3 ms·

We're a very long way from congestion pricing. We don't even have the simplest of toll schemes yet. It would be trivial to establish a toll on the eastbound B

We're a very long way from congestion pricing. We don't even have the simplest of toll schemes yet. It would be trivial to establish a toll on the eastbound Bay Bridge, for example, or to raise the westbound toll, but we haven't done it. It would be a matter of a little bit of paint to extend the existing carpool hours on car-choked freeways, or to establish new carpool lanes. Removing street parking spaces remains highly controversial. This city is a long way from congestion pricing.

gkop 11y ago
You are right that congestion pricing is not likely to happen very soon, it's just a wish of mine, a transparent and efficient solution bringing us to the same end result as the slow and politically noisy trajectory that we are on. Re: tolls, however, I don't think it's a smart idea to toll a bridge both ways because of the overhead of installing and maintaining the toll plaza, the detrimental effect on traffic, and the extra friction to leave the city (we want drivers to leave the city! Don't think twice, just leave!); just double the fees westbound instead. And maybe add flat tolls inbound on the 101 and 280 to match the inbound tolls on the bridges.
jon-wood 11y ago
London managed to go from nothing to congestion charging, although I wouldn't say its made a huge difference. The roads in central London are still hideously dangerous, especially for cyclists.
- thrownaway2424 11y ago
  Well, TfL does claim that congestion is down about 30% versus predicted congestion, or about 10% versus baseline congestion since before the charge. I know cycling is still perceived as dangerous there but according to the numbers, fatalities per cyclist journey are down significantly since the congestion charge began. If you think London cycling is dangerous I invite you to join me in San Francisco for some perspective.

gkop 11y ago

You are right that congestion pricing is not likely to happen very soon, it's just a wish of mine, a transparent and efficient solution bringing us to the same end result as the slow and politically noisy trajectory that we are on. Re: tolls, however, I don't think it's a smart idea to toll a bridge both ways because of the overhead of installing and maintaining the toll plaza, the detrimental effect on traffic, and the extra friction to leave the city (we want drivers to leave the city! Don't think twice, just leave!); just double the fees westbound instead. And maybe add flat tolls inbound on the 101 and 280 to match the inbound tolls on the bridges.

jon-wood 11y ago

London managed to go from nothing to congestion charging, although I wouldn't say its made a huge difference. The roads in central London are still hideously dangerous, especially for cyclists.

thrownaway2424 11y ago
Well, TfL does claim that congestion is down about 30% versus predicted congestion, or about 10% versus baseline congestion since before the charge. I know cycling is still perceived as dangerous there but according to the numbers, fatalities per cyclist journey are down significantly since the congestion charge began. If you think London cycling is dangerous I invite you to join me in San Francisco for some perspective.