Bike Tolls

[jrenaut]

I don’t object in theory to bikes and peds being charged for using infrastructure like that, but it had better be proportional to the wear they cause. A ton of metal doing 60mph is going to be a lot harder on the bridge than a person walking or biking.

[arlrider]

What does this thread have to do with bike tools?

[chris_s]

I’m OK with tolls as long as they are reasonable and the infrastructure on the bridge for bikes & peds is good. It costs money to include bike & ped infrastructure, so I’m happy to help pay for it.

Does this mean I can get an ez-pass for my bike?

[Raymo853]

@arlrider 97592 wrote:

What does this thread have to do with bike tools?

I went into general discussion and then posted. I suspect I either clicked wrong or when you do not pick a subcategory, it chooses the first one in the folder.

[Raymo853]

@jrenaut 97590 wrote:

I don’t object in theory to bikes and peds being charged for using infrastructure like that, but it had better be proportional to the wear they cause. A ton of metal doing 60mph is going to be a lot harder on the bridge than a person walking or biking.

It sounds like the charge for bikes and pedestrians would be remarkably lower than for cars.

[DismalScientist]

Sounds like SF just wants to stick it to the tourists. I can’t think of a similar short toll bridge that has sidewalks.

[arlrider]

@Raymo853 97599 wrote:

I went into general discussion and then posted. I suspect I either clicked wrong or when you do not pick a subcategory, it chooses the first one in the folder.

Sorry, I was just joking. I’m assuming the title of the thread was supposed to be “Bike Tolls“.

[Tim Kelley]

@arlrider 97606 wrote:

Sorry, I was just joking. I’m assuming the title of the thread was supposed to be “Bike Tolls“.

We can fix that. We have the technology.

[Raymo853]

I am really talking about this:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]6886[/ATTACH]

[baiskeli]

Most of you are way behind on your payments, by the way.

-The Bluemont Troll

[americancyclo]

Does that mean they’ll be charging for the Carquinez and Dumbarton Bridges as well?

EDIT: Nope, BATA owns the other seven bridges in the area.

funny, too, they talk about the influx of riders to Sausalito, but they only collect tolls from cars going southbound in to SF, not the other way. would bike tolls be both ways!? nutso.

[dplasters]

I would think that the volume of foot / bike traffic would have to be very very high to make up for the fixed costs of just collecting the toll. Turnstyles? People to monitor them, collect the money, if they have something like ez-pass how do you know that the person doesn’t just blow by with a fake pass? No license plates to identify them. So you have to chase them down?

It sounds like a logistical nightmare. Do they not know that all cyclists are scofflaws by nature?????

[elbows]

Hopefully it would be less disproportional than the fee at Great Falls National Park where a 4,300 pound CO2 and pollutant emitting vehicle with two people riding in it costs less than 2 cyclists pay.

[mstone]

@elbows 97637 wrote:

Hopefully it would be less disproportional than the fee at Great Falls National Park where a 4,300 pound CO2 and pollutant emitting vehicle with two people riding in it costs less than 2 cyclists pay.

That’s standard for all NPS properties. Shenandoah is just as asinine: $15 for a clown car with as many people as you can shove into it, $8 per person without a car. Because car infrastructure saves them money. Or something.

[mstone]

@dplasters 97636 wrote:

I would think that the volume of foot / bike traffic would have to be very very high to make up for the fixed costs of just collecting the toll

This. In general, pedestrian tolls are a stupid idea. Yeah, the pedestrian infrastructure adds a little to the cost–just deduct that much from the public subsidy for the bridge. (I don’t think there’s any toll bridge that covers 100% of its costs from tolls.)

[Author]

Posts