Congestion Pricing

limestonekid · April 2007

What are peoples thoughts on Mayor Bloomberg's proposal about congestion pricing?

Personally, I'm in favor of it. I walk to work in downtown Brooklyn and it's amazing the number of vehicles that are occupied by only the driver. If it gets cars off the road then I've in favor it.

I know there's more to it than that but something definitely needs to be done to encourage people to take other forms of transportation.

MOD NOTE: I just made this a global announcement to encourage all posters from all neighborhoods to participate in the discussion on this major issue.

-C

furrygreyboy · April 2007

I'm for it - but then I don't own a car.

I am concerned that mass transit may not be able to cope with the rise in travelers though. D'you think the money raised will go into planting thousands of trees (another of Bloomberg's environmental proposals) - I'm all for that too.

anonymous · April 2007

I own a car, I have to drive in Manhattan sometimes for business reasons, and I am completely in favor of congestion pricing.

I lose so much time to traffic. I would gladly pay money to enter for the same reason I gladly pay for the Midtown tunnel instead of taking the free bridge up the street... it's FASTER because there is a toll.

It's better for the environment, and the thing people forget is that it's better for drivers. Any driver who can't see this does not value their time IMO.

oiseau · April 2007

I'm for it but I think it would mean putting tolls at all the bridges and even then I still don't see how they will enforce this. I guess every raod which leads into 96th or below would have some type of scannwer or camera which will identify a persons license plate or EZ Pass?

and $21 for a truck which is just doing it's job? I'd say make it more expensive than the proposed $8 for the person who needs to drive his own vehicle into Manhattan to get to work. I'd say $15 - $20 per car wanting to drive into the city would be a good idea. Usually their business will pay for that anyway.

anonymous · April 2007

I drive to the city daily to work but I am still all for congestion pricing. It amazes me that even though the parking lot that I patronize charges $26/day to park, if I don't get there early enough...it will get filled up and I have to find another. Most of the people who park there, like myself, really don't NEED to drive to work. My job validates parking but most of the other customers pay out of their own pocket just to be "living that lifestyle." I've come to see that no matter what you charge for whatever product in a place like NYC...fools will gladly pay it after a bit of rumbling. My biggest concern is that congestion pricing is actually not going to reduce traffic because everyone will pay it.

j.b. · April 2007

It's a great idea, so long as the money goes towards specific mass-transit improvements...

thirtythreesixty · April 2007

London pre- and post- congestion charging is a different city to walk around in and commute in...the system works incredibly well...

Unfortunately, I don't think it passes because it has to be vote don so broadly and all the politicians that represent far flung Queens/LI will fight the thing to death so their constituents can drive 1 to a car...

boygabriel · April 2007

Nothing would make me happier than to see this law go through. The money should go to mass transit improvements to handle the (theoretical) increase in riders.

The more NYC does to balance the playing field between car- and non-car-commuters, the better.

linusvanpelt · April 2007

Oiseau wrote: I guess every raod which leads into 96th or below would have some type of scannwer or camera which will identify a persons license plate or EZ Pass?

You are correct.

I'm a car owner and am all for it; then again, I don't drive to Manhattan daily. They may end up tinkering with the pricing structure, but people will either pay with their wallets or they'll pay with ever more hellish traffic and air.

livetotravel · April 2007

WE live in a borough that has very limited public transportation options, especially subway, for our fellow Brooklynites who live in the far reaches of the borough.

As usual what initially sounds like a good idea - ends up sucking for people who need their cars every day to get to work because of lack of public transport options.

Where's Bloomberg's proposal for offering incentives to car pool?

boygabriel · April 2007

Driving to a subway is pretty easy to do. And probably cheaper & faster than driving to a garage in manhattan.

wally · April 2007

Amen. Bring it on. What about discounts for Carpool cars?

shishkab · April 2007

Oiseau wrote: and $21 for a truck which is just doing it's job? I'd say make it more expensive than the proposed $8 for the person who needs to drive his own vehicle into Manhattan to get to work.

i agree with this, too. i am not against commercial traffic in manhattan -- they are there to do a job and deliver goods which in theory is a benefit to the city. however, the folks who feel compelled to take their SUVs & cars in rather than "suffer" through mass transit (whether MTA, LIRR, NJT, or Metro-North) should have to pay extra for the privilege.

doctorj · April 2007

j.b. wrote: It's a great idea, so long as the money goes towards specific mass-transit improvements...

Or better yet, spend it on the one and only improvement for city commuters that's
* cheapest to build
* cheapest to maintain
* cheapest to use
* healthiest for the commuter
* best for the environment
* requires least space
* most accessible to the disabled
* never goes on strike
* about as fast as cars and public transport for typical city trips up to about 10 miles
* barely exploited so far, rather than maxed out

I'm talking of course about European-style cycle lanes with curbs, on every avenue and every fifth cross street.

nkotsonis · April 2007

He also wants to charge commercial vehicles $25.00 a day. That will greatly increase the cost of doing business in the city. Outer borough contractors will suffer, because they will not be able to afford the increase.
On the other hand, business in the outer boroughs may flourish, because this could spur more neighborhood development and investment outside of Manhattan.
The boroughs would become more economically independent and not rely on Manhattan for it's economic lifeline.
It's a double edged sword this argument.

doctorj · April 2007

nkotsonis wrote: He also wants to charge commercial vehicles $25.00 a day. That will greatly increase the cost of doing business in the city. Outer borough contractors will suffer, because they will not be able to afford the increase.

What makes you think that this extra cost of doing business won't just be passed on to the consumer, like all the other extra costs of doing business in Manhattan?

raulism · April 2007

This is probably a great idea for Manhattan, but I still think the devil's in the details. And one of those details is our neighborhood. How many people will drive from other parts of Brooklyn and then park near us and then hop on the subway? Has this been studied? The more I see of City planning in action, the more I distrust it.

We have to look at what will happen to the whole city.

Here are some articles I found, including discussions of the increase price of the London plan:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/13/nroads113.xml
http://baconsrebellion.blogspot.com/2007/02/rising-price-of-congestion-pricing.html

One pro-sensible development/anti-Ratner people support congestion pricing, including Aaron Naparstek:
http://www.naparstek.com/2005/12/seven-solutions-to-atlantic-yards.php

And here's something that tries to look at the city as a whole:
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/transportation/20060315/16/1788

It looks like everyone will be debating this for a while. I think we should focus on what we know best: our own neighborhoods. I hope the question does not become, congestion pricing, Yes or No? We should be debating what the options are within congestion pricing, and if we can achieve the same goals of a better transportation system without it. And we have to make sure that the planners don't just focus on Manhattan.

8thandprez · April 2007

As an urban planner, I think congestion pricing is a sensible move. The fact that the East River crossings are free means that all of us essentially subsidize every driver who uses these bridges. Applying congestion pricing in a uniform basis and using the technology to eliminate toll collection booths at the Hudson tunnels and other toll bridges in the city could really speed up traffic. Some of the longest traffic waits are caused by the enormous number of people who dont have EZPasses and back up traffic for everyone with their cash lane-queues. High speed EZPass and camera-based toll collection would be a godsend to NYC traffic problems.

I'd also like to see the congestion pricing money be folded into cheaper, easier mass transit options including a) grade-separated bike lanes, b) light rail, c) trams. The light rail and tram options could provide service to underserved outer borough neighborhoods likely to be affected by the congestion charge and would take much less time to get online than a subway extension.

j.b. · April 2007

While I dearly love Clinton Hill (and all the neighborhoods I've been a part of), what I'm more proud of our City. If Manhattan's congestion problems can be resolved in a way that generates transportation improvements for everyone, it's a win for both us and for future New Yorkers.

Look at a 1939 MTA map, and see how far the network used to extend. In 1940, there were 7.4 million New York City residents. In 2004, it was 8.1 million. We may number hit 9.2 million by 2030. Personal motor vehicles, in the long run, are not the solution if current assumptions about their use and cost during commuting hours persist.

the drunken guest · April 2007

Ah.. congestion pricing is a decent idea. I would seriously question where the dollars collected will be going. Also, what is the overhead for the infrastructure needed to collect such fees?... also, given that this will be a city government project I shutter to think of the inefficiencies both financially and logistically that will be involved.... and for what? For less cars in the city? Ok, great.

My idea has always been to transform all metropolitan areas to be more bike friendly (not a knew idea I know)... Tolls are band -aids... I'm talking an entire paradigm shift...

If you adjust for NYC's dominance in terms of financial resources, cultural and financial output, intelligence, population, and determination then our subway system sucks... sure it might be the best in the world, but it still sucks...

whyfi · April 2007

Not the best subways in the world, by a long shot... anywho...

j.b. · April 2007

Not to discourage more protected bike lanes ( I think they're a great idea ), but whether it's light rail, elevated platforms or subway tunnels, mass-transit is still the only long-term solution.

Compared to other subways systems that people might perceive as a better traveling experience, (Osaka perhaps comes to mind) you have to be willing to spend 16 bucks to get cross-town. The dominant features of our subway system are low flat-rate fares, the expanse of the network and the 24-hour service. To make the experience better, pick one of those three to get rid of. The only other (fat-chance) option is big federal subsidies (where are all those returns on energy-efficiency going, anyway?).

anonymous · April 2007

I'm all for congestion tax but there are some things I'd like to see addressed:

1: Like many others have already stated - more real bicycle lanes

2: The city should buy undeveloped lots near the ends of the subway lines to create commuter parking

3: They should have a two wheel exemption like London - motorbikes and scooters do not have to pay the tax as they add little to congestion.

easternscott · April 2007

does anyone costs for motorcycles to lower manhattan?

i was once part of a failed attepmt to increase motorcycle parking in the 5 boroughs. maybe now people will relize you can fit 6 bikes in 1 car space...

anonymous · April 2007

I support the mayor's proposal, but as someone mentioned, its going to face stiff resistance in the City Council and State legislature. I urge everyone to write to their city council Rep., State Assembly Rep. and State Senate Rep. urging them to support the mayor's plans as well. Find your Reps:
- http://www.nyccouncil.info/
- http://assembly.state.ny.us/
- http://www.senate.state.ny.us/senatehomepage.nsf/home?openform

Check out this report from Environmental Defense:
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm?contentID=6286

vinnybrooklyn · April 2007

The theory is good but I don't see them passing any laws like this.

anonymous · April 2007

How would you be able to leave Queens or Brooklyn, in order to go to New Jersey, without getting hit by congestion pricing? The tunnels and bridges out of the city are in Manhattan.

anonymous · April 2007

I already don't enjoy being on super-crowded cattle-car subway trips, so I'm not sure how I feel about this.

doublediamond · April 2007

Anonymous wrote: How would you be able to leave Queens or Brooklyn, in order to go to New Jersey, without getting hit by congestion pricing? The tunnels and bridges out of the city are in Manhattan.

That's my concern as well. In addition, if congestion pricing were put into place, I'd like a guarantee that the money would go toward environmentally friendly mass transportation. I just don't trust our government to do the right thing and that's really my issue.

capt. planet · April 2007

Anonymous wrote: I already don't enjoy being on super-crowded cattle-car subway trips, so I'm not sure how I feel about this.

According to the US Census, Brooklyn had 2.7 million people in 1940. The census in 2000 showed 2.46 million. The difference: in 1940 we had trolleys, electric buses, more frequent trains on the subway, and a lot fewer cars. People also tended to shop in n'hood stores, as there were no Costcos, Fairways, Whole Foods and other mega, big box stores. There was no suburban sprawl, deers didn't eat your petunias and black bears didn't eat your grand kids.

And you call this progress?

homeowner · April 2007

Boygabriel wrote: Driving to a subway is pretty easy to do. And probably cheaper & faster than driving to a garage in manhattan.

Yeah, driving to one in Brooklyn is easy, parking near one? Not so much.

The city has gotten rid of many of the municipal parking lots that were near mass transit hubs which folks used to use. I can think of three that were near (3 blocks or less) subway hubs that have been turned into apartments or commercial real estate off the top of my head (Flatbush & Nostrand start of the 2&5 trains, Atlantic & Court for the 2,3,4,5, and Tillary & Adams for the A&F.

doctorj wrote: I'm talking of course about European-style cycle lanes with curbs, on every avenue and every fifth cross street.

I've got to admit, I don't get the logic behind bike lanes. In NYC using a bike as a daily mode of transportation is only really possible for six months out of the year. The rest of the time it is either too cold, or wet for you to really be able to do it. For people like myself who have to show up in business attire, riding a bike from Brooklyn into Manhattan in a suit in the rain just seems crazy.

I'm always amazed by how little bike lanes get used here in Brooklyn. There are blocks that I drive along where I never see anyone in the bike lanes, ever.

j.b. wrote: It's a great idea, so long as the money goes towards specific mass-transit improvements...

The city would also need to do something about the division of money between the MTA, MetroNorth, and the LIRR. In the past the MTA has subsidized both Metro North and the LIRR. I think that now one of them makes a profit, but the other is still not self sufficient.

Still not clear on the technology. How do out of state cars or rentals (both of which may lack EZPass) pay?

Congestion Pricing

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories