http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/02/k...ngestion-charg

Boris Johnson for Mayor of... San Francisco? Our favorite municipal chief executive may be taking his time in dismantling the congestion charge in London, but his services may soon be needed in the City by the Bay, as local bureaucrats there contemplate instituting a new charge for motorists wishing to enter – or leave – the city's downtown core.

Driving in San Francisco is already quite an ordeal, and it's listed as the second most congested city in the United States. Motorists already have to pay tolls to cross the bridge and exorbitant parking fees, but the new initiative in the notoriously environmentally-friendly haven in Northern California (a similar initiative to that which failed in New York), could achieve its purpose of deterring motorists from driving downtown altogether. Mayor Gavin Newson is in favor of the plan – which would involve charging cars $3 on the way in as well as on the way out – as is County Transportation Authority director Jose Luis Mosovich, who likens Hurricane Katrina, the economic crisis, global warming, and yes, even terrorism to the city's burgeoning traffic crisis.

 

Who would actually want to DRIVE in San Francisco anyway, if there were other efficient means of getting around? Not only the congestion, but those notoriously steep hills (well-filmed in the Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry flicks), do a number on your brakes, clutch (if manual) transmission, and suspension. It is also hazardous just starting and stopping with most stick shifts....the guy in front of you is likely to roll back into you, and you into the guy behind you...a chain reaction. Then, to top it off, you are hated by the environmental-groupies at Berkeley riding their bicycles.

I wouldn't drive in SF if the city paid ME. It's bad enough right here in D.C.

 

This is another way of S.F. saying our public transportation system is royally fouled up, so you citizen will have to pay for the problem.

I am already upset that sales tax increase here in Miami-Dade county some years back in the name of improving the transit system actually went toward more salary increases for existing workers, http://www.miamiherald.com/multimedi...sit/index.html

Where do you really think that congestion charge money is going to go to?

 

SF is a 100+ year old city laid out before cars became common.

 

I'd guess three things, right off the bat; Maintenance on the Golden Gate/ FO-OAK bridges, more money for the Berkeley campus, and gay/lesbian campaign/lobbying issues. If the city is smart (which it often isn't), they will save some of it for earthquake-repair issues, which, like much of coastal CA, is inevitable.

 

indeed. i lived in the bay area for 5 years, and i have never been to the city for more than 5 times

 

This stuff is getting common. My wife tolfdme they just raised the enterance fee for on e of the NYC bridges to $10. Yes $10. Its not each way, but still $10 a day to get to work on top of all of the other crap like parking, insurance, gas, maintenance, and tolls. When I lived in Boston we couldnt even imagine why a person living in te city would even want a car

 

Having lived and worked in downtown San Francisco for 11 years, I would consider myself qualified to give an opinion on the matter.

People who drive into SF do it out on necessity, not convenience. If they could take public transporation, they would. The congestion charge will not deter people who would drive to work or those who would not be impacted by the additional cost.

Only thing this would do is:
1. Make the city money
2. Be tax on the poor
3. Lower business in those areas such as restaurants in those areas

Yeah, it's a stupid idea. It already costs $15 to park downtown a day.

 

bruce van, thanks for your post of sanity.

 

I've driven in the City many times, but only by necessity. I've taken BART into the City far more times when I knew I didn't have to ALSO go to Mountain View or San Jose the same day. If you don't HAVE to, it's insanity to fight the traffic.

I even took Amtrak to the City from Sacramento quite a few times just because in the end, it's cheaper and you aren't tied up driving while on the WiFi equipped train.

 

Chicago is not much better. Our fantastic mayor (Mayor Dailey) leased our park meter's out for 75 years to some company for 1.6 bil. We used to pay 25c a hour to park now its $1 a hour to park. Downtown is now $3 a hour it will be up to 6.50 a hour in 2013. A congestion charge is in the works for Chicago as well.

 

BART is not only overcrowded, but getting to be overpriced. For the cost of a round trip ticket into the city is over 11 bucks for me.

If I worked in the city and my stop was close to a station, I might make the change, but as it stands dealing with MUNI and BART is a big no from me.

So I would have to suck it up and eat the additional fees of this congestion charge if it goes through.

 

Damn, I was considering moving to S.F. for work.

So far, I get lost everytime when I'm in the city w/ navi. But this deter even more. I just hope they don't apply that for motorcycle.