This piece appeared in Sunday’s Post-Gazette which is coincidental given we just showed a movie about this subject at our fifth birthday party on Friday. Congestion pricing is worth researching for this city. As long as it doesn’t result in diverting traffic to poorer sections of town causing an increase in pollution and congestion there.

“Pittsburgh ought to fight traffic congestion and improve mass transit by experimenting with tolled ‘congestion zones’ in the South Side and elsewhere, suggest grad students MICHAEL BYRNE and KELSEY WALKO

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Traffic congestion, in addition to causing road rage and affecting our quality of life, hurts our nation’s economy, as well. The Texas Transportation Institute estimated that in 2003 congestion caused 3.7 billion hours of travel delay and 2.3 billion gallons of wasted fuel, costing drivers $63 billion. That means U.S. drivers typically pay a “congestion tax” of between $850 and $1,600 every year.

The traditional remedy to this problem, expanding capacity, is fading as a solution. Adding a lane to a highway can cost upwards of $10 million per mile — a prohibitive expense in Pennsylvania at a time when PennDOT cannot maintain the roads and bridges we already have. Traffic engineers also have come to realize that expanded roadways often generate more new traffic than they can handle, compounding congestion.

One result is that cities have begun experimenting with congestion pricing, which involves charging a fee to drive into congested urban neighborhoods during peak hours. The fee is collected “on the fly” using electronic toll-collection technology so as to ensure an uninterrupted flow of traffic.

Congestion zones have proven to be effective: In central London, congestion pricing reduced traffic by 15 percent and delays by 30 percent while raising more than $230 million, primarily for public-transportation improvements.

Congestion zones also have proven to be popular. After Stockholm implemented a year-long congestion-pricing trial, city residents, who initially were opposed to the plan, voted to make the congestion zone permanent after experiencing its benefits.

Michael Byrne is a student at the New York University School of Law and an editor of the NYU Environmental Law Journal (michael.byrne@nyu.edu). Kelsey Walko is a graduate student of Urban Planning at Hunter College, CUNY (kwalko@hunter.cuny.edu).

In an attempt to duplicate this success in the United States, the Bush administration is expanding federal support for congestion pricing by providing grants for cities to implement pricing schemes. For next year, the administration is seeking $175 million.

Pittsburgh would be a good candidate for congestion pricing, not only in Downtown or on the highways, but also in certain city neighborhoods.

As former South Side residents we have observed first-hand the growing congestion problem in that neighborhood. Even before the opening of SouthSide Works, traffic during peak hours stretched for blocks on East Carson Street. The continuing growth and success of the neighborhood since then has only made the problem worse. Given the topography of the neighborhood and the historic district along East Carson Street, road expansion is out of the question. Could congestion pricing be a solution?

We think so. The toll receipts from the congestion zone could be put towards constructing and operating a light-rail extension through the South Side using the currently unused capacity on the elevated railroad right-of-way. Park-and-ride garages could be constructed where 18th Street enters the South Side Flats and at the intersection of East Carson Street and Becks Run Road, allowing commuters to switch to the T before entering the congestion zone — at a cost far less than that of parking Downtown. The combination of reduced congestion and increased mass-transit capacity would allow for the continued growth of the South Side, while the increased parking capacity would ameliorate the weekend parking problem.

This solution would benefit all involved. Residents of the South Side would experience reduced pollution and congestion and increased transit capacity. The Port Authority would receive more operating money, which it so desperately needs. The state would pay less for maintenance because of reduced traffic on Route 837 and the Birmingham Bridge.

Commuters who currently travel by car also would benefit — either from a cheap, fast and easy trip if they park and take the T, or from a quicker and less stressful commute if they continue driving. Finally, the region as a whole would benefit by being seen as an innovator in regional planning, instead of the usual decade behind the rest of the country.

A similar solution could be used in other parts of the city. Expanding the congestion zone across the Monongahela from the South Side while adding rail transit on the tracks that stretch from Glenwood through Oakland to Downtown would allow for the redevelopment of Hazelwood and help offset traffic generated by the Mon-Fayette Expressway, if it ever comes to fruition.

A congestion zone also could promote orderly growth in Lawrenceville. Should the long-discussed Allegheny Valley Railroad plan go forward, a Lawrenceville zone could help finance park-and-ride stations at the 40th Street and Route 8 bridges, reducing the commuter traffic that currently travels down Butler Street.

Finally, the North Shore T extension could reach its full potential by funneling motorists bound for the Downtown congestion zone into the station currently planned to be built underneath an existing parking garage.

None of this can be done without taking the first step. The number-crunching and impact studies have been conducted by other cities; it’s time for us to recognize the undeniably positive evidence of their research. We therefore strongly urge the city of Pittsburgh to take advantage of the federal grants available and begin to implement congestion pricing.”

Link