Connecticut’s Transportation Strategy Board has selected a consultant, Cambridge Systematics, to study applying congestion pricing in the state. The TSB, a division of the Office of Policy and Management which sets broad state transportation goals, has been a long-time supporter of congestion pricing and first announced it would conduct the study late last year. Gov. Rell’s ConnDOT Reform Commission also recommended that the state explore tolling when it released its report in January (see MTR‘s earlier coverage of the TSB and ConnDOT reform commission).
The study will be completed by February 15 of next year and has quite broad scope. The analysis will include the type, location, and operation of potential tolls; their impacts on traffic congestion, safety, the economy, and the environment; whether tolls would create regional equity or privacy concerns, whether congestion pricing could be applied to existing roads and bridges or only to new facilities, and whether there is a role for public/private partnerships. The consultant is also explicitly charged with studying the conversion of carpool lanes into High-Occupancy Toll lanes (which would let in carpools for free and allow single-occupant vehicles to enter by paying a toll). The underused carpool lanes on I-84 east of Hartford could be good candidates for conversion.
It will be interesting to see what the study concludes on the safety impacts of tolls. Connecticut removed its tolls in 1985 after a number of deadly collisions at toll plazas, but advancements in high-speed and cashless tolling may alleviate the safety and environmental impacts of “stop and pay” tolls.
Reacting to the news, some state legislators told the Stamford Advocate that they were supportive of tolls (or, at least, of studying tolls). Unfortunately, most said they would consider tolls only if they were offset by a lowered gas tax, another source of transportation revenue.
Congestion pricing and other tolling systems are not only an excellent idea, but a necessity. Many of our roads and bridges in Connecticut are approaching the end of their maximum useful lifetimes. We’ve been ‘riding’ on the investment that our grandparents made in our transportation infrastructure and without a major reinvestment in this infrastructure, we risk increasing exposure to very serious safety hazards.
Anyway, why should road users not be responsible for paying for what they use? Especially if a signficant number of those users are only passing through our state? The fact is that the ‘user fee’ as paid through the gas tax is no longer sufficient. We must develop a more diverse revenue stream. It is unacceptable to ask for other tax dollars to subsidize the least efficient and most polluting transportation option: single occupant driving of personal cars. Because that is ultimately what we encourage when we build and expand our ‘free’ highways. I commend the members of the General Assembly who are brave enough to be honest about our needs. It will not be a popular idea, but it is a responsible proposal that reflects real needs.
As long as there is a cash lane there always will be traffic at tolls. There’s no getting around it. And that’s bad for our air.
Maybe there will be a time when cars pollute less, or not at all, but that time is not coming soon. It’s probably never coming for trucks.
There are only a few places where I would accept tolls… First, on the HOV lanes as described above, but they’d need to be designed so that they would not impact the rest of the traffic whatsoever. Second, at the entrance to the Indian reservations, so we can get some of those gamblers to pay for using the roads. (Probably be a bad idea to require exit tolls there). And last, on the highways entering (not exiting) the state.
Otherwise, just throwing up tolls all over the highways will simply clog the roads, pollute the air, and make it that much harder to survive here. It’s already costing a fortune to drive here. Don’t make it that much worse.
Doug writes, “As long as there is a cash lane . . . ”
Soon, cash lanes will be a thing of the past, at least if the Port Authority and the MTA studies prove that it is feasible to remove them.
http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/07/mta_to_study_cashless_tolling.html
http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=1&aid=84358
Congestion rating and other tolling systems are not only an first-class idea, but a necessity. Many of our roads and spans in Connecticut are approaching the end of their maximum useful lifetimes. We’ve been ‘riding’ on the investment that our grandparents made in our transportation infrastructure and without a major reinvestment in this infrastructure, we risk increasing exposure to very sober safety lucks.
_____________________
Aady
Connecticut Treatment Centers