RE: [carfree_cities] urban mobility study
There are ways transit subsidies can be directed at non-motorized modes.
Check out this link:
And do a FIND for the word "hill"- it's part of the company name that
expanded transit subsidies to be a "non-drive alone" subsidy. The results
are pretty impressive- a 17% bike/walk mode split!
Also, remember- every transit trip begins and ends with walking.
Improvements to transit often extend the ability of citizens to walk, just
as improving pedestrian conditions extends the usefulness of transit.
Transit and walking have a strong, symbiotic relationship. If you take a
look at my website, you'll see that one of the crucial selections is
pedestrian environment. We did not have a single firm respond that rated
their pedestrian environment as the lowest grade.
Anyway- parking cash-out (what was done at CH2M Hill in the example above)
can level the playing field between transit riders and non-motorized modes.
You need good parking management though to ensure that the system is not
From: mtneuman@... [mailto:mtneuman@...]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] urban mobility study
Offering free transit passes is seldom enough to get a substantial number of
people to leave their cars behind and take the bus to make a difference on
the road. I don't mean to comment negatively on it, but that seems to be
the case at the UW-Madison here, where a bus pass is included as part of the
Transit ticket giveaways are also unfair to those of us who choose
alternative non-polluting modes of transportation, such as bicycling,
[But your point is well taken -- thanks!]
"If you live within walking or bicycling distance of work, you can reduce
the global warming impact of your commute to zero." Denis Hayes,
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 07:14:37 -0400 "Patrick McDonough"
> TDM impacts are notoriously difficult to quantify. Much of TDM is________________________________________________________________
> behaviorally based and requires accurate reporting of people's
> individual behaviors. Tracking transit trips, which at least have
> ticket sales,
> monthly sales, and fareboxes, is somewhat easier. I recently
> completed my
> Master's Thesis on the effects and nature of employer-based transit
> programs. I built a website as a tool for employers to help
> demonstrate the
> quantitative and qualitative impacts. If any of you would like to
> transit subsidies to employers in your area, this may be a helpful
> Check it out: http://www.path.berkeley.edu/itsdecision/tdmtool/
> Patrick McDonough
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mtneuman@... [mailto:mtneuman@...]
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 1:02 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] urban mobility study
> They should have measured the effect of Transportation Demand
> congestion remedies like mine. Pay people not to drive so much.
> That would
> encourage them to use the other less polluting transportation
> options, and
> eventually move closer to where they like to spend the majority of
> If they did that, they wouldn't have to spend the $350 billion on
> capacity expansion. And think of the reduction in motor fuel
> especially from all those car sitting idle in traffic!
> Mike Neuman http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ClimateArchive/message/229
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web
up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up
To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Good stuff Pat. But it's mainly employee focused. That's fine, but it's
not enough traffic reduction.
My proposal would be available to even people who don't have a job. In
that sense, it would be good for the poor. Give them some extra money.
Better than nothing.
But mostly it would be aimed at commuters who come from outside the city.
Those are the folks who are ruining the cities with all the extra
driving and pollution, and who contribute the most greenhouse gases that
are known now to be causing the warming. It is much more radical. It
would pay $2,800 for an individual to not drive at all. The money would
also come from raising fuel taxes by $.50 a gallon.
When someone question the sanity of it, just ask them if they would
preferred global warming to go out of control. Then ask them who's
sensible and who isn't.
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 20:08:08 -0400 "Patrick McDonough"
> There are ways transit subsidies can be directed at non-motorized
> Check out this link:
> And do a FIND for the word "hill"- it's part of the company name
> expanded transit subsidies to be a "non-drive alone" subsidy. T
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!