The left-hand shoulders of I-35W between Burnsville and downtown Minneapolis will turn into toll lanes, thanks to $133 million from U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) privateers who’ve given national transportation policy a hard turn to the right. The Washington Post reports that Minneapolis is among five cities that beat out 21 others — along with hundreds of municipalities that used to get a share of such funding – to win a nearly $1 billion sweepstakes for cities willing to road-test the conservative concept of “congestion pricing.” That’s transportation-planning jargon for tolls that rise and fall according to traffic levels.
“Political appointees have spent the latter part of President Bush’s two terms laboring behind the scenes to shrink the federal role in road-building and public transportation,” the Post said. “They have also sought to turn highways into commodities that can be sold or leased to private firms and used by motorists for a price.” Drivers will find left lanes “dynamically priced” – meaning they’re more like Coke’s “smart” vending machines (the ones that raised prices on hot days) than the flat fees London and (soon) New York City charge cars for entering the city.
Continued: Click on Read More
The project is akin to the conversion of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes on Highway 394, for which Toll Roads News issued the plea, “Wanted: some real congestion, California style,” on behalf of planners who expected much more revenue from toll lanes that often go begging. State matching funds are pending at the Legislature, where lawmakers of either party can’t go wrong accepting major pork for more driving lanes. As a DOT told the Post, “It’s almost sort of un-American that we should be forced to sit and be stuck in traffic.”













13 Comments »
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
DFL had a hand in this The toll lane project was in the transportation bill that Pawlenty vetoed and the Legislature overrode.
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 5:25 pm
Bob’s right — and there’s more To get the support of the Minnesota Trucking Association the DFL wrote a prohibition on toll lanes into the transportation bill. The catch is the prohibition, according to Rep. Bernie Leider in a Civic Caucus interview, applies only to existing lanes, not new lanes. Lieder favors making the new Stillwater bridge a toll bridge.
That said, why is rasing the gas tax under the guise of a user fee ok, but charging an actual user fee is not? I’m a little confused by that logic.
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 5:46 pm
We slice the ideology different out here Congestion pricing on public highways seems to take on different ideological hues in different places. The Post story makes it clear that in DC, it’s part of a right wing approach. Here, as Bob says, it’s bipartisan. After this post went up I talked to Lee Munnich from the Humphrey Institute, whose report on the MNPASS system on 394 you can download from the Toll Roads trade journal website that’s linked above. He says in Europe it’s a left wing thing. But maybe one reason everyone’s happy with it here is we got the money, which is going to pay for a lot of transit projects too. If we’d lost out, the Bush approach of tying sweepstakes transit/highway funding to toll experiments might not seem so great.
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 5:59 pm
Change the headline, then “Bush’s Transportation privateers will throw funding at toll lanes for 35W” is far from an accurate assessment of what happened in HF 2800. This request came from Minnesota first and the Federal DOT is responding.
This originated in the DFL.
Comment posted March 19, 2008 @ 8:26 am
The future of 35W http://www.youtube.c...
Comment posted March 19, 2008 @ 10:09 am
In other words … Your opinion is not based on whether congestion pricing and toll roads are good or bad ideas, but rather on who supports or opposes them. The fact that we have transit money, regardless of how one feels about transit, is irrelvant to the benefit or boodoggle quality of “congestion pricing” and toll roads.
Is there a problem you are trying to address, or are you merely dissing the bad guys?
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 10:52 am
DFL had a hand in this The toll lane project was in the transportation bill that Pawlenty vetoed and the Legislature overrode.
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
Bob's right — and there's more To get the support of the Minnesota Trucking Association the DFL wrote a prohibition on toll lanes into the transportation bill. The catch is the prohibition, according to Rep. Bernie Leider in a Civic Caucus interview, applies only to existing lanes, not new lanes. Lieder favors making the new Stillwater bridge a toll bridge.
That said, why is rasing the gas tax under the guise of a user fee ok, but charging an actual user fee is not? I'm a little confused by that logic.
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 12:46 pm
We slice the ideology different out here Congestion pricing on public highways seems to take on different ideological hues in different places. The Post story makes it clear that in DC, it's part of a right wing approach. Here, as Bob says, it's bipartisan. After this post went up I talked to Lee Munnich from the Humphrey Institute, whose report on the MNPASS system on 394 you can download from the Toll Roads trade journal website that's linked above. He says in Europe it's a left wing thing. But maybe one reason everyone's happy with it here is we got the money, which is going to pay for a lot of transit projects too. If we'd lost out, the Bush approach of tying sweepstakes transit/highway funding to toll experiments might not seem so great.
Comment posted March 18, 2008 @ 12:59 pm
Change the headline, then “Bush's Transportation privateers will throw funding at toll lanes for 35W” is far from an accurate assessment of what happened in HF 2800. This request came from Minnesota first and the Federal DOT is responding.
This originated in the DFL.
Comment posted March 19, 2008 @ 3:26 am
The future of 35W http://www.youtube.c...
Comment posted March 19, 2008 @ 5:09 am
In other words … Your opinion is not based on whether congestion pricing and toll roads are good or bad ideas, but rather on who supports or opposes them. The fact that we have transit money, regardless of how one feels about transit, is irrelvant to the benefit or boodoggle quality of “congestion pricing” and toll roads.
Is there a problem you are trying to address, or are you merely dissing the bad guys?
Comment posted September 13, 2008 @ 3:12 pm
SAY NO TO TOLL ROADS!!! It is well known that private industry with the technology that is used for toll roads has been lobbying for this for years. freedom of movement on roads that are payed for with all of our tax dollars should be seen as a right not a privilege reserved for the few who can afford it!
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment