CHANGE MY LOCATION
Local
California News
Multimedia News
City ‘gateway toll’ considered
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Running late for her job at the Westfield Centre, Sunset district resident Lisa Ellen admits to sometimes ditching her long journey on Muni in favor of navigating the crowded downtown streets by car.
But under a controversial plan being studied by the San Francisco County Transportation Authority, the 21-year-old retail worker would pay a toll for bringing her vehicle into the congested area during peak drive times.
“I’d be annoyed, but it would be worth it if it relieved some of the congestion,” Ellen said. “I guess it would depend on the details — how much I was paying and how the money would be used.”
Today, motorists and pedestrians alike will hear new details about the congestion pricing plan, including possible designs, transportation improvements, and discount and exemption policies under consideration.
In terms of geographic area, there are two basic plans, SFCTA deputy director Tilly Chang said. One idea is to charge a “gateway toll” to anyone entering San Francisco when congestion is at its worst. The fee would be in addition to bridge tolls — although drivers coming in from the Peninsula would also be required to pay it, even though they don’t cross a bridge. A lower congestion toll may be proposed for commuters driving in over bridges from the north and east.
The other proposal would have motorists pay a toll only for entering the busiest parts of The City during peak congestion times. The area would include the Civic Center, Financial District and South of Market and be enforced either in the morning, night or both, Chang said. Bordering the area would be Van Ness Avenue, Harrison Street, the Embarcadero and Broadway Street. Those who live in the neighborhood could be offered an 80 percent discount and the SFCTA is considering discounts for low-income drivers as well.
There is also the possibility of combining both plans, so that drivers would face double rings of tolls, Chang said. Revenue from the fees would fund transportation projects such as pedestrian improvements, rapid regional bus service and better signal coordination.
The plan already faces a storm of criticism and would need state legislative approval to go forward.
Marc Intermaggio, executive vice president of the San Francisco chapter of the Building Owners and Managers Association, said the plan would hurt business.
“With The City’s budget problems, slowing down the rate of commerce, which will slow down tax revenue, is folly,” he said.
The first of several outreach meetings to discuss congestion pricing takes place today at 5:30 p.m. at San Francisco’s Main Library.
By the numbers
San Francisco traffic congestion
1 million Total daily trips
532,000 Daily car trips to downtown
304,000 Daily transit trips to downtown
$80 million Cost of excess fuel in 2005 due to congestion
$150 million Projected cost of excess fuel in 2030 due to congestion
32 minutes Average Bay Area trip
17 minutes Time spent in traffic during average Bay Area trip
Source: San Francisco County Transportation Authority
Comments from Examiner Readers
1:16 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 23, 2008 re: "City ‘gateway toll’ considered"
Report as inappropriate
10:59 AM MST on Wed., Jul. 23, 2008
re: "City ‘gateway toll’ considered"
Report as inappropriate
10:41 AM MST on Wed., Jul. 23, 2008
re: "City ‘gateway toll’ considered"
Report as inappropriate
2:43 PM MST on Tue., Jul. 1, 2008
re: "A way around crash sites"
Report as inappropriate
1:21 AM MST on Mon., Jun. 30, 2008
re: "Three die in crash-filled weekend"
Report as inappropriate
8:00 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "I-95 north of Baltimore home to region’s worst bottlenecks"
Report as inappropriate
7:31 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 18, 2008
re: "I-95 north of Baltimore home to region’s worst bottlenecks"
Report as inappropriate
3:49 PM MST on Wed., Apr. 2, 2008
re: "Crash won't accelerate bridge-median plan"
Report as inappropriate
1:03 PM MST on Thu., Jan. 17, 2008
re: "Bad weather causes traffic delays around District"
Report as inappropriate
8:16 PM MST on Wed., Nov. 28, 2007
re: "Golden Gate Bridge tragedy could have been worse"
Report as inappropriate
4:44 PM MST on Wed., Nov. 28, 2007
re: "Golden Gate Bridge tragedy could have been worse"
Report as inappropriate
9:16 AM MST on Wed., Oct. 17, 2007
re: "Study: Traffic costs D.C. $2B, Baltimore $1 billion annually"
Report as inappropriate
6:09 PM MST on Sun., Sep. 9, 2007
re: "Triathlon will snarl Sunday traffic"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
I guess SF really doesn't want people to come to the City! What a load of crock. Nobody in the SF govt has any business sense. Great, kill the goose that lays the golden eggs (businesses and sales taxes).
6 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
just shoot me said:
sweet - another friggin toll. I already pay $1000/month in commute costs.
3 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
If there were a viable, reliable CLEAN option then people would be able to not drive. Without that option people must drive. Clean up MUNI, make it dependable and regular and co- ordinate with other transit agencies and people will want to get out of their cars. As it is if you are in a hurry or out of communte hours MUNI is not an option. Also, I am unclear why people love BART!. Signage is pathetic and it is NOT co-ordinated with MUNI or Golden Gate transit, what's the point? Take a look at NYC, London or Paris to get a look at what good transit systems are. Funny, their workers show up and they keep to a timetable. Maybe we could try doing that?
3 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Bruce Simmons said:
for one, I don't understand how it cost $30 million to instigate the deployment of traffic control officers and traffic cones. Second, how would diverting a traffic jam to El Camino Real alleviate anything. El Camino Real is already questionably jammed up at traffic time and the ensuing flood of motor vehicles would only spill the excess onto the various side streets around that road. Spend the $30 million where it's needed, on the school systems or homeless shelters.
8 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
R.I.P. DeKeisha Skaggs! We will all miss you! -Jessica G. P.
8 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
600 Million dollars? Much too expensive and way too late to fix the problem. By the time the road is built, no one will care because the people will be gone.
6 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
These choke points have been around for over 30 years - and the drivers that dart into the lane and slam on their brakes that have not killed themselves are still endangering the rest of us! Leave the Baltimore area for good - I did 12 years ago and life is so much better since I don't have to deal with the crime or the local corporate societal ladder. I love to hear the companies complain about the lack of talent in the region. The problem is everybody in the Baltimore business district is trying to rape each other so what is left is table scraps for the locals - they don't have a problem hiring out of staters and paying them big bucks but if you are a local they hate the fact that they are reliant on you - especially if you are white and have a moral value system.
6 agree | 7 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
ms jackson said:
All this money spent on highway dividers, anti smoking campaigns, youth violence intiatives, dietary labeling, unwanted pregnancies, anti suicide barriers, etc. could be saved by introducing a microscopic brain implant that would cause extreme pain and forced change of action any time somebody begins to behave in a way that creates any sort of societal problems. Of course, this would mean about 95 percent of huimanity would be constantly groaning in pain and apparently changing their minds!
10 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
oh my gosh that is bad people need to start being more careful
152 agree | 125 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
When someone does something like this, it not only saves lives, it leaves the rest of us with the knowledge that one of us did a great good thing. I'm so grateful for that knowledge. John Beatty is a really good man.
202 agree | 208 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
San Francisco Voter said:
Wow. I knew there were at least a few good people around here.
212 agree | 201 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Mike Licht said:
>>Re: Study: Traffic costs D.C. $2B, Baltimore $1 billion annually<< Editorial decision to omit hyperlink to the actual study is a gross disservice to readers.
236 agree | 228 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
William Cooke said:
Great race. Thanks Annapolis, Annapolis Police, and AA County Police.
296 agree | 244 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree