Congestion in Vancouver
The cost of congestion in greater Vancouver has been priced at up to $1.3 Billion per year in 2002  (for matter of comparison, all combined motorist gas taxes will raise less than $800 million in metro Vancouver in 2011 ). Thought the Congestion numbers could look high, it is eventually not high enough to justify to invest billions of $ in new road infrastructures, which are not the most efficient allocation of capital to address congestion issues observed usually no more than 4 hrs a day.
The discussion below, grounded on a previous article as well as traffic data , starts of the viewpoint of what it takes to alleviate the congestion in Metro Vancouver using a road pricing model. From this conclusion, we have two questions to answer:
- What is the most efficient road pricing model? that is what is the one involving the less overhead cost and still achieving its goal to reduce the congestion?
- What is the better use of the money raised by a road pricing model?
Thought that in the context of Vancouver, road pricing schemes are mostly invoked to address Translink woes, it shouldn’t be the primary goal:
- The cost of a congestion toll should not be designed to match the Translink deficit
The primary goal should be to get the most efficient use of a scarce, because expensive, resource: Our Transportation network.
The allocation of the proceeding of a congestion toll needs to be seen thru this lens:
- What is the more efficient use of this transportation revenue stream?
It could not be always the case, but as mentioned in introduction, the general level of congestion in Vancouver, however mostly due to SOV, and the general cost of new road infrastructure, suggests it is better to invest it in the Public Transit network. This to provide alternative and efficient transportation means, able to effectively keep the level of the congestion charge under control. This option could be revisited overtime if necessary.
It could be discussed at length about what could be the better road pricing scheme for Vancouver:
- Area charge (London)
- “ideal” Road pricing (all road are priced according a complex formula and complex tracking of vehicles thru GPS…)
- Cordon pricing (Stockholm)
The today municipal politicians mood, is to not oppose to the road pricing idea, though for some, it is to rationalize the inaction toward it: that is
Anything other that the “ideal” road pricing is not “fair” to the motorists
They could be right, assuming the implementation and operating cost of the model they call for is largely offsetted by the economic gain permitted. Considering the overwhelming complexity of implementation of such a model, and the limited amount of congestion in the lower mainland, which limit the potential revenues, it is probably wrong headed:
The model could be fair to the individual motorists, but could be unfair to the general interest: It could cost more to operate than the general economic gain it allow
..and if there is a drawback to the model followed by London, it is this: the operating cost of its pricing scheme absorb largely the economic gain expected of better traffic conditions .
Considering the Vancouver topography and the choke points responsible for most of the lower mainland congestion, the equivalent of a “cordon pricing” on the bridges seems the natural way to go.
It is probably the best one from benefit/cost perspective. Due to the relatively insulated location of Vancouver, we consider an all “transponder” technology (on the model of Singapore), this to limit the operation cost.
Cordon pricing Model for Vancouver
Below, is a list of the Vancouver area bridge with their number of lanes, where toll gantries could take place, to give an idea of the required gantries investment
||Number of lanes
||Estimated annual revenue (M)
|George Massey Tunnel
|Arthur Laing Bridge
| Oak Street Bridge
|Knight Street Bridge
|Alex Fraser Bridge
|Port Mann Bridge
|Lions Gate Bridge
|Second Narrows Bridge
|Cambie Street Bridge
|Granville Street Bridge
|Burrard Street Bridge
Cost: $25 Millions/year
If we consider all or part of the bridges above, we can easily see than the gantries investment is pretty limited, and should be apriori lower than in the Stockholm case, and is estimated at $100 millions. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, the geographical location of Vancouver make worthy of consideration the outfitting of at least all lower mainland vehicles (they are around 1.5 millions) with a transponder. Here we consider the outfitting of all of the 2.5 millions vehicles registered in BC:
- Transponder investment: ~$30 millions (2 million of on board sticker at $1.6 + 500,000 exterior unit at $8)
The total initial capital cost of the system can be conservatively fixed at lower than $150 million. Assuming an all transponder based scheme, the maintenance and operating cost couldn’t be higher than the one in Singapore, and is estimated around $10 millions/year. the cost to operate the system is summarized below
||capital Amortization (15years)
|Operating & Maintenance (15years)
Revenue, ~$150 million annually
Traffic on Main bridge of the greater Vancouver area. Toll could be in effect once traffic reach max capacity of the bridge (red line), this is 4hr or less per day. in yellow example of toll fare for some bridges (see (6) for more detail)
It is probably the greater unknown of such a scheme. Based on traffic counting , and pricing modelization of a previous study , the estimated revenue per bridge is given in the above picture, and achieved by charging bridge crossing an average of 4hrs per weekday only…letting plenty of opportunities for people to move across the region free of charge.
The Impact on the transportation system
While some part of the peak hour traffic will shift toward off-peak, a signifcant part of it will shift to Transit. For this reason, one could expect:
- a lowered revenue from Gas and parking tax : we estimate this in the tune of $20 millions loss for Translink
- a significant demand increase for Transit : based on the Stockholm experience, the congestion charge could be responsible for an increase of 10% in Transit usage 
Whether there is an impediment to the implementation to a road pricing scheme, it is not as much the implementation cost or the effectiveness to reduce the congestion as seen, than the capability of the transit network to absorb the modal shift involved by a congestion pricing scheme.
In that aspect, the relatively low public transit usage in the Vancouver region, compared to other jurisdictions which have introduced a road pricing scheme, creates certainly some challenges for Translink:
For that reason, as well as political acceptance, a significant Translink service extension could be required, and that means the $70 million moving forward plan, could be only a starting point in transit increase.
On the other hand, the congestion reduction will help to increase the buses productivity, while that the increased demand will improve the fare-box revenue.
With a congestion charge, this bus could be probably travelling twice faster, and offering twice the frequency – so dramatically improving the service to transit customers- this for virtually the same operating cost. Same could apply to the truck industry.
After deducting operating cost and infrastructure amortization, as well as accounting the lost revenue in gas tax, the congestion charge could generate a revenue of $100 millions/year for the Translink coffers.
The lost of gas revenue affects also the Provincial and Federal Government, but one can fairly assume that this is more than offsetted by lower healthcare cost, due to accident reduction, reduction of greenhouse gas emission as well as more active living style associated to public transit use…
From it $70 millions could be already earmarked for Translink extension program as stated in its “moving forward plan”, but due to the effect of the congestion charge, such plan could prove much cheaper to implement.
That lefts extra money to address other woes in the transportation network, like on Broadway.
When to build new road infrastructure?
After good but reasonable alternative transit has been provided and the toll price need to be at a price point considered too high to alleviate congestion: it is time to question the need for new infratsructure…But when the revenue of the congestion toll could not even cover the debt service of a new infrastructure: it indicates not only there is no need for that, but that it is a bad investment if the matter is to address the congestion. That is eventually what illustrates the table above.
The Pattullo bridge congestion toll needs to be priced at a point where it raises “only” $14 million to alleviate the Congestion on it:
the debt service of a new $1 billion bridge could be anywhere north of $50 million…
Where Translink stands?
- Mayors of Metro Vancouver have already spent money on road pricing studies . They are apparently not publicly available, but it is not like there is no material around.
- Some mayors of the region have explicitly called on a road pricing scheme, which is also supported by a host of influencal people, like Translink commissioner Martin Crilly or former premier Mike Harcourt and Dale Parker , as well as organization like the Surrey Board of Trade
- Mayors of Meto Vancouver has explicitly expressed the request to fund transit on transportation based revenue source only
Considering this favorable environment for a road pricing scheme.
- Why Translink has been unable to come with nothing better than a 2c gas tax?
It seems the main obstacle to a road pricing implementation strategy is now Translink itself: it should have at least put on the table such an option as a base for discussion.
That could help to clarify all the points raised in this blog, eventually debunks some myths …but unfortunately it is not the route chosen by Translink so far…
 this number could look suspicious, since pretty much at odd with the one provided by Statistic Canada, but it is the one used by our government to justify investment in road infrastructure ( Canada pacific’s gateway ) which not only include time lost in congestion but also extra burnt fuel and cost of GHG, so it is only fair to use the same metric.
 The introduction of the congestion charge in Stockholm has translated in an increase of 5% of transit usage ( Transport planning in the Stockholm Region, Hans Hede, METREX International workshop, Moscow, June 2006 ), but the modal split was already at 30% for public Transit. It is at 16.5% in metro Vancouver.
 That is at least the opinion expressed by the Mayor of Richmond.
 GVRD votes to continue study of road tolls, The Province, February 25, 2007
 Opportunity for Metro Vancouver transit foundation is now, Mike Harcourt and Dale parker, Vancouver Sun December 7, 2010
 Traffic to downtown and traffic on Metro Vancouver’s bridge
 The London congestion charge: a tentative economic appraisal, R. Prud’homme and J.P. Bocarejo, Transport Policy Volume 12, Issue 3, May 2005, Pages 279-287
 29.06c provincial tax including 15c Translink tax + 10c federal tax per liter. number from Ministry of Finance Tax Bulletin as in June 2011
 From Freeway to feeway: Congestion pricing policies for BC’s Fraser River crossing, Peter Wightman, Simon Fraser University, 2008