3 ms·

> If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same pl

> If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same place at the end. Funny you should use that example. On toll roads you get charged in both directions, but I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Usually the argument is that you really can't go any other way so the toll in one direction covers the cost of both trips. But I actually think you're right here -- most people won't make the "return trip" so it makes sense to only charge people twice that do.

__derek__ 4y ago
> I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Huh, I think I've only seen this once (the Tacoma Narrows Bridge). Other toll bridges I've driven have all had tolls in each direction, e.g., Ambassador and Blue Water Bridges to Canada, Lake Washington floating bridge. Maybe I need to start taking more bridges to nowhere!
- jedberg 4y ago
  Interesting! I'll admit my sample size is limited to bridges in California, but at least in the Bay Area all the bridges only have tolls in one direction.
  - __derek__ 4y ago
    That makes sense. It fits with the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which connects Tacoma (urban economic hub) to the Olympic Peninsula (some small towns, mostly wilderness).
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    I suspect the Bay Area model is more common where the dominant traffic on a bridge is two-way commute traffic that can’t easily escape the toll regime for one side of the commute. In that case, one-way tolls reduce infrastructure and operating costs, and traffic impacts, of toll collection without any significant downside.
    - duskwuff 4y ago
      The other half of that is a practical matter -- collecting tolls in both directions means constructing and staffing a larger and more complex toll plaza. It's hard to justify that expense unless a lot of tolls will go uncollected without it.
      - dragonwriter 4y ago
        > The other half of that is a practical matter -- collecting tolls in both directions means constructing and staffing a larger and more complex toll plaza That’s part of what I waa getting at with “infrastructure cost”, yes.
- dymk 4y ago
  The floating bridge has a toll in both directions because there’s an alternate route which isn’t too much worse when there’s no traffic (and something about federal highway grant money)
munch117 4y ago
I've never seen a toll bridge that doesn't have tolls in both directions. I didn't even know that charging in only one direction was a thing. You live and you learn.
- jedberg 4y ago
  As I am also learning today. If you don't mind sharing, where do you live? Here in the Bay Area all of our bridges only have tolls in one direction.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    Also tolls crossing into NYC. Since going around is impractical, it means you need half as much tolling. And since the land for tollbooths would be more expensive on the NYC side your savings are even larger.
  - shagie 4y ago
    Fairly standard around Chicago area. Results for Illinois Tollway Plaza will show them (not all of them are - they can get interesting at intersections and off-ramps). (late edit) This is largely driven by the question "is a vehicle heading in one direction likely to return in the other?" For trips from Oakland to SF, yes - it is very likely that the vehicle will go back across the bay bridge back to Oakland (rather than heading down to San Jose and then back up the other side). On the other hand, a vehicle driving on the tollway through Chicago may be heading up to Minneapolis or to Detroit and then to other directions. Trips on the Illinois tollways are less likely to have a return trip and so both directions need to be tolled to capture the vehicles. It costs twice as much to do this (twice as many toll booths and staff) and so given the choice (trips to an island or other geographically isolated area) they only pay tolls in one direction.
  - trebecks 4y ago
    some nyc bridges and tunnels charge both ways. for the bridges and tunnels connecting ny and nj, you only need to pay going nj -> ny.
  - munch117 4y ago

__derek__ 4y ago

> I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Huh, I think I've only seen this once (the Tacoma Narrows Bridge). Other toll bridges I've driven have all had tolls in each direction, e.g., Ambassador and Blue Water Bridges to Canada, Lake Washington floating bridge. Maybe I need to start taking more bridges to nowhere!

jedberg 4y ago
Interesting! I'll admit my sample size is limited to bridges in California, but at least in the Bay Area all the bridges only have tolls in one direction.
- __derek__ 4y ago
  That makes sense. It fits with the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which connects Tacoma (urban economic hub) to the Olympic Peninsula (some small towns, mostly wilderness).
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  I suspect the Bay Area model is more common where the dominant traffic on a bridge is two-way commute traffic that can’t easily escape the toll regime for one side of the commute. In that case, one-way tolls reduce infrastructure and operating costs, and traffic impacts, of toll collection without any significant downside.
  - duskwuff 4y ago
    The other half of that is a practical matter -- collecting tolls in both directions means constructing and staffing a larger and more complex toll plaza. It's hard to justify that expense unless a lot of tolls will go uncollected without it.
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      > The other half of that is a practical matter -- collecting tolls in both directions means constructing and staffing a larger and more complex toll plaza That’s part of what I waa getting at with “infrastructure cost”, yes.
dymk 4y ago
The floating bridge has a toll in both directions because there’s an alternate route which isn’t too much worse when there’s no traffic (and something about federal highway grant money)

munch117 4y ago

I've never seen a toll bridge that doesn't have tolls in both directions. I didn't even know that charging in only one direction was a thing. You live and you learn.

jedberg 4y ago
As I am also learning today. If you don't mind sharing, where do you live? Here in the Bay Area all of our bridges only have tolls in one direction.
- jefftk 4y ago
  Also tolls crossing into NYC. Since going around is impractical, it means you need half as much tolling. And since the land for tollbooths would be more expensive on the NYC side your savings are even larger.
- shagie 4y ago
  Fairly standard around Chicago area. Results for Illinois Tollway Plaza will show them (not all of them are - they can get interesting at intersections and off-ramps). (late edit) This is largely driven by the question "is a vehicle heading in one direction likely to return in the other?" For trips from Oakland to SF, yes - it is very likely that the vehicle will go back across the bay bridge back to Oakland (rather than heading down to San Jose and then back up the other side). On the other hand, a vehicle driving on the tollway through Chicago may be heading up to Minneapolis or to Detroit and then to other directions. Trips on the Illinois tollways are less likely to have a return trip and so both directions need to be tolled to capture the vehicles. It costs twice as much to do this (twice as many toll booths and staff) and so given the choice (trips to an island or other geographically isolated area) they only pay tolls in one direction.
- trebecks 4y ago
  some nyc bridges and tunnels charge both ways. for the bridges and tunnels connecting ny and nj, you only need to pay going nj -> ny.
- munch117 4y ago