In the 11 years that I’ve lived here in Portland, it has been very disheartening to see the continual rise in single-passenger-only cars clogging our roads. Yes Portland is well known and famous for being one of the nation’s top bicycling cities, and our public transportation network is robust – yet the hegemony of the motor vehicle continues to rule.
When gas prices were pushing $4.00 there was a discernible drop in car traffic as people moved to traveling by bus, bike or light rail. As soon as prices slid back down they took to their cars again.
The Shenzhen Hashi Future Parking Equipment Co., Ltd who have proposed the Straddling Bus [pictured above] a vehicle powered by electricity and solar energy, say it would reduce traffic jams by 20-30%. Yet I can’t help but feel that just as when cities and states build new highways to ease congestion, traffic actually increases, traffic will also increase in cities that build a Straddling Bus system. There’s actually a term for it – induced traffic.
The answer is higher gas prices on cars via increased taxes, [BTW, not on trucks and other service vehicles] and a continued effort to pedestrianize downtown Portland by banning the car in certain parts of the city, while also increasing and encouraging bike use. The city could also follow London’s lead by introducing a Congestion Charge for drivers who insist on commuting downtown by car.
Six months after the Congestion Charge was introduced in London in 2003 a report found “.. that the average number of cars and delivery vehicles entering the central zone was 60,000 fewer than the previous year. Around 50–60% of this reduction was attributed to transfers to public transport, 20–30% to journeys avoiding the zone, 15-25% switching to car share, and the remainder to reduced number of journeys, more traveling outside the hours of operation, and increased use of motorbikes and bicycles.”
That may sound extreme, but if public safety and clean air is paramount we need to start paying more attention to studies that show how car’s drivers actually “consider themselves” when in the act of driving. For instance one study found that drivers ignore 70% of all traffic signs.
Psychologists have long revealed the senselessness of such exaggerated regulation. About 70 percent of traffic signs are ignored by drivers. What’s more, the glut of prohibitions is tantamount to treating the driver like a child and it also foments resentment. He may stop in front of the crosswalk, but that only makes him feel justified in preventing pedestrians from crossing the street on every other occasion. Every traffic light baits him with the promise of making it over the crossing while the light is still yellow. [Article]
The town of Makkinga in Holland reduced traffic and increased the safety of pedestrians and cyclists by doing away with all traffic signs ten years ago. It has been a huge success and has been taken up by other European cities.
So, to coin a phrase our city planners need to Think Different.
Great ideas all. I would also like to see some sort of benefit/encouragement for those who willingly do not own a car.
Portland could be far cleaner as well, if they’d adopt stricter emission standards like California. It’s kind of pitiful that we trail them in this. We (both OR and WA) should have the strictest standards to keep our cities clean.
August 3rd, 2010 at 12:48 pmHave to disagree with you on this one. One of the main problems with comparing Portland with European cities (as EVERYONE here seems to enjoy without giving thought to topography) is that yes, it works in Holland but have you been there? Transportation is much simpler because the only natural barriers are rivers, which bridges pretty much take care of. The traffic on the west side is terrible largely because there are only a few ways for commuters to come into downtown from other areas, thus you get bottlenecks. The west hills make this pretty much an unsolvable problem without vast amounts of money to figure out something else. Same goes for the huge amount of commuters on the eastside coming from washington.
Take away traffic signals here and things will not get better. I totally love the idea and would support giving it a try but do you really think half the drivers you encounter wouldn’t completely screw this up? People can’t even figure out the new bus lanes downtown or how bike lanes work. The too timid ones would freak out about who’s turn it is and the over aggressive ones would piss off a lot of people, and possibly worse, hurt someone.
I’m fortunate enough to live on the line for the 20 bus which makes commuting into downtown a breeze, about 20-30 min with traffic. However, you live outside of zone 2 on trimet, things get incredibly difficult. Not from a lack of stops, but ask people out in beaverton and hillboro how long it takes to get anywhere on trimet, especially into downtown. Granted this is mostly for people who live off the main lines, but a LOT of people do live off the main lines. Is anyone going to provide them with an a reason to double their commute time besides not having to pay a car fee? Or that they get to spend a lot of time walking in the rain?
I used to live in Lake Oswego and paid the cost to commute and park downtown because using Trimet doubled my commute time. My time is more valuable than doing nothing on a bus for an extra hour of my day (sorry, can’t afford a laptop). What about parents that need to drive for family reasons? You JUST tweeted a link about the middle class struggling to survive in America, ideas like this completely target that same middle class. You know, the ones who commute because they already cant afford to live in the city?
Don’t get me wrong, after using trimet almost exclusively for the last year I’ve really enjoyed the ease it provides in commuting but I don’t think adding to the already stupidly high cost of commuting is a solution. This will continue to be a problem in any growing society. Europe’s population growth is now stagnant which makes organizing what’s there much easier while our population keeps growing. Which is why I don’t buy the ‘it works well there’ scenario in most cases.
So how about a huge tax on people who move here to help subsidize the cost of their new needs? Most people don’t seem to remember one of our greatest mayors, Tom McCall knew this was a problem and went as far as to tell people to come here to visit but “for heaven’s sake, don’t come here to live”. Of course Portland’s very vocal population would hate that since SO many people move here from other places now. Which is fine, but it seems to me that the people who usually complain loudest about transportation and environmental issues are the ones who have moved here from other cities and also happen to live within the easy to navigate downtown area and just ‘don’t like all those people from suburbia’ (that’s my experience, which I’ve yet to find out much differently). Spend much time with people who live outside Portland and a lot of them will tell you about how much they hate Portland politics for this precise reason. A gas tax would impact the whole state while this is a Portland specific problem. There’s no reason that someone in Eastern Oregon should have to pay more because we can’t get our shit together. As an Oregon native who’s lived here my whole life that makes more sense to me, you know, taxing the people moving here, causing the population problem rather than the people living here just trying to get by.
Remember, this issue isn’t about the people who live downtown who don’t like the traffic, it’s about the people who need to commute to live their lives and support their families. If you’ve got a solution that doesn’t penalize the middle class for working far from where they live, I’m in full support.
I, like most people, don’t have a solid solution to the traffic problem that makes everyone happy so I will agree with the last bit of your post. City planners do need to think different. Fully prepared to be skewered by angry PDXers on this one, because that’s what happens nowadays when you oppose any traffic ‘solution’ so let’s hear it ;)
August 3rd, 2010 at 1:36 pmOne question that may or may not have an answer: does PDX have the infrastructure to handle a glut of people transitioning from cars to bikes? Most folks would probably shift to busses if they gave up their cars (we don’t all live within easy biking distance from our jobs), so this is more of a hypothetical thing than an actual concern.
E.
August 3rd, 2010 at 2:09 pmRyan, that’s a post of it’s own! I think I’m simply looking for a willingness to start thinking differently when it comes to PDX and transportation. I agree the topography here is different to cities in other countries but that’s merely a challenge to fix rather than a barrier to do something about our traffic problems. Doing nothing is not an alternative.. Otherwise thanks for your comment but you have brought up so many points that I can’t cover them all. One thing, I believe that cities impose gas taxes on top of State taxes, so it could be PDX specific
August 3rd, 2010 at 2:23 pmHaha, yeah my bad, got carried away there, I just love debating about Portland politics. And if gas taxes are city specific then I’m ok with that. I also second Erik’s question. I know that on my daily commute the 20 is usually standing room only or completely full, and just try catching the max at Pioneer Square at rush hour, they’re at complete capacity during the summer. Trimet is going to have to figure out a way to increase its capacity for sure. You’re right, doing nothing is not an alternative, but it also doesn’t cost anything. I’d rather put money towards things like schools and wait for the right solution than throw money at ideas simply for the sake of doing something. Maybe we can hire some of those Dutch guys to come over and help us get going :)
August 3rd, 2010 at 2:40 pmPortland is home to some of the WORST drivers in the world. I only drive because I’m terrified to share the road on a bicycle with these idiots and I grew sick of being harassed daily on the Yellow line down interstate into the city where I’d then walk to my office. It’s best for me, a Chicago raised driver (you wanna talk traffic?), to put 4 or 5 thousand pounds of steel between myself and the stoned knuckleheads who (YES I BELIEVE IT) ignore 70 percent of traffic signs. Passive agressive doesn’t work in a car and neither does smoking tons of grass and driving 10 miles below the speed limit or stopping at the end of the entrance ramp to the highway. I’m happy to support any effort to reduce the number of cars on the road. I’ll still be driving though.
August 3rd, 2010 at 2:48 pmSo I’m one of those diehard drivers that thought he would NEVER commute (albeit one that was always polite to cyclists). I had some issues with my truck one day, decided to ride the WES and MAX into work, and I’ve been a dedicated Tri Met rider since.
I think there is a lot of room for voluntary traffic reduction, largely through word of mouth and education. I think when people decide on their own to do something, rather than be coerced by government regulations or forced (and unfair) economic penalties, the decision has some longevity to it. Plus these converts become enthusiastic advocates for real, long-term change.
I heard the usual, tired arguments, mostly from people who lived near to a MAX line or close enough in to bike, that I was horrible for driving in. I had several people tell me that I was irresponsible for not moving closer into the city. Of course, those arguments didn’t carry any weight with me. I had my reasons for living in Tualatin, largely because that is what we could afford, was an excellent place to raise a family, and had great schools. It was also central to where I and my wife worked.
What DID make a difference was the fact I fill my truck up every three months (instead of every three weeks), I am SO much less stressed, I utilize the time to read (“paper” books are fine, no iPad required) and catch up on email and twitter. I have found I organize my days better and am much more productive. I have been spreading the word and new commuters are coming onboard daily. Sure, it’s a slow process, but it’s one that sticks.
August 3rd, 2010 at 4:13 pmJust for the record, Tom McCall was the governor of Oregon, not the mayor of Portland. I’d disagree that West Side traffic is mostly a phenomenon caused by car trips downtown. Most West Side traffic stays on the West Side.
Mostly, I agree with Dave. I don’t think we’ll come up with technological solutions to traffic congestion. They’ll have to be cultural solutions, as Del suggests, that are then translated into policy solutions. And the easiest policy solution is to raise gas taxes dramatically, though economic fairness issues make that difficult to institute, as Shroeder suggests.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:56 amThe last week I have been walking cycling taking the Bus, the Max and I am quite amazed how easy it is to get around Portland. It’s nice to watch the parking lots on the freeway, thinking I used to be one of them. Of course I was forced to be in this situation, so called reckless driving late at night. What I think is the mindset of the people in general the holy car is to be worshipped as the vehicle of choise. Portland has suppled one of the best transit systems in the States, pity it does not run 24 hours. But it nearly does. I can get to work takes an extra 20 minutes do what, I can doddle om me IPad. But the difference is when I want to get down town I get there faster, and I do not have to pay to park. Ny the way I think it’s great that a member of Shriekback lives in Portland one of my most favorite bands ever, I am an ex pat to. Gunning for the Budha
August 5th, 2010 at 12:21 amHi Dave
February 17th, 2011 at 12:49 pmDrop me an email when you have time.
Regards
Bryan Hudson (High Mead)