Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 87

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 86
86 Table 30. Summary of congestion/cordon pricing systems. Singapore London Oslo Stockholm Milan Charging method 85th percentile of Cordon with Cordon Cordon Cordon average speed flat charge Primary objective Demand Congestion Revenue Environmental Environmental management relief generation Discounts No Yes Yes N/A Yes Charges for Yes No Yes Yes Yes through trips Exemptions HOV 4+ and Motorcycles N/A Clean Vehicles buses and taxis; vehicles, meeting high residents get taxis, emissions a 90% motorcycles, standards discount buses, and emergency vehicles most of the tolling systems studied, operating costs ranged In Westminster, the municipal government manages park- from 17% to 60% of revenues. ing directly; Additionally, the average operating cost as a percentage of In San Francisco, a partnership of agencies led by SFMTA revenues for the London, Oslo, Stockholm, and Milan con- is managing the parking pricing system; and gestion zones was 38.7%. Financial data were not available In Chicago, the responsibility for parking management has for the Singapore congestion pricing system. In contrast, been handed over to a private party. operating costs for a sample of 15 tolling agencies in the United States and Canada averaged nearly 34% of operating The primary objective of the public sector agencies that revenues in 2007. Figure 43 summarizes the operating costs administer and operate these programs is to make parking in as percentage of revenues for the cordon price systems under downtown areas less desirable than parking areas in outlying review. areas. For the Chicago system, the private sector partner also has the objective of maximizing revenues within the rate struc- ture set by the rate framework established by the city. In con- 4.6 Cost Estimates for Parking trast, the pricing structure for the San Francisco parking system Pricing Systems is relatively more dynamic. The intent is to adjust parking rates Each of the three systems presented in Section 2.5 illustrates to help shift the demand for parking from one area of the city a different approach to parking pricing management: to another (e.g., from the business district during the day to the 60.0% 55.4% 53.9% 50.0% 38.7% 40.0% 33.5% 28.8% 30.0% 20.0% 10.6% 10.0% 0.0% London Oslo Milan Stockholm Congestion US Tolling Zone Average Agencies Average (2007) Source: Jacobs Engineering Group, 2010. Figure 43. Operating costs as a percentage of revenues for congestion pricing systems.

OCR for page 86
87 Table 31. Summary of parking price management systems. Westminster San Francisco Chicago Management Municipal Multiple public agencies Privatepublic partnership Primary objective To control parking To make parking easier To generate and manage demand revenue Primary method Price cars out of Price cars out of high- Price cars out of high-demand parking demand parking zones high-demand zones parking zones Technology CCTV, pay-stations, In-street sensors, pay- Pay-stations, wireless network stations, wireless wireless networks network Payment options Coin, credit, debit, Coin, credit, debit, Coin, credit, debit phone, scratch card smart card Rate schedule Static Variable by time of day Static 2009 price range (per hour) 1.10 4.40 $0.25$10.00 $1.25$4.25 2013 price range (per hour) TBD TBD $2.00$6.50 nightlife areas in the evening) as conditions warrant. In this reduces congestion in urban areas. Notwithstanding, this manner, San Francisco is going one step further since parking approach may affect the amount of revenues generated from rates for on-street spaces are set at lower rates than off-street parking systems due to reduced demand for private vehicles parking spaces. San Francisco also expects to have a broader entering into the city and using its parking areas. The impact range of rates than either Westminster or Chicago. Table 31 of combining congestion management techniques would summarizes the parking management systems under study. need to be carefully analyzed for any city or other jurisdiction In some regions (e.g., Westminster), parking pricing sys- considering implementation. tems may be combined with cordon pricing to support con- Although three parking pricing systems are presented in gestion management. Drivers heading into a city with cordon this report, financial data are only available for the Westmin- tolls not only must pay the toll to enter the city but must addi- ster system. Operating revenues and operating costs for the tionally pay parking rates that reflect the demand for the space Westminster parking pricing system averaged $136 million chosen. When faced with congestion and parking charges, and $77 million, respectively, over fiscal years 2004 to 2008. drivers may consider the trade-offs of public transit versus Thus, the average operating cost as a percentage of revenues personal vehicles, potentially creating a synergistic effect that was 56.6% over fiscal years 2004 to 2008.