldn't it be a protectionist policy? Also, Wouldn't it just divert traffic to side roads and avenues, but allow more congestion to main streets? Also, Wouldn't people just not want to go into Boston anymore?
Click to expand...

Ask New Yorkers.

mass88 said:
Assuming tolls were put on 93 both north and south of the city, is there another American city where every major highway into and out of the city had a toll on it?
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong... but see above. Pretty sure NY is tolled on all the highways (or at least all the interstate bridges).
 
kevtron2000 said:
If tolls are on all highways going out of the city and in the city, wouldn't it be a protectionist policy? Also, Wouldn't it just divert traffic to side roads and avenues, but allow more congestion to main streets? Also, Wouldn't people just not want to go into Boston anymore?
Click to expand...

You don't make the toll a million dollars. You make it $1-2, at least at first. You want to discourage frivolous trips and alter commuting patterns, not discourage all trips.

And you have to be really stupid or ideologically driven to take surface roads to avoid tolls on highways. You'll burn more money in gas sitting in traffic than the damn toll.
 
fattony said:
You don't make the toll a million dollars. You make it $1-2, at least at first. You want to discourage frivolous trips and alter commuting patterns, not discourage all trips.

And you have to be really stupid or ideologically driven to take surface roads to avoid tolls on highways. You'll burn more money in gas sitting in traffic than the damn toll.
Click to expand...

Yep. I agree. Tolls do alter traffic patterns. No Toll should charge $1000 per ride.
 
Drivers are more than free to try commuting from Plaistow to Boston via secondary roads. When they eventually come to their senses, we'll welcome them back to the newly tolled Expressway with open arms.
 
In a sane world the Big Dig cost would have been offset by tolls. It's only fair.

Toll roads fell out of favor when the Feds started paying 90 cents on the dollar for new highways. Before then tolling was the only way to get financing.

I firmly believe that 93 should be tolled at certain points. With the gas tax unchanged for a generation and the state of America's roads so poor the need for new road funding is higher than ever.

But tolling 93 won't happen. It's not politically feasible and it wouldn't do much in terms of raising money to make enough of a difference. Manhattan is an island, you need bridges and tunnels to get in and out so tolling works. In Boston there really isn't much more you can do toll wise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top