Rethinking the Taylor propositions

-
In Rethinking Traffic Congestion, Brian D. Taylor makes an interesting point that traffic congestion could be seen as a sign of success rather than a failure. On the first page Brian gets my full attention, because of this-
 “Conventional wisdom holds that traffic congestion exacts a terrible social and economic toll on society; expanding transportation capacity only makes things worse; and redesigning cities and expanding alternative transportation modes offer the best long-term means for reducing traffic congestion. I want to offer ten propositions that challenge these ideas and suggest how we might begin to think differently about traffic congestion. “
I’m curious as to why he would have the opposite perspective that I, and many others have about traffic congestion.  
Taylor’s fourth proposition suggests that the hilarious analogy of buying a bigger belt to address weight gain doesn’t equate to the situation of adding more lanes to address traffic congestion. I have never heard this analogy, but to me it works perfectly, despite Taylor’s opinion. He points out the benefit of social interaction and economic transactions that driving provides. He argues that seeing driving as a bad habit is ignoring these benefits. He doesn’t consider that these benefits aren’t exclusively available to drivers. Transit riders and cyclists can also enjoy these benefits of travel, and in some cases, like heavily congested areas where parking is unavailable, alternative modes of travel can bring more of these particular benefits.  
Proposition eight suggests that improving alternative modes of transportation would be less effective than decreasing the utility of driving. I would say that the two are intertwined because by making transit faster or cheaper, that would automatically make driving more costly and slower in relation. When transit is as fast as driving, the utility of driving is decreased in relation to transit. If driving a mile is cheaper than bussing a mile, lower the fare for the bus to a penny, and driving a mile becomes expensive. Whether you aim to make driving expensive or transit cheap, either change directly effects the other in relation. 
Proposition ten states that “sprawl” can reduce congestion unless it is done in a way that clumps employment and commercial space in congested corridors. But this is not what he is advocating. Taylor points out that new technology and adroit capacity expansions are the key to short term solutions, and pricing is probably the best long term solution.  This makes sense to me, but it brings me to question, why would we want to convenience travelers with faster travel times by reducing congestion, but then inconvenience them by charging more money to drive? I think the answer to reducing congestion is getting cars off the roads, not just the cars who cannot afford higher pricing to reduce congestion, but any car with one occupant. This is the solution with the most convenience vs. inconvenience. 
While pricing is a good idea, I think that we should have other, more aggressive methods to reduce congestion as well. A ban on single occupancy cars seems very logical to me, but I imagine most people would not be on board with that idea. Taylor makes good points, and I don't mean to give the impression that I disagree with his points, but I just thought that some extra consideration would be helpful. 
Wells Wait 
10/23/2018
Edited by Anthony Tortorici
reference
Taylor, Brian D. "Rethinking Traffic Congestion" Access 21: p. 8-16. Fall 2002

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The worst congestion in the world

-
Image
While I was going to school at UCLA, the car-culture was very apparent to me. The city also felt incredibly spread out, and it would sometimes take me more than an hour by bus to get downtown. I did not own a car the entire time I lived in LA, and I felt very limited. I quickly became bored with Westwood, the neighborhood that UCLA is in, and the only neighborhood that was within walking distance of my apartment and I had to rely on my friends to drive me to the beach or other neighborhoods. I was surprised when I read in Sorenson’s article, “Moving Los Angeles”, that despite Los Angeles reputation for sprawl, it is actually quite dense when compared to the nation’s 14 largest metropolitan areas. In class, we talked about how Los Angeles is the only major city that has become denser since the 1960s. Los Angeles is not as dense as New York City, but it is quite dense at a regional scale. The suburbs are denser on average than suburbs in other cities. Reflecting on this more, I realized...
Read more

Uh oh. Does Vision Zero Reinforce White Supremacy in the United States?

-
Many US cities, including Portland, have adopted Vision Zero strategies as a response to pedestrian and bicyclist traffic safety needs. Vision Zero, a traffic safety approach which originated in Sweden, is a program that aims to ultimately reduce the number of traffic-related-deaths to zero (Vision Zero Network 2018). The program’s approach is multifaceted, using public education, street design, legislation and law enforcement to reach its desired outcomes (Elevbakk 2007, Trujillo 2014). Sounds like a win-win, right? Ah, but let’s not forget our mantra of equity: “who gets what when and why?”. There is often more to the policy than we see at first glance. Indeed, Vision Zero does have its critics. Critiques of Vision Zero focus on concerns related to equity – including issues related to location of infrastructural improvements, and racially biased enforcement of traffic related laws (Bliss 2016). In cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, mobility justice groups have raised c...
Read more

The age of automation

-
Image
Cities across the nation, including Phoenix, Boston, and San Francisco, have already begun allowing transportation network companies (TNCs), such as Uber and Lyft, to test out new autonomous vehicle (AV) technology. However, after the March 18 Uber crash, which resulted in the death of a woman, many cities put a halt to the testing. Despite this incident, cities have not terminated their plans to introduce self-driving vehicles onto their streets. Some cities, including Boston, MA, are gradually introducing AVs, starting with small driverless zones. Philadelphia, PA, has established a rigorous testing process. AVs must meet important standards, such as emergency braking and basic driving capabilities before the vehicles are released to the streets (Krauss, 2018) . Many cities are still excited about the potential benefits of AVs. The Boston municipal government argues that the introduction of AVs could lead to improved accessibility for people living with the aging population and ...
Read more