No Light Rail in Vancouver!
Light rail costs too much, does too little
The Anti-Car Movement in Britain
British auto drivers pay something like $4 in auto-related taxes for every dollar
that the government spends on highways. The surplus goes for transit, intercity rail,
and other government operations.
Meanwhile, the government is doing much to discourage auto driving, including installing
speed humps, red-light cameras, and the famous cordon charge for entering inner London.
All of this rankles Malcolm Heymer, a civil engineer and member of the Association
of British Drivers. Heymer gave a presentation (10MB) at the San Jose Preserving
the American Dream conference last weekend. You can also download the text of his
presentation, which is only 248-kilobytes.
The so-called congestion fee for driving into inner London, says Heymer, is not really
a congestion fee because it does not discriminate between people who drive at congested
times or on congested streets from those who do not. He points to data showing that
the cordon charge initially reduced traffic in London, but in just five years traffic
returned to pre-charge levels.
While many Americans welcome true congestion pricing of roads as a way of reducing
congestion, Heymer is more skeptical: since his government already takes far more
money from auto drivers than its spends on roads, he would rather not give the government
more money to waste on other activities.
The cameras also bother Heymer. While red-light cameras sound good, he notes that
they can result in more accidents, not less, as people get rear-ended after slamming
on their brakes to avoid getting caught crossing an intersection as the light turns
red. Heymer observes that Britain has more than 4 million closed-circuit cameras
watching everyone’s every move (including, ironically, several aimed at George Orwell’s
former home), and many of these are programmed to recognize and record automobile
license plate numbers.
Planners justify speed humps and other traffic-calming devices on safety grounds.
But Heymer points out that auto safety had been increasing dramatically long before
anyone began installing speed humps. Total traffic fatalities in Britain fell by
more than 50 percent between 1966 and 1993. Since then — the time period in which
various traffic calming measures have been installed — the fatality rate has flattened
out, suggesting that traffic calming has done little to improve safety.
Of course, much of what Heymer says about Britain applies to the U.S. too. American
auto drivers need to make sure that any fees they pay, including existing gas taxes
and new congestion tolls, are not simply diverted to expensive rail projects or other
pork-barrel programs. Red-light cameras and traffic calming should be carefully evaluated
and used only if they truly increase safety, not simply as a social engineering measure
to discourage driving or (in the case of cameras) increasing municipal revenues.
Note: In the aftermath of the conference, the Antiplanner has fallen a bit behind
in postings. I hope to catch up by next week and resume having a fresh new post every
weekday morning.
Reprinted from The Antiplanner
