Congestion toll in Boston?

[Shepard]

Here's a maximalist view of what a charge zone would look like - pretty much how I define the CBD.

 

[Matthew]

So it would allow more cars to come into the city. Get it? This is why it boggles my mind that urbanists/ped/bicyclist groups favor such a plan so much. Its purpose is to increase vehicle operating speeds during peak hours and maximize roadway throughput, allowing more cars to enter the city.

Did you watch the video? Stockholm's experience was a consistent 20% drop in traffic volume. See just over 4 minutes into the video for the bar chart.

Honestly, road space pricing is a win-win, there's something for everyone. Motorists get reliable, hassle-free commutes. The city gets to deal with fewer cars. And there's a bit of money to use on improvements such as public transit or road repair.

I'm especially intrigued by the way support swung from only 30% approval to a massive 70% approval rating after it was implemented.

 

[omaja]

Here's a maximalist view of what a charge zone would look like - pretty much how I define the CBD.

I was about to draw up my own but it would have looked basically the same.

How it would work: Put monitoring equipment on all surface streets leading into the zone and charge vehicles upon exiting 1/90/93/Storrow within the zone. Through traffic on 1/90/93/Storrow (defined as people traveling on one or connecting to/from one of the aforementioned routes) would not be charged.

I also like the idea of a variable charge like they have in Stockholm. That would likely be much more amenable than London's fixed £10 charge for entering the zone, which ignores peaks between 7AM-6PM that it is in effect.

 

[AmericanFolkLegend]

No! No! No! It won't work in Stockholm or Singapore or London or Boston. There's too many secondary streets. And it's an impact on our civil liberties. And the tax will be inefficient. And we'll never get enough unicorns to deliver the transponders....

 

[jass]

How about we start by simply tolling the central artery?

If Obama's thugs complain, simply have a light fixture fall, and declare it will take 4 years to repair (thus closing the tunnels), unless a toll is approved, at which point repairs can be expedited to 24 hours.

 

[massmotorist]

These arguments that it can't be done (Boston is too dense, too many secondary and tertiary streets, impossible to find the right pricing scheme, etc.) is so bizarre.

Say you don't think it's fair, or you hate taxes, or there are more efficient alternatives, or you like sitting in traffic... but don't argue that it can't be done. It's been done successfully in London. That argument is over.

To be a bit hyperbolic to make my point, Communism was done "successfully" in the Soviet Union. That doesn't mean I want to replicate it here. England has absurdly low civil liberties protections and CCTV cameras everywhere. I don't want that in America, and neither should you.

I'm not questioning its technical feasability. I'm saying in order to get it done we'd have to do things that would infringe upon liberties unacceptably. And without doing those liberty-infringing things, it wouldn't work.

 

[George_Apley]

How about we start by simply tolling the central artery?

If Obama's thugs complain, simply have a light fixture fall, and declare it will take 4 years to repair (thus closing the tunnels), unless a toll is approved, at which point repairs can be expedited to 24 hours.

Perfect. Accuse the feds of thuggery, and then advocate extorting them and saying fuck you to every commuter who uses the tunnel in order to get a tolling exception...

 

[saulblum]

I'm saying in order to get it done we'd have to do things that would infringe upon liberties unacceptably. And without doing those liberty-infringing things, it wouldn't work.

When there are mass protests about the TSA feeling citizens up in order to travel around their own country and the police conducting warrantless searches on the T, we can talk about how much the citizens of this country love their civil liberties.

 

[AmericanFolkLegend]

I'm not questioning its technical feasability. I'm saying in order to get it done we'd have to do things that would infringe upon liberties unacceptably. And without doing those liberty-infringing things, it wouldn't work.

But again, why does it have to be any worse than requiring Fast Pass transponders? Do you feel like your civil liberties are violated every time you get off the Pike at the A/B tolls?
(I realize the counter argument to the A/B tolls is that you could take Rt 9. But with a congestion tax I'd argue that you could take the MBTA/CR. Or only drive into Boston outside the 6:30-9:30AM and 3:30-6:30PM windows. Or ride a bike. Or whatever. Again, your changing people's behavior, which would be the whole point!)

 

[Matthew]

I'm not questioning its technical feasability. I'm saying in order to get it done we'd have to do things that would infringe upon liberties unacceptably. And without doing those liberty-infringing things, it wouldn't work.

I disagree, you can do it with toll transponders just like we already use all over the country.

Also, the "communist" argument was really outlandish.

 

[Shepard]

I think, logistically, when you have a situation as in Boston where many small streets could potentially lead into "the zone" you'd be better off going with random enforcement (temporary photo setups) at constantly shifting places within the zone. This leaves it up to the driver to have bought a day/week/monthly pass or pay a large fine if caught in the zone without one. Also give BTD parking enforcement the ability to ticket for noncompliance as well.

 

[mass88]

I think a congestion toll charge is an interesting idea and it could work. But knowing how this state and city run things, I have little faith they will be able to implement such a thing without messing it up and having it take forever through the red tape.

 

[jass]

Perfect. Accuse the feds of thuggery, and then advocate extorting them and saying fuck you to every commuter who uses the tunnel in order to get a tolling exception...

The feds are being extortionist thugs by not allowing localities to set their own tolling rules.

Just playing the same game by the same rules.

 

[George_Apley]

Well if you don't want the feds to set the rules, devolve funding for highways back to the states. The feds are allowed to set the rules for things that the feds have a heavy hand in funding.

Edit:

Did the state request an exemption for tolls on the tunnel and have it denied? I was under the impression that the ban on tolls on interstates was for two reasons: 1) The feds fund Interstates, so states shouldn't raise money off of them. 2) Interstates function to ease transportation amongst the states, and tolls can create a barrier to that.

It's not unprecedented for the feds to grant an exception for tunnels, is it? If it's a funding issue they have, earmark a percentage of the toll's earnings to the federal infrastructure bank.

 

[jass]

Well if you don't want the feds to set the rules, devolve funding for highways back to the states. The feds are allowed to set the rules for things that the feds have a heavy hand in funding.

Edit:

Did the state request an exemption for tolls on the tunnel and have it denied? I was under the impression that the ban on tolls on interstates was for two reasons: 1) The feds fund Interstates, so states shouldn't raise money off of them. 2) Interstates function to ease transportation amongst the states, and tolls can create a barrier to that.

It's not unprecedented for the feds to grant an exception for tunnels, is it? If it's a funding issue they have, earmark a percentage of the toll's earnings to the federal infrastructure bank.

Mass didnt apply for a waiver, but Penn did two years ago and it got denied.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Mass didnt apply for a waiver, but Penn did two years ago and it got denied.

I'm pretty sure that two years ago, the feds weren't rolling out the pilot program they've got now for tolling interstates.

That aside, the Big Dig cost us $24 billion and climbing last I checked. On that basis alone, I'd expect tolls to be approved.

 

[JohnAKeith]

Based on how the casinos' revenue pie was divided up, I agree; the state won't do a good job of congestion toll pricing. The state legislature and governor saw this huge pot of cash coming its way from the casinos and slot parlors but have promised all the money away, so little of it will remain for any debt reduction / tax reduction / new projects.

At least that's how I see it, without having delved into the numbers.

 

[massmotorist]

But again, why does it have to be any worse than requiring Fast Pass transponders? Do you feel like your civil liberties are violated every time you get off the Pike at the A/B tolls?
(I realize the counter argument to the A/B tolls is that you could take Rt 9. But with a congestion tax I'd argue that you could take the MBTA/CR. Or only drive into Boston outside the 6:30-9:30AM and 3:30-6:30PM windows. Or ride a bike. Or whatever. Again, your changing people's behavior, which would be the whole point!)

I disagree, you can do it with toll transponders just like we already use all over the country.

Also, the "communist" argument was really outlandish.

I oppose eliminating cash lanes on tolls roads for the same reasons. I believe strongly that you should be able to get from "here" to "there" without having your travel logged, recorded, or written down.

I wasn't saying congestion pricing = communism, I was saying implementable ≠ desirable

 

[omaja]

I'm pretty sure that two years ago, the feds weren't rolling out the pilot program they've got now for tolling interstates.

That aside, the Big Dig cost us $24 billion and climbing last I checked. On that basis alone, I'd expect tolls to be approved.

I wouldn't bet on it for the foreseeable future. The FHWA pilot was for three slots and they are all reserved: 70 in MO, 95 in VA and 95 in SC.

 

[Kahta]

That aside, the Big Dig cost us $24 billion and climbing last I checked. On that basis alone, I'd expect tolls to be approved.

Including interest is not an honest way of calculating the cost of something, but it is an effective way for politicians to be dramatic.