Mobility Pricing

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

Something needs to be done to deal with the congestion. It took a few years but Highway #1 is a total parking lot during rushhour- and this will probably worsen with a growing population.

It's not fair that someone from Maple Ridge can take a new bridge and an upgraded road for free while someone coming in from Fraser Heights has to spend near $6.50 a day just to deal with congestion from Cape Horne to Vancouver via the always clogged Burnaby Lake stretch.

I like the idea of general road tolling for the busy highways and crossings. Highway #91, Highway #99, Highway #1, Lougheed etc.

You fix congestion by building infrastructure. People can decide their method of travel between point a and b at x time. Vancouver is so far behind and it is why I am leaving the city as it is progressively getting more and more unlivable. The solution is to build build build, and I mean massive investments. In the mean time the country should curtail immigration rates to take some pressure of the major cities if it cant direct people to other parts of the country. That is the solution.

Mobility pricing is at worst a major infringement on privacy rights, at best inefficient. Also I should add it is not in place anywhere in the world, not in 20-30 million people cities. Not in mature 5 10 million people cities. Now you want to put it in place in Vancouver? A under built sprawling city in the second largest country on this planet? For 2.4 million residents? To accomplish what? Piss on privacy rights, flush billions down the toilet and make our region even less livable?

Mobility pricing is not viable nor smart. The government should be doing only one thing. One thing. Providing infrastructure. Not trying to determine how individuals move around in their daily lives as they do their part in running our economy. The government should pay for this by taxing economic activity, as in income, corporate, sales taxes etc.

[libtard]

Vancouver is so backwards. REAL progressive cities like New York and San Francisco haven't adopted mobility pricing. No other city in North America has. What makes Vancouver so special that it thinks it can compare itself to European cities?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by cornholio

You fix congestion by building infrastructure.

Sure, you just build your way out of congestion. That'll work.

[libtard]

The transit folk love the idea of mobility pricing because its yet ANOTHER revenue stream for their perverse public transportation fantasies to become reality. They will literally never be satisfied. Even though the entire metro region is blanketed in transit already and puts most other cities to shame, they demand more skytrains and buses.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by libtard

The transit folk love the idea of mobility pricing because its yet ANOTHER revenue stream for their perverse public transportation fantasies to become reality. They will literally never be satisfied. Even though the entire metro region is blanketed in transit already and puts most other cities to shame, they demand more skytrains and buses.

A family video of yours?

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by libtard

The transit folk love the idea of mobility pricing because its yet ANOTHER revenue stream for their perverse public transportation fantasies to become reality. They will literally never be satisfied. Even though the entire metro region is blanketed in transit already and puts most other cities to shame, they demand more skytrains and buses.

[Migrant_Coconut]

[flipper316]

Am I seriously gonna get charged if i want to drive 5 minutes down a secondary road at like 2 pm just to go down to Wal Mart or something. And why the hell would I be getting charged more for roads that haven't been improved/expanded since they opened.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by libtard

Ridiculous fantasy thread should be locked

How is this a fantasy thread? I didn't make this up. We will see in a year where this is going after the committee reports their findings.

[oy1234]

Oregon is currently running a pilot project that bills drivers per mile driven in an attempt to change how people are billed for roads (and usage).

http://www.myorego.org/about/

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by oy1234

Oregon is currently running a pilot project that bills drivers per mile driven in an attempt to change how people are billed for roads (and usage).

http://www.myorego.org/about/

hhhhmmmm won't that just give people an incentive to stay home and not spend money if they don't have to. Wow, that will be a boost for the economy..

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

hhhhmmmm won't that just give people an incentive to stay home and not spend money if they don't have to. Wow, that will be a boost for the economy..

It sounds like you didn't even click the link. People who opt in to this get a refund off the gas taxes they pay. It's a pilot project that's meant to figure out how to charge people through mobility pricing instead of through gas taxes, and it's revenue neutral.

In other words people aren't getting charged more than they already are, so keep your "OH WHAAAA THE ECONOMY" nonsense to yourself.

Besides, it's well proven that congestion negatively impacts the economy, and this is meant to improve congestion which means the economy improves, so it's up to you to show that this "stay at home instead of driving somewhere to save money" argument would actually hurt the economy.

And your argument also implies that people would just stay home instead of maybe walking to the local store or taking transit.

[dharper]

Originally Posted by oy1234

Oregon is currently running a pilot project that bills drivers per mile driven in an attempt to change how people are billed for roads (and usage).

http://www.myorego.org/about/

I watched a few videos on that website, and it said you would receive a rebate of $.30 for every gallon of gas used.
It sounds like a flawed system, if at 1:15 in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeINSddK3YY it says,"And if you drive a less efficient vehicle, you might even save some money with Orego."
No system should make a less efficient vehicle cheaper to drive over a more efficient one. Especially in Oregon. Yes it is making the road usage part more even for all vehicles, but the environmental part would be giving a bigger advantage to less efficient vehicles.

[Steveston]

Every system of charging people for road usage has some unfairness.

If you toll every bridge, someone driving from Burke Mountain to downtown gets a free ride, while someone commuting from North Surrey to New West has to pay for a 3 km drive.

If you use a barrier approach, someone who lives and works outside of the barrier never has to pay, even though they may be using the roads just as much as someone who needs to cross a river.

Using an odometer approach means that you pay for your vacation trip to the Rockies.

I would prefer that everyone agrees that we need to do something about traffic congestion in Metro Van, and also agrees that we need a fair way to raise money for new infrastructure.

There are systems being employed in various cities throughout the world. Some work, some don't; each has its pros and cons, some might have applicability for Metro Van, some won't. Maybe if we get a group together to do some research and consultation and come up with a plan that might work here.. oh wait.

My initial thoughts might be something akin to the way some local governments charge for water usage. You can pay a flat rate, or you can have a meter installed and pay for your own usage. The "flat rate" might be some charge on your annual ICBC renewal, based on your residence and declared work location. The usage approach may be some phone-based GPS app that is set up to protect privacy (only reports kms, not where you went). The rates would be set up such that the usage approach results in a reduced payment for 90% of drivers, thus encouraging its adoption (like water meters). It could also be set up to employ TDM, by charging people less if they use bottlenecks at off-peak hours.

Just a first thought -- go ahead a shoot holes in it.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by Steveston

Every system of charging people for road usage has some unfairness.

If you toll every bridge, someone driving from Burke Mountain to downtown gets a free ride, while someone commuting from North Surrey to New West has to pay for a 3 km drive.

If you use a barrier approach, someone who lives and works outside of the barrier never has to pay, even though they may be using the roads just as much as someone who needs to cross a river.

Using an odometer approach means that you pay for your vacation trip to the Rockies.

I would prefer that everyone agrees that we need to do something about traffic congestion in Metro Van, and also agrees that we need a fair way to raise money for new infrastructure.

There are systems being employed in various cities throughout the world. Some work, some don't; each has its pros and cons, some might have applicability for Metro Van, some won't. Maybe if we get a group together to do some research and consultation and come up with a plan that might work here.. oh wait.

My initial thoughts might be something akin to the way some local governments charge for water usage. You can pay a flat rate, or you can have a meter installed and pay for your own usage. The "flat rate" might be some charge on your annual ICBC renewal, based on your residence and declared work location. The usage approach may be some phone-based GPS app that is set up to protect privacy (only reports kms, not where you went). The rates would be set up such that the usage approach results in a reduced payment for 90% of drivers, thus encouraging its adoption (like water meters). It could also be set up to employ TDM, by charging people less if they use bottlenecks at off-peak hours.

Just a first thought -- go ahead a shoot holes in it.

I completely agree that something needs to be done. We cannot just sit here, add 20-30K people every year, build zero new roads and hope, and I say with all due respect, to bike our way out of congestion.

Mobility pricing is the way to go and it has to be coupled with massive investment in mass transit. However, mobility pricing has to be meaningful and it has to apply to all the trips and vary according to car size. It cannot be just another tax. It has to replace the existing taxes (as it has been suggested here before) so that people carefully consider:

a) Do I need to buy a car?
b) Do I need this trip?
c) Can I combine my trips and save money?
d) Can I replace my trip with transit, home delivery or something else?

This could also solve the problems in the future with automated cars as the same criteria would apply to those trips as well.

[GeeCee]

Odometer pricing but captured upon leaving and entering the province, so mileage outside of the province isn't counted.

[moosejaw]

Theres 1.6 million vehicles registered in greater vancouver last year
500k have been added since 2001.

There must be some way to drum up money based on those figures

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Won't that just give people an incentive to stay home and not spend money if they don't have to. Wow, that will be a boost for the economy..

Seeing the direct costs of every trip you make might cause you to decide to make do your grocery shopping on the way home instead of making a separate trip for it, or to pick your friends up and go to the mall together instead of everyone driving there on their own. Those kinds of decisions will not impact the economy, but they will reduce congestion.

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by Steveston

My initial thoughts might be something akin to the way some local governments charge for water usage. You can pay a flat rate, or you can have a meter installed and pay for your own usage. The "flat rate" might be some charge on your annual ICBC renewal, based on your residence and declared work location. The usage approach may be some phone-based GPS app that is set up to protect privacy (only reports kms, not where you went). The rates would be set up such that the usage approach results in a reduced payment for 90% of drivers, thus encouraging its adoption (like water meters). It could also be set up to employ TDM, by charging people less if they use bottlenecks at off-peak hours.

What you mentioned here should be included in any mobility pricing policy. I think with a GPS-based system there should be a flat pass option that is a bit more expensive on average, but caters to those who are very concerned about things like privacy. You would also need it for trucks and other vehicles driving into the region.

[waves]

How exactly will mobility pricing be different from a gas tax and insurance?

• Those who drive more in Metro Van pay more and use more gas
• Those who drive more efficient cars pay less because they consume less gas
• Insurance charges you less if you drive your vehicle only recreationally than for work and less depending on your region.

For mobility pricing to be implemented, it would need to do all of these three things:
(1) increase/decrease the cost of driving on an hour by hour basis.
(2) increase/decrease the cost from micro location to micro location basis.
(3) charge visiting vehicles and old vehicles.

It would be a waste otherwise because you can just use other methods, such as a gas tax, insurance charges or bridge tolls.

A list of proposed systems:

• Odometer: No(1) No(2) Yes(3). Can't tell when and where you are. Could charge a flat rate per km driven for those crossing the border by road.
• GPS Tracking: Yes(1) Yes(2) No(3). Unless it is hardwired into the car someone could just turn it off. You can't hardwire it to every car because of existing vehicles and out of town vehicles. Also a privacy issue. Very expensive to implement continually.
• RFID micro zones: Yes(1) Yes(2) No(3). High initial capital cost with RFID sensors on all borders to micro zones. Low operational cost. Entry points into Metro Vancouver would need toll booth's to ensure all visitors have an RFID registered or a Metro Van Pass (similar to a National Park Pass?). Very disruptive to inter-regional traffic (Hwy 1, Sea to Sky Hwy, Ferry Highways).
• All Bridge Tolling: Yes(1) No(2) Yes(3). Zones aren't evenly distributed in size.
• Specify your work place on your Insurance: No(1) NotReally(2) No(3). People use their cars for much much more than just going to work.
• Gas Tax: No(1) Kinda(2) Yes(3). People don't fill up frequent enough that the price of gas can be changed to discourage travel during certain hours.
  

The only solution I think remotely worth considering would by RFID Microzones, but would be a very expensive endeavour. They should scrap this idea of Mobility Pricing and just increase the Gas Tax as a more fair and simple way of collecting revenue. People will avoid peak hours from congestion by their own accord, which increases the likelihood they will consider transit and if they do need to drive, influence what time they do drive at.

People had enough trouble with Compass and that wasn't really revolutionary technology.