Making Space: Congestion Pricing in Cities

Making Space: Congestion Pricing in Cities About the National League of Cities The National League of Cities (NLC) is the voice of America’s cities, towns and villages, representing more than 200 million people. NLC works to strengthen local leadership, influence federal policy and drive innovative solutions. NLC’s Center for City Solutions provides research and analysis on key topics and trends important to cities and creative solutions to improve the quality of life in communities. About the Authors Nicole DuPuis is the former manager of the Urban Innovation program, Kyle Funk is a research assistant, Jason Griess is the former Heinz Urban Innovation Fellow, Brenna Rivett is a principal associate and Brooks Rainwater is the senior executive and director of NLC’s Center for City Solutions. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge Laura Cofsky who edited the report, and Paris Williams who designed the report. NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................3 Overview of Commuting Patterns in Big Cities ....................4 Case Studies..................................................................................6 London .............................................................................................................................................6 Stockholm .......................................................................................................................................8 Singapore ......................................................................................................................................10 New York ....................................................................................................................................... 12 Equity and Congestion Pricing ............................................... 16 Growing Cities and Congestion ...............................................17 Conclusion – The Future of Congestion Pricing ................. 18 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES Foreword obility is critical to individual and societal One solution that can simultaneously Mprosperity. Individuals need the ability to reduce traffic congestion and raise revenue get around to work, see each other and play, for maintenance and infrastructure needs and commerce requires the efficient movement is congestion pricing, also referred to as of goods. Cities need transportation networks congestion charges or congestion taxes. that run like clockwork, whether those networks Congestion pricing models can help us properly are city streets, commuter highways, rail lines price the use of our roadways, which is a finite, or ports. But the costs of traffic congestion and in-demand good. These models are built on a maintenance backlogs are ever-growing, and basic economic concept: When a public good current funding models are not keeping pace is in high demand, the price charged to use with city needs. that good increases to reflect its value and thus, what users are willing to pay to use it. If you asked people in almost any large In the case of mobility, charges increase with American city what they felt was the greatest traffic, thereby encouraging some drivers to get local challenge, traffic congestion would be off the road and ease traffic pain points. The top of mind. That’s because most Americans funds raised can be utilized to improve public still travel by car. Commuting behaviors in U.S. infrastructure, including public transportation cities look relatively grim regardless of city and roadways. This guide provides local leaders size. In U.S. cities with populations of 50,000 or with the research and examples needed to make fewer, 91 percent of residents commute by car. informed decisions for their communities. In mid-sized cities it hovers between 86 and 87 percent, and in large cities, that number drops Onward, to 78 percent. Even among the 15 largest cities, only five have comprehensive transportation systems. Clarence E. Anthony CEO and Executive Director National League of Cities 2 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES Introduction New York City is, per usual, the first American city to embrace the new model, with a Road-User Charge Systems vs. recent announcement of a congestion zone Congestion Pricing in Manhattan. However, this type of paid use Road user charge systems require drivers model is not limited to big city environments. “to pay based on distance driven and, perhaps other costs of road use, such as Today, funding for infrastructure comes from a wear and tear on roads, traffic congestion, variety of federal, state and local government and air pollution.”1 sources that rely mainly on gasoline excise taxes. As costs for construction have risen Congestion pricing is a type of road user and vehicles have become more fuel-efficient, charge system in which a flat or variable the flat gas tax, which funds the Highway rate fee is charged to vehicles that drive in Trust Fund (HTF), has fallen short of meeting a specified area or zone within a city. With the nation’s repair and maintenance needs. variable pricing, the goal is for congestion As cities and states deal with the immediate charges to rise in accordance with increased consequences of this funding shortfall, broken traffic congestion, thereby pushing some transit systems and traffic woes, they will need drivers off the road and making traffic flow to explore innovative revenue sources and more smoothly. technologies to ensure that mobility remains a public, equitable good. These programs rely on tracking drivers either through manual odometer readings or onboard devices. NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES 3 Overview of Commuting Patterns in Big Cities Figure 1: Commuting Patterns in US Cities by Size Group 100% 2% 5% 5% 6% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 91% 87% 86% 78% 40% 30% 20% 10% 16% 7% 7% 9% 0% Very Small (less than 50K) Small (50K–199K) Mid-Size (200K–500K) Large (more than 500K) Figure 2: The 15 Largest Cities in the US are Heavily Car Dependent 100% 4% 6% 6% 4% 5% 8% 6% 7% 8% 9% 5% 5% 5% 7% 5% 90% 80% 28% 70% 49% 58% 60% 60% 78% 50% 88% 89% 89% 88% 88% 90% 90% 92% 84% 84% 40% 68% 30% 43% 20% 37% 36% 10% 14% 8% 8% 7% 7% 7% 0% 6% 6% 5% 4% 4% Austin, Texas Dallas, Texas Chicago, Illinois Houston, Texas Columbus, Ohio Phoenix, Arizona San Jose, California San Antonio, Texas New York, New York San Diego, California Jacksonville,Indianapolis, Florida Indiana Los Angeles, California San Francisco, California Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Public Transit, Walk, or Bike Commute Driving Commute Other or No Commute 4 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES Of the 15 largest cities in the United States, only New York City boasts a commuting population where the majority of commuters take public transportation to work. Additionally, of these 15 cities, only five have comprehensive public transportation systems. Unsurprisingly, these cities remain heavily reliant on car transportation. Figure 3: Cities in which close to 50% or more of the population commutes via public transit 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 69% 68% 30% 61% 57% 56% 55% 53% 51% 50% 49% 49% 20% 10% 0% New York, New York Berkeley, California Hoboken, New Jersey Union City, New Jersey Boston, Massachusetts Jersey City, New Jersey San Francisco, California Cambridge, Massachusetts Somerville, Massachusetts West New York, New Jersey Washington, District of Columbia The cities where close to 50% or more of the population commutes via public transit center around four key hubs: New York City; Washington, D.C.; Boston, Massachusetts; and San Francisco, California. The New York and New Jersey cities included are all “ring cities” surrounding New York City and the same is true for the Massachusetts cities that surround Boston. Meanwhile, Berkeley, while not directly adjacent to San Francisco, has built a public transit system that not only serves the local city but also connects it to the larger Bay Area. *Each bar may not add up to exactly 100% due to rounding NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES 5 Case Studies London As more people opted to take the bus and ride their bikes, these improvements have remained Background steady. Even though London experienced a Of the cities that have implemented congestion 20 percent population growth, there was a 9.9 pricing schemes, London is the most similar to percent decrease in traffic volume between 2000 New York City in terms of population size, and and 2015.5 Air quality also seems to be improving economic and cultural diversity. Both serve as in the London area, and there are approximately robust global cities with multiple transportation 1,888 fewer deaths each year because vehicle options. But in 2003, London took a divergent fumes have been reduced.6 path to fund their dated transportation infrastructure. Financing the Program The implementation of congestion pricing Before implementing congestion pricing in throughout the city of London required an initial February 2003, automobiles in the city were only investment of $214 million.7 With a starting rate reaching average speeds of 7.5 mph and the city of £5 per car in 2003 — which increased to £11.50 was accruing an estimated $3-$6 million loss in 2014 — congestion pricing brought in gross every week due to gridlock.2 Around 90 percent revenue of about $3.9 billion in its first 10 years, of Londoners reported that congestion in the of which around half funds public transportation.8 city was too high and expressed concerns about The other half is used for operating costs, travel time and air pollution. Mayor Livingstone

Load more