Officials approve toll fee to drive on San Francisco's famous Lombard Street

[bing101]

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/officials-approve-toll-fee-to-drive-on-san-francisco-s-famous-lombard-street/1932585486?fbclid=IwAR2yuE2KP1Te1VvdTNvojz9mhLGYL49m_Znh1oyXWGQDyFe_cY1tif9IsBo

A toll fee has been approved for Lombard Street. Also there is a reservation system in the talks. Plus there needs to be a final approval from the state of California for the Toll to come out though.

[doorknob60]

I'm normally not a big fan of tolls, but this seems 100% fine to me. That section of street is 99% tourist attraction, 1% city street. And with traffic as bad as it is in SF, reducing some of the unnecessary (non commuter, delivery, etc.) clog is good, and the money earned can be used to maintain the road, sidewalks, and surrounding area. People that want to visit for free can come on foot and leave their cars out of the way (I love cars and driving, but driving in the city of SF should only be done when necessary).

[The Ghostbuster]

San Francisco should consider tolling more streets. Maybe the streets that carry US 101 between the Central Freeway and Doyle Drive should be tolled, as well as SF's other streets (and freeways) that are the most congested.

[hotdogPi]

San Francisco should consider tolling more streets. Maybe the streets that carry US 101 between the Central Freeway and Doyle Drive should be tolled, as well as SF's other streets (and freeways) that are the most congested.

Most city streets can be bypassed with minimal effort. The thing about Lombard St. is that the street itself is a tourist attraction.

[TheStranger]

San Francisco should consider tolling more streets. Maybe the streets that carry US 101 between the Central Freeway and Doyle Drive should be tolled, as well as SF's other streets (and freeways) that are the most congested.

The city has proposed congestion fees for downtown as well:

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Congestion-pricing-SF-considering-a-fee-to-drive-13614717.php?psid=NeW

However not much public support for the idea at present (based on that article).

[cahwyguy]

Note: The bill on this is still in committee, and must pass in order for this to happen. See http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB1605

[US 89]

San Francisco should consider tolling more streets. Maybe the streets that carry US 101 between the Central Freeway and Doyle Drive should be tolled, as well as SF's other streets (and freeways) that are the most congested.

The city has proposed congestion fees for downtown as well:

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Congestion-pricing-SF-considering-a-fee-to-drive-13614717.php?psid=NeW

However not much public support for the idea at present (based on that article).

Not to mention that would amount to a new non-bridge toll on an existing US Highway without a free parallel alternate, which isn't allowed by AAHSTO (although based on US 301, that may not be a thing anymore?)

[skluth]

I'm normally not a big fan of tolls, but this seems 100% fine to me. That section of street is 99% tourist attraction, 1% city street. And with traffic as bad as it is in SF, reducing some of the unnecessary (non commuter, delivery, etc.) clog is good, and the money earned can be used to maintain the road, sidewalks, and surrounding area. People that want to visit for free can come on foot and leave their cars out of the way (I love cars and driving, but driving in the city of SF should only be done when necessary).

Completely agree. It's been decades since I visited Lombard St, but it was a pleasant walk. I don't know why anyone would drive it unless they were physically disabled.

[hotdogPi]

Not to mention that would amount to a new non-bridge toll on an existing US Highway without a free parallel alternate, which isn't allowed by AAHSTO (although based on US 301, that may not be a thing anymore?)

US 301 has a free parallel alternate, but trucks aren't allowed on it.

[Max Rockatansky]

Usually I'm not a fan of stuff like this but Lombard Street is way too crowded with vehicles.  The worst part is when cars stop on the downhill grade and obstruct trolley traffic.  Lombard Street is way more interesting on foot anyways, especially if you are a runner.  Russian Hill features a massive grade east of Van Ness that is a hell of climb. 

[english si]

I don't know why anyone would drive it unless they were physically disabled.

If you live on it?

Plus, with the hairpin bends and all that, it gives the appearance of a fun drive (I doubt it actually is anything but boring). When I visited, most cars were residents and pulled in to driveways. Most of the rest of traffic were thrill seekers using boards, bikes and blades (that would be fun). The footpaths were busy though - and this on the 2nd or 3rd of January, so hardly peak tourist season.

[TheStranger]

I don't know why anyone would drive it unless they were physically disabled.

If you live on it?

Plus, with the hairpin bends and all that, it gives the appearance of a fun drive (I doubt it actually is anything but boring). When I visited, most cars were residents and pulled in to driveways. Most of the rest of traffic were thrill seekers using boards, bikes and blades (that would be fun). The footpaths were busy though - and this on the 2nd or 3rd of January, so hardly peak tourist season.

I've driven that stretch of Lombard - usually at off-peak hours like after 9 PM - the twists and grade are definitely a fun enough experience in a car!

[mrsman]

It's a good idea, so long as residents and anyone serving the block (deliveries, plumbers, etc.) could get some kind of exemption.  For residents, it should be easy enough to automatically verify them.  For others, perhaps they can seek a refund with proof of  proper business.

It reminds me of the higher fare for cable cars ($7) than bus ($2.50) because the cable cars are for tourists, but residents will take the bus (or have a monthly pass and could still ride cable cars without additional cost.)

[sparker]

It's a good idea, so long as residents and anyone serving the block (deliveries, plumbers, etc.) could get some kind of exemption.  For residents, it should be easy enough to automatically verify them.  For others, perhaps they can seek a refund with proof of  proper business.

It reminds me of the higher fare for cable cars ($7) than bus ($2.50) because the cable cars are for tourists, but residents will take the bus (or have a monthly pass and could still ride cable cars without additional cost.)

They'll probably issue windshield stickers to residents a la neighborhood parking permits in S.F. and certain other area cities; vendors and service providers will likely be obvious -- no one's going to deck out their vans and trucks with business names and logos just to save $5-10 on a toll!   Re the higher cable car fee:  most of the additional money goes directly into a maintenance fund to take care of the extremely old propulsion equipment and the structure under the tracks, which is unique to the system.  And transit passes are good on the cable cars for the period their issuance describes (if the pass isn't good on weekends, that pertains to the whole city system regardless of mode).

It'll be interesting to see how the Lombard system will be monitored -- my guess is that the online system will either print out receipts (possibly with a bar code); there might be a gate at the top of the hill that is activated by swiping a bar code -- either a hard copy or on one's phone -- over a reader -- or possibly a punch code.  Something tells me they won't post an actual person at the top of the hill to verify toll purchases.   

[Plutonic Panda]

This is a horrible idea. The street may be a tourist attraction, but that doesn't warrant tolling infrastructure that has been paid for and is basically a statement of saying "we'll let the rich have the privilege of paying to drive but everyone else must walk."  It sets a bad precedent. The people living on this street knew how much of a tourist attraction it is. Tolling it won't fix that.

Now there will be problems of traffic backing up to pay to use and trying to find parking assuming most don't pay the toll and opt to walk. Now instead of dealing with gridlock car congestion the homeowners can deal with litter which is shown constantly in high foot traffic tourist areas.

This is just a bad idea all around. Hopefully this proposal dies. Hopefully the congestion pricing proposal dies. Tolls have no place on anything except non-interstate freeways and HO/T lanes.

Oh, and as for the excuses to pay for traffic officers, what a joke. One of the highest taxed states can't find the money for traffic revenue. So now we will decide if most traffic that uses a street is from tourist we should toll the road? Again, this is a bad precedent.

[Max Rockatansky]

The irony to all this stuff with Lombard Street is that the Potrero HIll section of Vermont Street is slightly more curvy.

[english si]

The irony to all this stuff with Lombard Street is that the Potrero HIll section of Vermont Street is slightly more curvy.

Lombard Street gets the tourists because it's at a stop on the most touristy mode of SF transit and is in a posh part of town.

They put in footways, thinned the road and remade it out of red bricks, put light shrubbery in the gaps, allowing a view of the whole block. I'm not sure you can get the same effect on Vermont Street.

[Max Rockatansky]

The irony to all this stuff with Lombard Street is that the Potrero HIll section of Vermont Street is slightly more curvy.

Lombard Street gets the tourists because it's at a stop on the most touristy mode of SF transit and is in a posh part of town.

They put in footways, thinned the road and remade it out of red bricks, put light shrubbery in the gaps, allowing a view of the whole block. I'm not sure you can get the same effect on Vermont Street.

Vermont Street is partially obscured by plant growth and is an a largely residential area.  It definitely isn't as photogenic but way more fun to drive on given the lack of crowds. 

[mrsman]

I imagine that it would be somewhat similar to the 17 Mile drive in Carmel.  Visitors will pay toll but it is true that at 17 Mile drive is a private Street.  Given the location of Lombard Street I doubt that there would be room for a toll booth so I would imagine that there would be electronic tolling of some sort.

Nexus 5X