Captain Goddammit wrote:They want to grow the event without increasing the number of vehicles. That's idiotic.
No it's not. There is nothing that fixes a ratio of occupants per vehicle.
That means the size and weight of the vehicles will have to increase.
That will tear up the road more than a higher number of lighter vehicles.
While damage to pavement as a function of axle weight goes up by the 4th power
; 2.5 in other studies
), the major concentration of weight-related pavement damage is on vehicles in excess of 18,000 lbs per axle or so. States rarely even meter anything below that type of threshold, and the only vehicles that satisfy that will be large RVs, MVs being hauled in, heavy construction equipment, and maybe the occasional large truck transport. Perhaps those heavy vehicles are where the extra fees are coming from.
For most attendees, the added vehicle weight won't even come close to these heavy vehicle thresholds. Even if a single person increases the weight of the vehicle by 1000 lbs/person -- which is a lot -- you'd need a clown-car to make it matter. The main issue will be space. Maybe it'll mean people use a van rather than a car, or haul in a trailer with a truck. Still, that's chump change as far as weight goes, and trailers redistribute axle weight anyway. If trucks are needed, the people probably would've hauled in one anyway for the amount of supplies they need, and again, chump change
in terms of weight.
What this also means is that this scheme really is about reducing the number
of vehicles, not about a toll for some road damage as a function of weight.
That combined with the well known fact that everyone already is carpooling and using almost every vehicle to max capacity makes me doubt the real worth of this.
Then there shouldn't be much problem with the number of passes, provided that there is an easy mechanism to release passes back into the system like STEP. I'm also expecting there to be additional passes issued should "35,000" limit truly become a problem.
But what makes this all worth it? Let's look at how many fewer cars we'd have if we increase the occupant to car ratio. Assuming 65,000 attendees:
Ratio -> vehicles
1.9 -> ~34,000 (current ratio)
2.0 -> 32,500
2.1 -> ~31,000
2.2 -> ~29,500
2.5 -> 26,000
For increasing the ratio even by an average of 0.1 person, we get about 1,500 vehicles shaved off, or about a 2.3% reduction in overall traffic. It doesn't sound like much, but with larger groups having to settle on a single entrance date, I speculate that we can also expect that a large share of the reduction in traffic will occur during peak periods.
If I don't get tickets and a pass in the initial public sale, I'm done. I'm not gonna pay $800 for STEP tickets only to be turned away at the gate. Sorry BMorg but fuck that, no deal.
Well perhaps there will be some sort of checkbox that says "I need a vehicle pass available with any STEP ticket offering."
You're also highlighting some of the benefits too: the fear of being stuck with an essentially useless ticket bottoms out the last-minute jump-in-the-car-I-just-got-a-fire-sale-ticket market. Now it'll be: "got my ride reserved
with some friends and all I need is the ticket." People start planning rides in advance regardless of their ticket-holding status.