London £5 "Congestion Fee" - Page 2

Lawrence of Arabia · February 12, 2003, 22:51

SFs system is a joke. Two of the six lines go to the same location, and whoever was on the planning team obviously didnt live in the Richmond because there are no trains that go anywhere near that area.

Sten Sture · February 12, 2003, 23:07

That's easy! Just take the convenient #38 Geary bus, or walk across the park from my super N line.

Gotta go bribe someone to run an N-Judah. How f-ing hard can it be to run a train system as elaborate as the muni? Boggles the mind.

cheers

Long live Willie - somewhere else.

Sten Sture · February 12, 2003, 23:14

this shows the horrible complexity of the SF subway system. Impossible to administer.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 12, 2003, 23:20

The 38 is so crowded in the morning and at night that ifyou arn't by the door, theres no way you can get off at the stop you want to. BTW, where's the F line? Those puppies go so slow, you die of old age by the time you get to Fisherman's warf.

Urban Ranger · February 13, 2003, 04:06

Quote:

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Actually the Singapore subway reminds me of the DC one with its similar architecture and mix of underground and raised railway - the one thing I didn't like was that if you buy single tickets, you have to pay an upfront deposit as the tickets are recycleable (good idea), but the card costs more that the price of the fare so they were losing money on lost tickets. This now mean that when you finish your journey you have to queue up again to get your bloody deposit back! A rare lack of foresight from the Singapore govt...

The local MTR (subway) tickets are also recyclable, being thin sheets of plastic with a magnetic strip. We also have multiple-use passes called the Octopus, a sort of smart card.

Sikander · February 13, 2003, 05:30

A fiver just for congestion? In most places you can get your congestion for free!

Havak · February 13, 2003, 06:17

I think the money raised by this has to be ploughed back into public transport by law - or so the BBC news team were reporting last night.

Of course public tranport here is rather a joke. Drivers already prop up the national economy through indirect taxes - on the purchase of the vehicle, 80% plus of the cost of fuel, excise duty to be allowed on the road, mandatory insurance with mandatory insurance tax...

I can't see Americans putting up with the tax burden that the british motorist does to be honest.

So thanks Ken - another stupid idea that every council in the country will copy to fund their next 'fact finding mission' (to SF maybe?)

TheStinger · February 13, 2003, 06:26

The maximum it could raise is £365 million. That will not do a great deal to improve the tube.

MikeH · February 13, 2003, 06:29

Polls show that the majority of Londoners are in favour. The money does have to be put back into public transport.

I think London is unlike a lot of US cities, although Ming's New York comparison is spot in, it's just like paying to get to Manhattan. 40% of London households don't own a car, the lower income you have the less likely you are to own a car. Not because they can't afford it as much as it just being a total waste of money having a car if you live in Central London. The main people who'll be hit by this are people working in the city.

I live about 50 miles from London and I'd never even consider driving into Central London.

I would attatch a London Tube map but the image is 670K

http://www.thetube.com/content/tubem...tm_quad_2h.gif

TheStinger · February 13, 2003, 06:34

London is differnt to US cities in that is older and therefore the the vast majority of it wa in place before cars were invented, making it difficult to drive. Added to the fact the government spends too little on transport and you have gridlock.

In other countries it also the case that not just the capital gets an underground system. Of course the UK is very London biased and therefore no one considers setting one up in the other big cities

Solly · February 13, 2003, 06:44

I'm all for it. Hopefully it will spread elsewhere.

MikeH · February 13, 2003, 07:10

Quote:

Originally posted by TheStinger
London is differnt to US cities in that is older and therefore the the vast majority of it wa in place before cars were invented, making it difficult to drive. Added to the fact the government spends too little on transport and you have gridlock.

In other countries it also the case that not just the capital gets an underground system. Of course the UK is very London biased and therefore no one considers setting one up in the other big cities

It's too expensive. No-one would pay for it. Out of interest, has any European country built an underground system in a city in the last 50 years? 100?

TheStinger · February 13, 2003, 07:12

Madrid, Barcelona.

CerberusIV · February 13, 2003, 07:16

Quote:

Originally posted by TheStinger
In other countries it also the case that not just the capital gets an underground system. Of course the UK is very London biased and therefore no one considers setting one up in the other big cities

Liverpool has a decent local rail system (at least it used to). Most other major cities seem to be going for trams or guided buses instead. London is probably the only UK city where there are so many people to move around that a full blown underground system is economically feasible.

The money does go back into public transport. The nice thing about this tax is that it will mostly hit the people who can afford it. Many Londoners don't even bother to have cars and there is absolutely nowhere within the restricted zone that has free public parking so anyone who will be paying the £5 to get in is either already paying more than that per day to park or has a very well paid job with a parking spot provided by their employer.

There has been a rash of adverts in this months UK scooter and motorcycle magazines encouraging people to switch to two wheels and avoid the charge. Personally I would be scared to ride or drive anything short of a tank around central London.

TheStinger · February 13, 2003, 07:18

Leeds is getting trams but only 3 lines I think, and the west of the city is being ignored.

Guided buses are crap

CerberusIV · February 13, 2003, 07:30

It looks like they will be needing the money for London Underground.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2756151.stm

Buck Birdseed · February 13, 2003, 07:35

I believe Copenhagen is building one now, and certainly most cities have changed their system in some way since it was originally built. It's a reasonably cheap (and durable!) way to create large-scale mass transport that people actually use...

Stockholm's underground system was started with two lines in 1950-57, the last major expansion was in 1975, the last minor one in 1994.

My favourite subway layout is still Moscow's- big, chunky lines going out in tight radial spokes (this map is, er, squeezed) with a proper bloody circle around it.

TheStinger · February 13, 2003, 07:36

Monorail is the way forward.

Solly · February 13, 2003, 09:16

The way foward is for people to realise there are many alternatives to the car.

Urban Ranger · February 13, 2003, 10:35

Quote:

Originally posted by TheStinger
Guided buses are crap

You mean trams? They are kinda neat

TheStinger · February 13, 2003, 10:42

I mean guided buses. They have special lanes where only buses can go. They are not normal bus lanes. They are narrow lanes and the driver does not have to steer because little wheels on the bus follow the lane. The bus then leaves the lane and rejoins normal traffic.

Thats probably claer as mud so ill try and find a link

TheStinger · February 13, 2003, 10:54

Link for guided buses

http://www.firstleeds.co.uk/superbus/index.html

Adam Smith · February 13, 2003, 11:40

Charging for congestion is a great idea.
Just a parking fee wont do the job, since commercial vehicles operate but dont necessarily park (legally) in the downtown area.
Gotta put the money back into mass transit.
Mass transit capacity improvements can be fairly inexpensive. Here in DC they are going to add two cars to every train. (Or at least they keep saying they will do this soon.) In NYC they increased capacity on some lines into lower Manhattan by upgrading train signals to reduce headways between trains.
I would think its not that hard to charge for downtown road use. The article mentions Singapore doing so electronically. IIRC, HK also has an electronic charging system to get into Victoria. but in that case access is controlled by two or three tunnels.

Boris Godunov · February 13, 2003, 12:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Sten Sture
this shows the horrible complexity of the SF subway system. Impossible to administer.

Was that sarcasm? Looks like a breeze to me.

Buck Birdseed · February 13, 2003, 12:32

And in another position on the tram-to-bus continuum are Trolley Buses, normal buses that are powered by overhead, tram-style wires suspended over normal traffic lanes. Works reasonably well but only in purely urban routes.

Caligastia · February 13, 2003, 13:18

Quote:

Originally posted by MikeH
I think London is unlike a lot of US cities, although Ming's New York comparison is spot in, it's just like paying to get to Manhattan.

As I said, there are several bridges into Manhattan that are still toll-free.

MikeH · February 13, 2003, 13:20

Missed that, sorry.

Spiffor · February 13, 2003, 14:04

Stuttgart built 10 kilometres of high intenity subway during the 70's.
Paris built its regional network (partly undergound) in the 70's as well, and two lines have been built in the last 5 years.
It's not always the cost which hinders cities to build underground mass transit systems, but rather the kind of ground. Strasbourg and Bordeaux have very wet / semi swampish grounds, and hence they have a tramway rather than a subway.

Drogue · February 13, 2003, 14:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Boddington's
The way foward is for people to realise there are many alternatives to the car.

Exactly.

Sten Sture · February 13, 2003, 18:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

Was that sarcasm? Looks like a breeze to me.

Yeah, it should be a breeze. They even have GPS on all the trains now so they can see where they are on the route, and they still have 45 minute gaps (scheduled for 5) followed by 8 consecutive trains for the same line. Infuriating. The only thing worse are the buses, as LofA referenced.

For a rich city with huge tax revenue full of leftwingers we have some f-ed up social services for the working class. The school system makes the trains look efficient.