New car fees and more great ideas

[shroom]

The way the announcement reads the early buyers can buy 4 passes but there is a limit on passes. So my guess is people will horde them and then people who get a ticket late may not get a pass at all. I have to have a pass if I get to go this year. I have a 2 day drive and I need to plan, no last minute stuff for me.

Maybe it will work but I can see where it might be a crazy year like tickets were a few years back when those changed.

[unjonharley]

Its to early for ride share.. But.. I will tell you right now.. I will not pick you from along side the road.. The last time i picked a hitcher go to a fair it took three day to get the smell out.. So don't try your Rainbow hippie/raver hair ball shit on me..

ass grass or gas no one ride this WV for free..

[Koi Kichi]

If you are a vehicle towing an RV does that mean you need 1 vehicle pass for the tow vehicle only or 2 vehicle passes...one for the truck and one for the trailer? Just curious.

[gaminwench]

One pass for towing vehicles.

[Eric]

So my guess is people will horde them and then people who get a ticket late may not get a pass at all.

The hoarders are going to be idiots, throwing away the $40 they spend on extra passes (and, I'm sure, finding a way to blame BMorg for them spending the money to hoard). The very first section of the FAQ about Vehicle Passes clearly says:

There will be an initial allotment made for 35,000 Vehicle Passes.

(emphasis mine)

Now, I don't have psychic powers, nor do I have insider knowledge, but my read of that sentence is that they'll release more if it looks like the 35,000 won't cover it. I seriously doubt they want to go through the PR nightmare of 2012 again.

[BBadger]

Maybe the real benefit is that the doomsayers won't attend!

[Captain Goddammit]

Says the guy who adds what to the event?

[BBadger]

I don't wear my credentials on my sleeve or my avatar.

[Captain Goddammit]

The reason I put the boat in the avatar is because it's recognizable and a lot more people here get to meet in person.
When someone sees it they know it's me, and half the time they climb on. Then the next person who recognizes it yells and we stop, and they meet me and whoever else is aboard.
It really works!

[Eric]

The reason I put the boat in the avatar is because it's recognizable and a lot more people here get to meet in person.
When someone sees it they know it's me, and half the time they climb on.

Funny, that's how having my picture in my avatar works for me...

[Mia]

Understand that I've never been there so I'm just throwing this out there. I wonder if a "park and ride" space would help traffic? Where you could hitch a ride on public transport with trailers for your gear.

[AntiM]

A whole new can of worms is still a can of worms.

I like camping beside our vehicle, because it is handy for locking up valuables, and a less dusty space when needed for minor health chores.

[BBadger]

The reason I put the boat in the avatar is because it's recognizable and a lot more people here get to meet in person.

No prob! I was just slinging some shit back. Anyway, I wear my wax teeth on my sleeve and avatar.

When someone sees it they know it's me, and half the time they climb on. Then the next person who recognizes it yells and we stop, and they meet me and whoever else is aboard.
It really works!

If we both meet on the playa, I'll have to take you up on that!

Understand that I've never been there so I'm just throwing this out there. I wonder if a "park and ride" space would help traffic? Where you could hitch a ride on public transport with trailers for your gear.

Yeah, but where would you park? I don't think the businesses in Reno would appreciate it. Even if they did, now imagine thousands of burners trying to find their car in a parking lot, and then leaving to go home after packing their dusty shit they pulled off some trailer/train car. It's like pushing the problem downstream. Plus, you'd need security to make sure nobody breaks into these parked cars. I've been wary enough of parking trailers at the Grand Sierra in Reno; I'm not sure if I'd want a vehicle left alone somewhere for a week.

About the nicest way of getting your stuff to the playa is to have one of those shipping containers dropped off with most of the camp infrastructure, and then driving in with everything else. It helps, but doesn't fix everything.

[Captain Goddammit]

Funny, that's how having my picture in my avatar works for me...

Well you're a very recognizable person! I'm not as much but you can spot the boat from a distance. Especially at night.

[JayBobBoy]

I'm trying to find a reason to get all worked up over this...but I can't. However, as a traffic engineer, I find this conversation very intriguing. I fully understand the BORG's interest in minimizing the overall traffic impact, as we all can.

Normally, to reduce congestion, adding a fee (or toll) can be very effective on its own. However, by indicating that these VP's are available on a limited basis and selling them in advance, the BORG is trying to stimulate early awareness of the issue by adding the idea of scarcity. Even if it doesn't really exist. As Eric pointed out the first 35,000 VP's are an "initial allotment". With this method of distributing VP's, you can pretty much guarantee that there will be more VP's sold than vehicles that show up on the playa. (An excellent business plan)

Unfortunately, the idea of vehicle pass scarcity adds a whole new layer of possible issues. I am planning on buying two tickets and one vehicle pass for my wife and I. There is a great possibility that either one of us may change jobs in the next 9 months which would change everything. Would not having that extra VP make it more difficult to unload my tickets? I realize it's a remote possibility, but for $40, it seems like a worthwhile investment to have a VP to go with each ticket. I can't be the only person thinking the same way...

If they wanted an accurate vehicle count in advance, they could have easily asked ticket buyers to purchase their VP along with their ticket, with the understanding that additional VP's could be purchased if needed. The additional fee alone should be enough to discourage some from driving to the event, if not, charge more until you get the result you want. That's how traffic and toll lanes work all across the country.

This boils down to a nice psychological experiment. Adding scarcity of VP's to the equation seems totally unnecessary. I only hope that they can get the results they are hoping for without any undue hassle on the participants.

[theCryptofishist]

I have seen nothing indicating that they want an accurate count in advance...

[JayBobBoy]

They may not be looking for that data, but it would be available, accurate, and somewhat valuable...yes? It would indicate if charging $40 in advance had any effect.

[Gobkin]

I think if one will have ability to sell vehicle passes via STEP (or just transfer them to another person) it would solve a lot of problems. Unfortunately I can not find anything in regards to this.

[theCryptofishist]

There doesn't seem to be any. At least, I don't think anyone's said they've seen it as far as I remember. If they aren't, I hope they add it to a FAQ soon.

[smittydc]

Just thought I’d also point out that the $1.4 million in extra ticket revenue from these parking passes is 75% more than what is given out in art grants (~$800,000/yr). So the participants are now spending more on managing traffic than the organization does to encourage art. Barf.

[FossaFerox]

Just thought I’d also point out that the $1.4 million in extra ticket revenue from these parking passes is 75% more than what is given out in art grants (~$800,000/yr). So the participants are now spending more on managing traffic than the organization does to encourage art. Barf.

Are those art grant numbers finalized for THIS year? What if some of the added revenue does in fact go to art?

[Captain Goddammit]

What if some of the added revenue does in fact go to art?

Then they collected it on bullshit pretenses… but we already know that.

[FossaFerox]

What if some of the added revenue does in fact go to art?

Then they collected it on bullshit pretenses… but we already know that.

Did they come out and say that road maintenance had ANYTHING to do with this? I first heard that as idle speculation and it looked like people accepted it as fact and ran with it from there. Though to be fair, most of the time you guys do know things I don't...

From what I can tell, though, it really looks like they're simply trying to encourage carpooling and could use the money for anything they please.

[theCryptofishist]

What if some of the added revenue does in fact go to art?

Then they collected it on bullshit pretenses… but we already know that.

Did they come out and say that road maintenance had ANYTHING to do with this? I first heard that as idle speculation and it looked like people accepted it as fact and ran with it from there. Though to be fair, most of the time you guys do know things I don't...

From what I can tell, though, it really looks like they're simply trying to encourage carpooling and could use the money for anything they please.

Traffic is the greatest impediment to the growth and sustainability of Black Rock City. Burning Man is under pressure from the Bureau of Land Management and Nevada Department of Transportation to reduce the number of cars entering the event. Highways 447 and 34 are at max capacity during the event and we’re being asked to pay for road damage caused by participant vehicles. Road travel represents 60% of the carbon emissions related to the event.

You're right. It's completely made up.

[BBadger]

Well from the blog post they refer to being asked to pay for road damage. I doubt the actual road damage causing vehicles will go down though. There will always be heavy vehicles for infrastructure and RVs and stuff. The volume of passenger cars makes little difference.

Reducing traffic is not a bullshit pretense by any means though. Essentially it's penalizing for using resources that affect the ability for the event to grow. Perhaps those pass prices should go up, not ticket prices, in the future.

Now a bullshit pretense for me would be the carbon emissions.

[FossaFerox]

You're right. It's completely made up.

Though to be fair, most of the time you guys do know things I don't...

[Captain Goddammit]

The reason a say it's a bullshit pretense is the road damage is caused much more by the larger vehicles, and that's what they are encouraging more of.
But it is what it is… the Kool-Aid has been served.
They can make the vehicle fee $400, I'm still going to have the same two people aboard. I can't carry anyone else plus their gear unless I get a bigger truck and I'm already using a one-ton dually at max capacity. $40 is a drop in the bucket in the realm of Burning Man expenses. I can't believe anyone even gives a shit about the $40. The availability of passes is an issue perhaps, but there couldn't be many people doing this trip for less than $1000 overall, bare minimum, other than the occasional hippy freeloader sleeping in Center Camp.

[BBadger]

The reason a say it's a bullshit pretense is the road damage is caused much more by the larger vehicles, and that's what they are encouraging more of.

No, you just don't get it. The origin of the additional fee from the BLM or other agencies may be road damage -- but that is due to real heavy vehicles -- the kind that haul in infrastructure, and some of the largest RVs. The premise of the $40 vehicle pass is to reduce traffic not reduce road damage.

Your claim about road damage due to "larger vehicles" has been largely debunked too. Why do you stick to this line of thought? Everyone could switch to 16' moving trucks and it wouldn't matter. There are thresholds that must be met before it matters about this "road damage" due to "large vehicles". Passenger vehicles -- even the largest -- don't qualify. Your trailer hauling 9,000 pounds doesn't qualify.

And those RVs? Those won't increase much over baseline because of the large premium to rent them versus the vehicle-pass fee, and those who rent them usually planned to do so anyway. If they pack more people into their RVs to cover the cost, then that's a pro too.

So really, the road damage fee wouldn't decrease regardless of penalties to vehicle types. Instead, this is essentially a ticket-price increase that gets taxed at the vehicle level instead of the individual. It's a ticket-price increase to encourage a higher occupant/vehicle ratio.

[Captain Goddammit]

No you don't get it
It says right on the Burning Man page they want this to increase ridership of the Burner Express bus and use of shipping containers. Those are both the heavy vehicles over the somewhat imaginary threshold of road wear.
And if I and my usual caravan partner combine ourselves into one vehicle it will be a semi truck.

[smittydc]

With the closing of the Gypsum mine the wear and tear on these roads has to be down 80-90%. This is basically a shake down of burningman by Nevada, and the Borganizers decided it was easier to not argue this one. They can't win every fight on every issue. And maybe we'll actually get better road conditions out of this (but probably not).