
|
Los Angeles City Guides
|
Article History SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - When and how much? Those two aspects of the Golden Gate Bridge variable-toll pricing plan could become clearer after a committee meeting today.
Approved in March, the variable-toll pricing would charge drivers extra for crossing the span during peak travel times.
In earlier discussions, bridge officials speculated an extra cost in the range of 50 cents to $1 during peak travel times, although Supervisor Jake McGoldrick, who sits on the bridge district board, said the increase would likely be $2.
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District officials will decide on a number of options for a variable-toll pricing, including how much fares will increase and what time those increases will take place, after an eight-week study of the plan is presented in a subcommittee meeting today.
The finance committee will decide which variable-toll pricing program to recommend for approval for Friday’s full board meeting.
The variable-toll pricing is being discussed concurrently with another proposal — preliminarily approved in January — to add $1 to the $5 base amount for tolls, and it would also apply to FasTrak users, who pay $4.
The variable toll and the base toll increase will be discussed with the public at a June 11 formal hearing at San Rafael, according to bridge district spokeswoman Mary Currie.
Based on public input, the approval of the tolls will go before the full board in July, Currie said.
If approved, the $1 base-toll-hike likely would not be implemented before January 2009, Currie said. The variable-toll increase cannot be implemented earlier than September 2008 or later than September 2009, Currie said.
By approving the variable-toll pricing plan in March, the bridge district helped the Bay Area secure $158.7 million in federal grant funding.
Not ranked |
EMAIL ME THIS STORY |
ARTICLE HISTORY |
Sports
Business |
Real Estate Family Movies and Books Venues, Sports and Music Concerts, Artists and Tickets Be Inspired - Quotes and Stories |
Comments from Examiner Readers
9:57 AM MST on Tue., Jun. 10, 2008 re: "Fog surrounding toll increases may start to lift"
Report as inappropriate
1:02 AM MST on Mon., Jun. 9, 2008
re: "Crossover crash shuts down Golden Gate Bridge traffic"
Report as inappropriate
9:57 AM MST on Thu., May. 8, 2008
re: "Fog surrounding toll increases may start to lift"
Report as inappropriate
1:12 PM MST on Fri., Apr. 11, 2008
re: "Peak hours cost peak prices"
Report as inappropriate
12:31 PM MST on Fri., Apr. 11, 2008
re: "Commuters await price for congestion toll"
Report as inappropriate
4:29 AM MST on Fri., Apr. 11, 2008
re: "Commuters await price for congestion toll"
Report as inappropriate
6:37 PM MST on Mon., Mar. 17, 2008
re: "Peak hours cost peak prices"
Report as inappropriate
9:09 AM MST on Mon., Mar. 17, 2008
re: "Peak hours cost peak prices"
Report as inappropriate
11:14 AM MST on Fri., Mar. 14, 2008
re: "Congestion fare zooming ahead"
Report as inappropriate
3:07 AM MST on Fri., Feb. 29, 2008
re: "Golden Gate Bridge closer to a real median"
Report as inappropriate
12:56 PM MST on Sat., Feb. 9, 2008
re: "Golden Gate Bridge closer to a real median"
Report as inappropriate
4:33 PM MST on Fri., Feb. 8, 2008
re: "Golden Gate Bridge closer to a real median"
Report as inappropriate
11:18 AM MST on Fri., Feb. 8, 2008
re: "Golden Gate Bridge closer to a real median"
Report as inappropriate
10:57 AM MST on Fri., Feb. 8, 2008
re: "Golden Gate Bridge closer to a real median"
Report as inappropriate
nonprofit gypsy said:
I absolutely agree, take control away from GGB board. They are not practicing ethical oversite ofour resources!
2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Has there been any more news of the condidtion of Grace dammann, the driver of the Honda CRV that was hit on the Golden gate Bridge 17 days ago?
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The state should take ownership of this bridge, the GGB board is trying to fill their pockets for years.
6 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The usual anti-tax, anti-fees lobby will whine and cry about increased tolls for Doyle Drive. That is until, of course, there's a major seismic event which cripples beyond use or collapses Doyle Drive. Then, of course, they will blame the government for doing nothing beforehand. We can't have it both ways.
7 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Hmmm New York was smart enough to say no to the congestion tolls for Manhattan.
5 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"If congestion-based tolling is necessary to secure the grant money, what about LOWERING non-peak-hour tolls by, say, 25 cents? Result: congestion-based tolling without further discouraging those of us who already think twice before taking our discretionary income across the bridge, either direction."
5 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
If congestion-based tolling is necessary to secure the grant money, what about LOWERING non-peak-hour tolls by, say, 25 cents? Result: congestion-based tolling without further discouraging those of us who already think twice before taking our discretionary income across the bridge, either direction.
8 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Gladwyn d'Souza said:
This traffic does more than just go down Doyle Drive. In San Mateo County cities like SSF double in population during the day while Redwood Shores sees a factor of twenty increase. And we lose bicycle access, on Ralston over 101, because traffic coming to Oracle and EA caused the interchange to be reconfigured, to allow more on ramps ramps from Oracle, so much so that the interchange has become the number one location for bicycle car collisions in Belmont. So what does Supervisor McGoldrick mean by regional cooperation? This is an example of how Caltrans uses regional ignorance to keep CMAs like SFTA and CCAG in their car trance.
6 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
When Doyle Drive is paid off, can we reverse the toll back to 0? I don't think so. Liberal taxes are driving people away. I already bought a home in Nevada. Maybe its time to get out of this hellhole. The next earthquake is coming anyway and everyone is going to die... JK
7 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Grant Gilligan said:
I was hit head on on the bridge. I was not even in far left lane. The woman next to me died and had no air bags. My friend and I survived the 100+ mile an hour impact. I drive across the bridge 5 times a week. I welcome the barrier!
33 agree | 32 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
So, will this barrier extend along Doyle Drive as well? The yellow tubes are hazardous (in addition to preventing the crossover problem) - they are frequently knocked loose and thrown about (very comforting on a motorcycle; there's already plenty of junk on CA highways).
41 agree | 40 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I rather enjoy risking a drive across the Golden Gate Bridge as is. I believe such beauty is cleary worth taking my chances. Sometimes I even hazard a quick glance to one side or the other, to catch a glimpse of either the amazing Pacific Ocean or San Francisco's unique cityscape. I've been doing it for 31 years now without a scratch on me or my car.
51 agree | 44 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Walter E.Wallis said:
Using new high strength steel, towers could be strengthened at the same time the roadway was widened, allowing 3 lanes each way and a premanent divider. Move the walkways either up or down and gain an emergency lane.
58 agree | 49 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Ian H said:
.64 fatalities per million miles traveled didn't sound so bad ... until I looked up the national average, which is 0.0098 fatalities per million miles traveled. In other words, drivers are 65 times more likely to be killed driving across the Golden Gate Bridge than the average US roadway. The Examiner should make a little extra effort to put its statistics into context. I'm in favor of the barrier now.
43 agree | 51 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree