4 ms·

I live in NYC, and lived in SF. NYC can have a congestion fee because car travel is essentially a luxury. All train lines within the affected area of the city r

I live in NYC, and lived in SF. NYC can have a congestion fee because car travel is essentially a luxury. All train lines within the affected area of the city run every 15 minutes or so overnight, and less than 10 during the day. The bus service is also extremely extensive. SF has nothing comparable. There are ~4 subway stops in downtown SF, vs 151 in manhattan (probably around 120-130 in the affected area). SF needs to right with density and transit to even begin considering something like this.

areyousure 5y ago
Simply out of curiosity, I counted 91 stations in Manhattan in the proposed congestion pricing area below 60th street. (More precisely, I counted 60 stations outside the area.) More relevantly, congestion pricing has been proposed since (at least) 2007, and there are actually currently 0 stations in Manhattan in the congestion pricing area ... because there is no congestion pricing.
Ericson2314 5y ago
Well first of all, there are busses. Congestion pricing should make the buses run absolutely better, and even more relatively better compared to cars. Maybe have some extra busses that turn around at the congestion zone border too for extra frequency. In the medium term, SF should be extending it's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadtbahn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadtbahn. The central subways is behind schedule as usual for bay area infra. They should dig the Geary subway cut and cover. Every time public transit improves, crank up the congestion pricing and expand the area it covers.