NY: Is $8 too much to pay for drivers entering Manhattan?

[NYguy]

NY Post

BLOOMY GETS REEL-Y SNOOTY ON CAR FEE

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04212007/photos/news002a.jpg

By MAGGIE HABERMAN and TOM LIDDY
April 21, 2007

Hey, you can afford it.

Mayor Bloomberg scoffed at opponents of his $8 fee to drive into Manhattan, saying in effect that New Yorkers have the money to pay for it.

"It sounds like a lot of money," said Bloomberg, "but you go to the movies, it's 12 bucks . . . so let's put some of this stuff in perspective here."

Bloomberg confirmed on his weekly WABC radio show that he plans to announce a "congestion pricing" initiative - an $8 flat fee per trip to enter parts of Manhattan during high-traffic hours. He'll tell more in a speech tomorrow outlining his policy of managing the city's growth from now to 2030.

Pointing out that the cost of parking in Manhattan is already sky-high, Bloomberg said "people that drive into the city generally . . . tend to be people that can afford it because otherwise they'd take mass transit."

The cost of coming into Manhattan every weekday once over the course of a year would be $2,080 - and only taxis would be exempt.

When radio host John Gambling pointed out that some people will call it a tax, the mayor responded, "you can call it anything you want, I suppose. Is it a tax? Well, the guy who's collecting the 12 bucks when you go to the movies, is that a tax?"

But that analogy was blasted by outer-borough critics of the plan.

"I think the comparison is totally inapt - people don't have to go to the movies," said Brooklyn City Councilman Lew Fidler.

"Sometimes you have to go to Manhattan . . . the whole concept is incredibly elitist, and I think so is that comparison."

There are several unanswered questions about the plan, which sources said is a knockoff of one London put in place in 2003.

In New York, the fee would exempt taxi and livery cabs, as well as disabled drivers, but would include delivery trucks.

"It definitely will affect the smaller businessman the worse," said Ali Sham, a dispatcher at Deluxe Delivery in Long Island City, Queens. "That's not good for the business, for the drivers, nor for the customers"

With 20 trucks going into the Manhattan at least once a day, Ali's crew would have to shell out more than $40,000 a year.

The boundaries in which the fee would be charged remain unclear. It's also not known how the city would handle extra mass-transit commuters no longer driving cars into Manhattan.

Several sources said riders who use MTA and Port Authority bridges and tunnels would have the cost of tolls deducted from the $8 instead of paying an additional amount.

But the sources said there's deep concern about how that type of arrangement would work going forward if the tolls ever have to be raised, and how it would affect the MTA's and PA's ability to issue bonds in the future.

Kathy Wylde, head of the Partnership for New York City - which supports the measure - cited savings in travel time and gasoline costs.

"Our studies, and the London experience, show that delivery and maintenance trucks have enormous reductions in cost as a result of reduced traffic and the ability to move around the city," she said.

Aides to Gov. Spitzer, Republican Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Democratic Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said they're waiting to see the plan before they comment.

But a source in the Republican-controlled Senate said, "It's not going to go anywhere . . . we don't understand what the mayor is up to."

Motorists had mixed opinions.

"I think crazy - why would they want to do that?" said Ricky Lowman, 32, a jewelry buyer from Bensonhurst, Brooklyn, who enters Manhattan daily. "I will not come in.

But Avi Goldstein, 41, of Lawrence, L.I., said, "If it will be less traffic for me coming in, I'd be happy to pay for it."

[i]Additional reporting by Hasani Gittens in New York and Fredric U. Dicker and Kenneth Lovett in Albany

[NYguy]

Daily News

All pumped up
Bloomberg will 'fight like heck' to get congestion pricing bill passed

BY MICHAEL SAUL
Saturday, April 21st 2007

Mayor Bloomberg defended his plan to charge motorists $8 to enter the most congested parts of Manhattan - laying the groundwork yesterday for a fierce battle with Albany.

"You know, it sounds like a lot of money, but you go to a movie, it's $12," Bloomberg said on his weekly WABC-AM radio show. "So, let's, you know, put some of this stuff in perspective here."

Bloomberg said motorists who drive into Manhattan tend to be the "people who can afford it," and he suggested he would "fight like heck" to get the Legislature to approve the plan before he leaves office in December 2009.

"Using economics to influence public behavior is something this country is built on," he declared. "It's called capitalism."

London has a successful congestion-pricing program in place.

Tomorrow, during a major policy address at the Museum of Natural History, Bloomberg will officially roll out more than 100 initiatives aimed at preparing the city to handle a projected population increase of a million people by 2030.

The congestion-pricing proposal - charging $8 for motorists to enter Manhattan below 86th St. from as early as 6 a.m. to as late as 6 p.m. - has already outraged some drivers and a slew of elected officials.

Told how Bloomberg compared the $8 charge to the price of admission to the movies, Queens Borough President Helen Marshall replied, "A lot of people are not even going to movies because they're $12."

"This is an unfair tax on people who are paying the price of having a poor public transportation system," said Marshall, referring to residents of her borough. "Our mass transit system is already overloaded."

Assemblywoman Catherine Nolan and state Sen. John Sabini, both Democrats from Queens, said the mayor's proposal has little to no chance of winning support from either chamber in the Legislature.

Sabini said congestion pricing is one of the rare issues that will "unite the outer boroughs and the suburbs" in opposition.

But several elected officials, including Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz and Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion, said they would keep an open mind. Both said they wanted to ensure the plan wouldn't hurt working families.

"I'm not going to slam it, but I'm not going to open up the corks of the champagne," said Markowitz, predicting the proposal will be substantially "fine-tuned" if it moves forward.

Environmentalists and civic leaders showered Bloomberg with praise.

"For New York to maintain quality of life, healthy air for all of us, especially our children growing up here, and for us to tackle the challenge of climate change, we need to do congestion pricing to slow the growth of traffic congestion," said Andy Darrell, regional director of the Environmental Defense group, a nonprofit organization.

Bloomberg acknowledged that he faces an uphill battle.

"Most elected officials - not all, but most - are unwilling to champion unpopular causes," he said. But he added it's disingenuous to complain about environmental problems and then fight against remedies.

"What we need are people to get ahead of the curve," he said. "I would describe it as leading from the front."

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2007/04/21/amd_tollkerner.jpg

Walter Kerner, New Jersey: 'We have to do it. It's a pollution issue and a congestion issue...We have got to get people on mass transit.'


http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2007/04/21/amd_tollvagavnov.jpg

Dmitry Vaganov, Brooklyn: 'The subway is dirty, it's hot. I don't like the feeling of being underground. I would rather drive, but if it's going to happen I would have to leave the car at home.'


http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2007/04/21/amd_tolllopez.jpg

Jerry Lopez, Queens: 'I don't want to pay that. It's far too expensive, and for regular people like me it's not good.'

[AnotherPunter]

I lived in London for a while. The Congestion Fee is absolutely the smartest thing that has been done in urban planning in a long long time. The complaints are that it would put a burden on an already overburdened public transportation system. But THATS the POINT. It forces improvement in the public transportation system and provides a major source of funding for it at the same time. Brilliant.

The key is the focus on busses. Ken Livingstone (London's Mayor) accompanied the congestion charge with a plan to vastly improve the public transportation system built--not around subways--but around busses. The big problem with busses is that they get stuck in traffic. Not that efficient. But taking cars off the roads allows you to make dedicated bus lanes that actually work. The busses are very reliable and actually get you places fairly quickly. And the busses are clean, well maintained (partly because each route is bid out to private companies which lease the route and are subject to common rules--for instance, the busses all need to be the deep red color that people associate with the system; they all need to comply with the transportation authority's payment scheme, etc).

In the US, taking the bus is an ordeal and considered something of a downscale activity. In London, its just the smart way to get around. This has relieved stress on the Underground and made the center of the city vastly more liveable.

And I think its a great idea for NYC.

http://www.highways.gov.uk/knowledge/images/bus_lane.jpg

[donybrx]

Maybe $8 is too little....most people will cough it up just like they cough up the huge increases in gascosts...

I had to make a one day trip into NY this week...errand of mercy for a friend in sciatic nerve pain to get to the specialist. On the way back I was able to take the HOV lane on the Long Island Expressway (because there were two of us---even though one of use was lying down in the back seat--out of view----as such, 'cop bait' were I...lol); but the LIE was congested with stop/start traffic for the better part of 40 miles at 3:15-3:45 PM---not even rush hour--every vehicle had only ONE driver, exiting the 'city'.....as the few of us in the HOV lane breezed by at 55-65 MPH......

I was ga-ga over NYC for a very long time...and loved living there in those 'better' days...but glad to be gone...making room for the next 30 ga-ga folks.....

[staff]

If that's the price of keeping cars and pollution away from Manhattan, then no, it's not too much.

[PhillyRising]

How about putting more office jobs in the other boroughs? Why do they all have to be in Manhattan? Maybe the Mayor should give some incentives of putting those high paying office jobs all over the city. They wouldn't be leaving New York and you get your less crowding of Manhattan.

[pricemazda]

because then you would get a kind of sprawl. If businesses are spread out, the numbers of people who need to go to such places decreases, therefore public transport becomes less viable. You need a certain density in order for public transportation to become economic.

As long as the central business area is well served by public transportation then having a CBD doesn't matter.

[PhillyRising]

because then you would get a kind of sprawl. If businesses are spread out, the numbers of people who need to go to such places decreases, therefore public transport becomes less viable. You need a certain density in order for public transportation to become economic.

As long as the central business area is well served by public transportation then having a CBD doesn't matter.

i meant like putting jobs in Downtown Brooklyn....they have mass transit. New York is already a sprawled out city....put jobs closer to where the majority of New Yorkers live.

[pricemazda]

because you don't live in a communist centrally planned economy. Businesses want to go where there is critical mass.

If you spread out businesses you would probably increase the need to travel, but this time instead of to one central location, you would end up with many cross town journeys.

For example, if you are a lawyer and are based in Queens, yet your clients are based in Jersey City and they want a conference meeting with you, their accountants and their senior shareholders, thats a lot of cross town meetings.

And despite video conferencing is bullshit. Its so annoying to use and a pain in the ass.

[nath05]

I don't see why delivery vehicles wouldn't be exempt....seems like that would put an unfair strain on small business owners and employers.

Otherwise, I'd call this a good idea.

[pricemazda]

I would hazard a guess, from London's experience in fact the overwhelming majority of people already use public transportation in some way.

In London pre-congestion charge the figure was 80% of people using public transport to come into the centre, that means 20% of people and delivery vehicles were causing all the horrific congestion.

It will force those delivery vehicles to be more efficient in their journeys, not make unecessary trips, maybe even force people to look for alternatives to having all their goods delivered.

[pdxstreetcar]

what about just dedicating several lanes exclusively for buses, taxis and emergency vehicles and letting the other vehicles fight over the remaining space on the road? the avenues are quite wide anyway. somthing like 3 lanes for buses, taxis & emergency vehicles and have only 1 lane for delivery vehicles and motorists. wouldn't this have the same effect but without the fee?

[pricemazda]

Not on pollution levels, and it would only serve to increase congestion, not lessen it.

I don't understand why this is an issue, people accept paying a fee to use the tunnels, people accept paying tolls on turnpikes.

[BnaBreaker]

Seems to me like the boundaries should be the same as the city limits. I fully support this congestion toll concept, but people who live just over the East River in Brooklyn with a view of the Manhattan skyline shouldn't have to pay eight bucks to get there. I say they should make the suburbanites pay.

[mariokarter]

8 dollars is a lot of money for some people actually, and avoiding driving through manhatten isn't always possible. Also I don't really get where hes going with the whole movie comparison, this is 8 dollars in the addition to all the other car operating expenses. You don't pay "movie insurance" or feed gas to a movie to make it play, the only cost is the admission, where as there are tons of car expenses.

[BTinSF]

Here in San Francisco we have had what amounts to a $5 charge for some time. That's the toll on the Bay Bridge (there's a similar one on the Golden Gate). You can still enter the city from the south without a charge, but that's a minority of the people coming into town on any given day. Anyway, the charges don't seem to have stopped a lot of people. What does stop them are the hassles and costs associated with having the car once they are here: $12 to park for 8 hrs IF you can get a space, the probability your car will be dented or vandalized if you park on the street (where you will have to run out every hour and feed the meter).

What would help would be if businesses would stop subsidizing parking--both for customers and for executives. But the argument then is that that would cause those businesses to leave the downtown. I think it would have that tendency but I don't know if it would overcome the advantages of being downtown. It seems like in New York, a lot of business has fled to New Jersey and southern Connecticutt, but a lot hasn't.

[pricemazda]

No one talks about thee costs to business of congestion itself.

[BTinSF]

^^^Yeah, they talk about it: http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2002/html/table_01_65.html and http://www.fightgridlocknow.gov/docs/conginitoverview070301.htm

I don't put much faith in numbers like these though.

[pricemazda]

well for example, the cost of people in man hours from being late in the mornings, people being late to meetings. There a cost.

Think of the number of times you had to wait in for a delivery guy or someone to fix your appliances.

[AnotherPunter]

Couple of comments:

1. Technology. I guess one question I have is how the technology to do this will work. In London they have cameras set up at the border of the zone where they snap a picture of every license plate that drives by. If you've paid, you are good. If you haven't paid, a bill shows up at your door. You can do that in London because there is one authority giving out licenses for the whole of the UK so, unless you've driven over from the Continent on a ferry, they can figure out a way to charge you. In NYC, you'll have people from NJ, CT, PA and the rest of the country driving through as well. Unless they are going to have actual toll collectors or some kind of electronic tag that shows you've paid, I'm not sure how they will enforce this.

2. Just create bus lanes. Someone above suggested just creating dedicated lanes for busses.

what about just dedicating several lanes exclusively for buses, taxis and emergency vehicles and letting the other vehicles fight over the remaining space on the road? the avenues are quite wide anyway. somthing like 3 lanes for buses, taxis & emergency vehicles and have only 1 lane for delivery vehicles and motorists. wouldn't this have the same effect but without the fee?

that would restrict the number of cars (encouraging many to move to public transportation) without charging a fee. The problem is then you don't have the source of revenues that can be fed back into improving public transportation and if you don't improve public transportation, it will create more problems than it solves.

3. Sprawl vs. centralization.

How about putting more office jobs in the other boroughs?

Don't you think that charging a fee will increase the incentives for some companies to do just that and spread into the other boroughs? Two options: (1) create tax incentives to get people to invest in outer boroughs or (2) create tax disincentives to get people not to invest in Manhattan. Either gets the job done and there's an argument to be made that the (2) is better than (1).

[BTinSF]

well for example, the cost of people in man hours from being late in the mornings, people being late to meetings. There a cost.

Think of the number of times you had to wait in for a delivery guy or someone to fix your appliances.

Even better examples from the articles I linked:

Congestion Threatens Businesses

Beyond lost time and fuel, transportation congestion imposes significant additional costs on U.S. businesses. As transportation congestion mounts, the economic benefits generated by trucking, rail and aviation deregulation are increasingly threatened. The TTI totals and aviation figures take into account only time and fuel, and would be much higher if they incorporated other costs, such as the cost of unreliability, the loss of productive delivery cycles, the need for increased inventory, or the cost of congestion-related emissions. To date, these costs have been insufficiently quantified, but even the anecdotal evidence is telling:

A national retailer that keeps $2.5 billion worth of merchandise on-hand recently added 10 days of “buffer stock” to its inventory due to increased delays. This buffer stock costs the retailer $2.7 million annually.

For a container carrier who handles almost 20,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) of cargo per week, one full day of port delay adds $4 million in annual operating costs.

An Atlanta area distributor of pet food with an 11-truck fleet finds it difficult for one truck to make more than 12 daily deliveries; in 1984, one truck made as many as 20 deliveries each day.

In 2005, congestion at the Otay Mesa and Tecate crossings along the California-Mexico border was estimated by the San Diego Association of Governments to cost the U.S. economy $3.7 billion in output and almost 40,000 jobs.

[kirjtc2]

Couple of comments:

1. Technology. I guess one question I have is how the technology to do this will work. In London they have cameras set up at the border of the zone where they snap a picture of every license plate that drives by. If you've paid, you are good. If you haven't paid, a bill shows up at your door. You can do that in London because there is one authority giving out licenses for the whole of the UK so, unless you've driven over from the Continent on a ferry, they can figure out a way to charge you. In NYC, you'll have people from NJ, CT, PA and the rest of the country driving through as well. Unless they are going to have actual toll collectors or some kind of electronic tag that shows you've paid, I'm not sure how they will enforce this.


Sounds like what they have on highway 407 in Toronto. They haven't had much success tracking down license plates from outside of Ontario.

[ctman987]

As a current New Yorker I have mixed feelings about this tax although I know the mayor does mean well.

I am in the Bronx but right on the subway line and so always use to the subway to go into Manhattan about 4-5 times per week. There are probably about 5 or 6 times a year that I actually drive into Manhattan (below the 116th Street/Columbia University area and when I do go into the city I prep for the high cost of tolls and parking.

Nevertheless I know there are areas of this city that are poorly served by mass transit and as a result people need to use their cars to get into Manhattan for various reasons. Does this mean that parts of the city that are poorly served by mass transit are going to be put on new subway lines so that residents dont have to drive to Manhattan? I doubt it.

This plan needs to be looked at carfefully. Yes there are thousands of commuters from Long Island, New Jersey, Westchester county and Connecticut who prefer to drive in Manhattan rather then use Metro North or the LIRR or New Jersey Transit or the PATH. But there are many city residents who need to drive to certain areas of Manhattan for various reasons.

There is some discussion of buses here. I use city buses probably 2x per year at the most. I personally prefer the subway system. Buses are forced to sit in congestion and face serious delays. Putting in bus lanes will cause more chaos while Manhattan streets are being made to have bus lanes. I personally beleive the city should work on improving the subway, add more lines, replace the subway cars and renovate the stations

Lastly the mayors comparison to movie tickets is completly uncalled for. Movie tickets in Manhattan cost more then 2x the price they should. Movie prices are overpriced in Manhattan like everything else which is why many city residents cant afford to go to the movies in Manhattan. Yes tourists and wealthy Manhattanites flock to the movies but there are many residents from other areas of the city that cant afford the tickets in the same way they cant afford this new price to enter Manhattan.

[Jularc]

I like this idea of the $8 charge. Hopefully with that charge they can invested in making the public trasportion system in the city much pleasing for people to take than currently seems.

[Riise]

8 dollars is a lot of money for some people actually, and avoiding driving through manhatten isn't always possible. Also I don't really get where hes going with the whole movie comparison, this is 8 dollars in the addition to all the other car operating expenses. You don't pay "movie insurance" or feed gas to a movie to make it play, the only cost is the admission, where as there are tons of car expenses.

Fuel, insurance, and maintenance are the cost of using an automobile, not using the road. If you are going to add the cost of using a car in you must also calculate the total cost associated with going to a movie. In addition to admission the cost of going to a movie also includes: costs associated with getting to the movie (transport), popcorn, etc.

[Master Shake]

I am with Dmitry Vaganov...the subways are hot and disgusting.

Bloomberg is a typical Liberal Elitist (even though he is a pseudo Republican). He will impose costs on the working man, the blue collar immigrants that make New York run. How about they also impose a charge on cars running INSIDE Manhattan as well, and not just those entering from the Outer Boroughs. Make the millionaire bankers and yuppies also pay $8 every time they ride in a limo or a cab. Then the support for this TAX will go out the window. I am sorry this is pure hypocrisy plain and simple.

Also, if Bloomberg and the yuppies wanted to destroy Chinatown, the last ethnic enclave in Manhattan that does not look like suburban Ohio, this will surely destroy the neighborhood as immigrant families who come into Manhattan to vist will be priced out.

Why doesn't Bloomberg and the other do-gooders invest in public transit FIRST, before TAXING New Yorkers to death. New York is not transit utopia, far from it. Subways do not serve the majority of Queens, Staten Island and much of Brooklyn. London has much broader transit coverage, not only with the Tube, but also with commuter rail lines. Plus London continues to build new lines. New York has not built a train line in 50 years. They are starting work on the Second Avenue Subway, which will ONLY run in Manhattan which already has many subway lines, meanwhile the majority of the outer boroughs have no subway service.

If New York subways were not so filthy and disgusting people will ride it.

This plan is simply all wrong and only makes smug rich people in Manhattan feel better about themselves while they consume more than millions of poor people around the World.

[Frisco_Zig]

Here in San Francisco we have had what amounts to a $5 charge for some time. That's the toll on the Bay Bridge (there's a similar one on the Golden Gate). You can still enter the city from the south without a charge, but that's a minority of the people coming into town on any given day.

I think the number of people who do drive in from the South as well as the many who drive within SF is significant

I think congestion pricing in a great policy idea though I am not sure about a toll since as the poster above mentions it doesn't charge those driving within the island

with regard to SF the recent Muni fiasco leaves me with little confidence our transit is up to snuff or that new money from a congestion zone directed to Muni wouldn't simply be wasted (or even that money raised with the congestion pricing wouldn't be diverted to the general fund for social services)

[fflint]

Bloomberg is a typical Liberal Elitist (even though he is a pseudo Republican).
Bloomberg, like most Republicans, is indeed an elitist--which stands to reason, considering most elitists are Republicans. I agree with you on this one.

He will impose costs on the working man, the blue collar immigrants that make New York run.
If it costs $8 to drive into Manhattan all by one's self in a privately owned automobile, then it isn't a "working man" or "blue colllar immigrant" activity, now, is it?

If New York subways were not so filthy and disgusting people will ride it.
If crossing a bridge or tunnel didn't cost $8, maybe people would drive private automobiles all by themselves more often.

This plan is simply all wrong and only makes smug rich people in Manhattan feel better about themselves while they consume more than millions of poor people around the World.
The vast and longstanding civic investment in public transit by the City of New York should absolutely be privileged by its civic officials. To fail to do so would be a deriliction of civic duty.

Only a decadent, conservative idealogue would crusade against conserving and protecting New York's public transit investment in favor of the corporate auto industry's latest and shittiest product lines.

[Dalreg]

If anything the fee should be higher. Make it significant enough to actually impact the way people think. There are many alternatives to driving in NYC people just have to stop and look.

[donybrx]

I am with Dmitry Vaganov...the subways are hot and disgusting.



Also, if Bloomberg and the yuppies wanted to destroy Chinatown, the last ethnic enclave in Manhattan that does not look like suburban Ohio, this will surely destroy the neighborhood as immigrant families who come into Manhattan to vist will be priced out.





Long before Bloomberg, Chinatown was gobbling up Little Italy......Asian in-migrants typically settled in large swaths of Queens. The Germans have been squeezed out of the east 80s. Me, I left altogether.


And yes the subways are not anywhere nearly as well run or managed as they were during the first half of the twentieth century......but there isn't as much interest in or commitment to integrity and quality as there was in those days....as concerns too much of American life these days

[tackledspoon]

This plan is simply all wrong and only makes smug rich people in Manhattan feel better about themselves while they consume more than millions of poor people around the World.

What about thinking of this as a carpool incentive. Let me do some math. From my parents' house in Chatham, NJ, a monthly pass is $9.20 a day (or less, as you'll see later) and takes between 40 minutes and an hour depending on whether you catch the express or local.
For one person to drive into New York, assuming that the person's automobile gets about 25mpg, that's a gallon of gas each way at about $3.00 per gallon, which comse out to $6.00. Add to that the $8 toll and tolls to get onto the parkway and you're looking at $16 round trip, not including parking, wear and tear or insurance. Now, if people would just carpool to work, they could turn it into a $4 round trip each day and split insurance and wear and tear by alternating automobiles.
Personally, I'll still take mass transit, but my point is that this isn't meant to rule out "the working man" and make life better for "smug liberal elites." It is a plan that encourages responsible consumption.

Why doesn't Bloomberg and the other do-gooders invest in public transit FIRST, before TAXING New Yorkers to death.

Little tid-bit from NJtransit.com:
BusinessPass & PatronPass
BusinessPass is NJ TRANSIT's commuter pass that offers pre-tax savings on commuting costs. Offered through your employer, BusinessPass allows you to save even more on monthly rail, bus, and light rail passes by deducting a portion of the cost from your pre-tax salaries, thus increasing your take-home pay. Also, the monthly passes are mailed directly to your work site. PatronPass gives businesses an opportunity to buy one-way tickets in bulk for either the bus, train, or light rail in advance.
While this isn't inside this city, this offers a very reasonable alternative for a huge portion of commuters who would be affected by this hike.
New York is not transit utopia, far from it. Subways do not serve the majority of Queens, Staten Island and much of Brooklyn. London has much broader transit coverage, not only with the Tube, but also with commuter rail lines. Plus London continues to build new lines. New York has not built a train line in 50 years. They are starting work on the Second Avenue Subway, which will ONLY run in Manhattan which already has many subway lines, meanwhile the majority of the outer boroughs have no subway service.
Subways don't, but city busses sure as hell do.
As for the dirt and grime- New York City subways are not the cleanest, but I have OCD and I've been riding the subway for my entire life with little issue.

[BayRidgeFever]

No, subway service does not cover every square inch of NYC. That would be an impossible task and not financially sound. They DO however go through the major population centers of the outer boroughs, like downtown Brooklyn, Jamaica, Flushing, and LIC. The second avenue subway will only serve Manhattan, yes, but it is so necessary. Over 1.5 million people crowd the Lexington line everyday, and some of that must be diverted to second ave, whos population is increasing rapidly lately. Sure it's a little dirty, but NY was never known to be a pristine city, and honestly, it's grossly exaggerated, for $2 to get anywhere, deal with it.

In addition to subway service, many underserved neighborhoods have "express buses," which instead of a $2 charge cost $5. They make a few stops in the neighborhood and go straight into Manhattan from there. Usually the trip takes less than 40 minutes even from places as far out as Douglaston Queens.

There is also metro-north, which serves a good portion of the Bronx. There is also LIRR, which serves a good portion of Queens. There is also the Staten Island Railway, which runs right down the center of Staten Island, to a connection with the ferry. There are so many ferries and water taxies along the waterfront, where the population will be exploding within 10 years (LIC and Williamsburg esp). There are also the countless ferries from NY to NJ, and Path from NY to NJ. Plus, you can always take a cab or car service, which in the long run (insurance for your car, repairs, gas, headaches) saves you money and gray hairs!

Bottom line, transit options are limitless in this city! Driving a car into Manhattan is, for one, a royal pain, and second, so unnecessary! I say we make it $20, then we will really get people discouraged.

[ginsan2]

I like the idea of taking an active role in making public transportation more efficient and "called for". But as others have mentioned... I don't think this toll fee will actually produce anything line with what people actually want.

To be short, this isn't being implemented on any sort of economy of scale; the amateur economist in me wants to know what the extraneous results will be of this cost that is too low to be noticeable, but adds up to significant amounts over a period of time. This is the kind of cost that business look at in years-end style and say "Wow, last year people spent over $8,546,000 just trying to get into Manhattan" without really analyzing further; maybe their business doesn't require people to drive in, or can be staffed locally, doesn't need regular shipments, etc.

I think it's going to be more detrimental than anything else; I like the idea but not how it's being implemented. :yuck:

[Jaroslaw]

Bloomberg says that people are rational and respond to economic incentives... then how about free subways, NOT another tax? I'd be more for this if it were revenue-neutral, i.e., balanced by some reduction in gov't income somewhere else. OR if all the money went into subway investment (not that one can historically trust the gov't with these kinds of earmarks). It is true that every city has these... London got its congestion charge idea from Singapore, which has had it for decades, I think--of course the newspapers would never know this--and while HK doesn't have a congestion charge (the number of cars from mainland China is controlled by the Chinese as much as by HK), it has a 100% car value registration license, and extremely high charges for everything else...and the bus is almost as convenient as a taxi. I guess I'm for this as a sign of NY self-confidence...

BTW, there are studies that argue that congestion was not reduced significantly in London after its system was adopted, and that a lot of congestion was exported outside the congestion charge perimeter. Indeed, total congestion went up (like when you reduce the number of parking spaces, congestion increases because of the extra people looking for parking). This is why they are expanding the perimeter now...

[larryfla]

I am with Dmitry Vaganov...the subways are hot and disgusting.

Bloomberg is a typical Liberal Elitist (even though he is a pseudo Republican). He will impose costs on the working man, the blue collar immigrants that make New York run. How about they also impose a charge on cars running INSIDE Manhattan as well, and not just those entering from the Outer Boroughs. Make the millionaire bankers and yuppies also pay $8 every time they ride in a limo or a cab. Then the support for this TAX will go out the window. I am sorry this is pure hypocrisy plain and simple.

Also, if Bloomberg and the yuppies wanted to destroy Chinatown, the last ethnic enclave in Manhattan that does not look like suburban Ohio, this will surely destroy the neighborhood as immigrant families who come into Manhattan to vist will be priced out.

Why doesn't Bloomberg and the other do-gooders invest in public transit FIRST, before TAXING New Yorkers to death. New York is not transit utopia, far from it. Subways do not serve the majority of Queens, Staten Island and much of Brooklyn. London has much broader transit coverage, not only with the Tube, but also with commuter rail lines. Plus London continues to build new lines. New York has not built a train line in 50 years. They are starting work on the Second Avenue Subway, which will ONLY run in Manhattan which already has many subway lines, meanwhile the majority of the outer boroughs have no subway service.

If New York subways were not so filthy and disgusting people will ride it.

This plan is simply all wrong and only makes smug rich people in Manhattan feel better about themselves while they consume more than millions of poor people around the World.
Driving in central London cost a driver eight pounds a day. I think that $8.00 a day would be a good cost. The pound is twice the value of a dollar so it works out?

[Curious Atlantan]

We need to drive less and take public transportation more to save the planet for next generations. It makes a lot of sense in this context to tax people who drive to fund public transportation improvements and extensions, to get the subway closer to people and make it more confortable. It makes A LOT of sense to me, I don't see what is so hard to understand.
The sooner people and businesses in this country do understand this and make the necessary changes, the better it will be for everybody. As an example, look at what not making the right changes at the right time did for the big three American car manufacturers: they are hammered into oblivion by the Japanese manufacturers. Duuuuuuh.

[NYguy]

i meant like putting jobs in Downtown Brooklyn....they have mass transit. New York is already a sprawled out city....put jobs closer to where the majority of New Yorkers live.

There is a plan in place to put more office buidings in Downtown Brooklyn. But that's not a solution. Downtown Brooklyn has its own problems already.

[NYguy]

If you spread out businesses you would probably increase the need to travel, but this time instead of to one central location, you would end up with many cross town journeys.

Also, in the case of New York, you have people coming not just from the other boroughs, but from surrounding states as well. Manhattan is centrally located, and with Penn Station, Grand Central, the PA bus terminals, etc., both the workplace and the workforce are easily accessible in and to Manhattan.

[NYguy]

I like this idea of the $8 charge. Hopefully with that charge they can invested in making the public trasportion system in the city much pleasing for people to take than currently seems.

I have no sympathy for people who insist on driving into Manhattan. But I guess the alternative to Bloomberg's $8 toll would be to toll the city's bridges (the Port Authority and the MTA's bridges and tunnels are already tolled). That would mean tolls on the Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williamsburgh, Queensborough, and the smaller bridges that connect Manhattan and the Bronx. It's an issue that comes and goes frequently. But it's basically the same as what Bloomberg is suggesting. Mass transit into Manhattan is already critical (you can hardly get on some trains during rush hour), but there are improvements in the works - it will take some years before they are even completed. Capacity at Penn Station will be doubled with the new tunnel they are building under the Hudson. With LIRR service moving into Grand Central, there will be oppurtunity for more service. Even ferry service has increased in recent years, another alternative.

We need to get more cars off the road. There are just several issues, with no easy one-stop answers. For example, with every car that drops off the road with the $8 fare, would that encourage someone else to take their place?

Avi Goldstein, 41, of Lawrence, L.I., said, "If it will be less traffic for me coming in, I'd be happy to pay for it."

Will there be increased taxi service along with increased subway, bus, and commuter rail service with these funds alone? These issues all have to be worked out.

[DaveofCali]

This is a key part of the article:

"Bloomberg confirmed on his weekly WABC radio show that he plans to announce a "congestion pricing" initiative - an $8 flat fee per trip to enter parts of Manhattan during high-traffic hours."

Thus, not all the time. However, exceptions should be made for things like delivery trucks because those are necessary trips.

[sprtsluvr8]

Why not charge taxis? They seem to create the biggest of the traffic congestion in NYC...and they can't drive...

My problem with the congestion tax is that it sends a message to suburbanites to "stay out of the city". I feel that the tax would eventually cause just that - people would stay out of the city once again, like they did when U.S. cities were in decline. Someone wanting to see a movie will decide to see it outside of the pay area; someone going out to eat will do it outside of the pay area; some companies will decide to move outside of the pay area after massive complaints by employees; etc, etc...the majority of people won't be bullied into riding transit, but they WILL change their habits by driving to destinations outside of the city. Business will follow the trend like they did in the 60's-70's and the city will decline.

The overall attitude of people who support this idea seems to be animosity toward suburbanites taking advantage of their city in the cozy convenience of their cars. Let me just say...driving into the city is NOT convenient. I have a feeling that many people who do drive have specific reasons for it, especially in a city like NY where subway coverage is very extensive. When you consider the frustration and time of stop-and-go traffic plus the occasional accident hold ups; the time and $ spent on parking and locating parking; the $ of gas; then add a congestion fee to that? Trips to the city may just become very special and very seldom. Not good for the city IMO.

[e2ksj3]

Aren't the $6 tolls at the crossings into Manhattan enough? I know that would deter me from driving in the city. :sly:

I think this is a little excessive, plus you've got to keep in mind, that they will have to pay for the man power and/or equipment for setting all this up and to me that just seems like to much. If NYC wasn't on an island, I could see doing this, but I think a better approach would to have just been to raise the tolls at the crossings and increase the car tax for people who own a car living in the city.

[arbeiter]

Anyone who drives a car to work daily in Manhattan, other than people who use a car to actually conduct their business (taxi drivers, plumbers, etc) do not constitute the lower-classes. The cheapest monthly parking runs over $200 a month. It's $150 a month to park in my neighborhood in Brooklyn!

I don't see that there is any 'right' that we'd be taking away. For Long Islanders who must drive, park your car at a lot in Jamaica or Flushing. New Jerseyans accepted their $6 fee, begrudgingly. I don't see why the east approach should be free and the west should not.

[arbeiter]

My problem with the congestion tax is that it sends a message to suburbanites to "stay out of the city". I feel that the tax would eventually cause just that - people would stay out of the city once again, like they did when U.S. cities were in decline. Someone wanting to see a movie will decide to see it outside of the pay area; someone going out to eat will do it outside of the pay area; some companies will decide to move outside of the pay area after massive complaints by employees; etc, etc...the majority of people won't be bullied into riding transit, but they WILL change their habits by driving to destinations outside of the city. Business will follow the trend like they did in the 60's-70's and the city will decline.


Um, if you're from Long Island and use your car to drive into Manhattan to see a movie, you're stupid. There are probably 15 multiplex theatres with parking that are much closer to Long Island. Same goes for NJ - even the cheap discount theatre in Union City, 1 mile from Midtown, has a parking lot.

As far as dining, anyone who lives way away from Manhattan and wants to have a meal does it in their neighborhood. Lots of Long Islanders I know drive into Queens or Brooklyn and not Manhattan to eat. Most suburbanites who drive to Manhattan to eat are going there for a special occasion, or can afford to do so already.

The 'pay area' is not all of new york city...

[arbeiter]

There is a plan in place to put more office buidings in Downtown Brooklyn. But that's not a solution. Downtown Brooklyn has its own problems already.

What problems do you mean? I mean, it's underutilized as a tertiary business district, but that's the only major problem it has. In terms of subway infrastructure, several of the subway stations are below capacity. Lawrence St/MetroTech is shockingly empty most of the day.

[pico44]

I am with Dmitry Vaganov...the subways are hot and disgusting.

Bloomberg is a typical Liberal Elitist (even though he is a pseudo Republican). He will impose costs on the working man, the blue collar immigrants that make New York run. How about they also impose a charge on cars running INSIDE Manhattan as well, and not just those entering from the Outer Boroughs. Make the millionaire bankers and yuppies also pay $8 every time they ride in a limo or a cab. Then the support for this TAX will go out the window. I am sorry this is pure hypocrisy plain and simple.

Also, if Bloomberg and the yuppies wanted to destroy Chinatown, the last ethnic enclave in Manhattan that does not look like suburban Ohio, this will surely destroy the neighborhood as immigrant families who come into Manhattan to vist will be priced out.

Why doesn't Bloomberg and the other do-gooders invest in public transit FIRST, before TAXING New Yorkers to death. New York is not transit utopia, far from it. Subways do not serve the majority of Queens, Staten Island and much of Brooklyn. London has much broader transit coverage, not only with the Tube, but also with commuter rail lines. Plus London continues to build new lines. New York has not built a train line in 50 years. They are starting work on the Second Avenue Subway, which will ONLY run in Manhattan which already has many subway lines, meanwhile the majority of the outer boroughs have no subway service.

If New York subways were not so filthy and disgusting people will ride it.

This plan is simply all wrong and only makes smug rich people in Manhattan feel better about themselves while they consume more than millions of poor people around the World.

Wow. What an incredibly uninformed post. For the record I think this is a great idea. The only drawback I can see is the negative effect it will have on small business owners. Of course, anyone who has ever had to deal with driving down an avenue with delivery trucks double parked on both sides of the street would understand the need for businesses to be more efficient in terms of shipping and receiving. Hopefully something like this would nudge them towards such efficiency. And Master Shake, try not not to spew so much ignorant vitrol unless you know what you are talking about. Blue collar folks are not the ones driving into the city. This will have a much greater effect on the "smug rich people" driving in from Great Neck, Scarsdale and Greenwich. Will some of them be motivated to jump on a train instead paying the extra 8 bucks a day? Hopefully. But at the worst it will provide the city of New York with additional revenue for subway upkeep and improvements. A subway, by the way, that may be old and gritty; but is many times more extensive and more used than any other in the country. So in American terms, New York is very much a transit utopia. Is there room for improvement? You bet. But revenue is needed before improvements are made.

[Chicago103]

This fee will hurt working families? If you can afford to drive and park in Manhattan right now then how are you a working family? If you are penny pinching then why would you not take public transportation into Manhattan? Poor people dont have the luxury of weighing the time it takes to get somewhere on public transit vs. the convienience of driving, they just use the cheapest method and put up with it. As a carless person myself thats how I view it.

[Marcu]

Is NYC in some sort of budget crunch? New spending programs on the horizon? What's really behind this? Why now?

[ctman987]

As an almost daily user of New York City's public transportation system I think its great quite honestly. Everyone compares it to the Tube in London. Well for the United States greater NYC's public transporation system is great, the United States is not England. These are two differant countries. Comparisons to major international cities in growing superpower countries like China and India would be a better comparison then London. Yes London competes with NYC for business capital of the world but the USA has worked its way to being a global superpower while England is no longer that.

New York City's subway system serve Manhattan as well as many areas of the outer boroughs. I am able to easily get into Manhattan from my school in the Bronx with no issues. The subways are constantly mobbed and yes it may be annoying but it is a sign that there is a demand for public transportation in this city. The temperatures reached into the 80's the weekends and you could not find a room to stand on many subway lines this weekend and I go out numerous Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights and ride the subways at all hours of the night and there is a constant stream of people 24/7.

In addition there are buses that help to pick up the pieces that the subway cannot cover. For commuter rail lets not forget the Metro-North lines serving areas up to Poughkipsee and over upto New Haven, CT. The LIRR serves Long Island Commuters and New Jersey Transit as as well as the PATH helps New Jersey commuters. Thousands of commuters ride the rails every day into Grand Central and Penn Station. Trains have recently been added to the New Haven line to keep up with commuters. Taking a train from New Haven, Bridgeport or Stamford is a lot easier then sitting in gridlock on I-95 on the CT shoreline...turst me.

[LordMandeep]

it spending money to clean itself up, which a lot of North America cities are doing...

[hoosier]

Is NYC in some sort of budget crunch? New spending programs on the horizon? What's really behind this? Why now?

The city wants to reduce its carbon emissions and has seen the success of London's congestion tax, not to mention the added funding for crucial mass transit upgrades that this charge will provide.

New York would be wiped out with even a 10ft rise in sea levels. The city can't afford to witness that possibility become a reality.

[Chicago103]

As an almost daily user of New York City's public transportation system I think its great quite honestly. Everyone compares it to the Tube in London. Well for the United States greater NYC's public transporation system is great, the United States is not England. These are two differant countries. Comparisons to major international cities in growing superpower countries like China and India would be a better comparison then London. Yes London competes with NYC for business capital of the world but the USA has worked its way to being a global superpower while England is no longer that.

New York City's subway system serve Manhattan as well as many areas of the outer boroughs. I am able to easily get into Manhattan from my school in the Bronx with no issues. The subways are constantly mobbed and yes it may be annoying but it is a sign that there is a demand for public transportation in this city. The temperatures reached into the 80's the weekends and you could not find a room to stand on many subway lines this weekend and I go out numerous Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights and ride the subways at all hours of the night and there is a constant stream of people 24/7.

In addition there are buses that help to pick up the pieces that the subway cannot cover. For commuter rail lets not forget the Metro-North lines serving areas up to Poughkipsee and over upto New Haven, CT. The LIRR serves Long Island Commuters and New Jersey Transit as as well as the PATH helps New Jersey commuters. Thousands of commuters ride the rails every day into Grand Central and Penn Station. Trains have recently been added to the New Haven line to keep up with commuters. Taking a train from New Haven, Bridgeport or Stamford is a lot easier then sitting in gridlock on I-95 on the CT shoreline...turst me.

Yeah, claims that this law can hurt working people only makes sense if there is no viable alternative for them to get into Manhattan. I consider myself to be working class in terms of how much I am earning right now and I say that if you tolerate the costs of diving and parking in Manhattan as a working person than you are being fiscally irresponsible to yourself, its many times cheaper to take public transit into Manhattan. Hell even many wealthy people take public transportation into Manhattan, people who could afford to drive but dont because they feel its better to take transit than sit in traffic. The working class argument applies to affordable housing, healthcare, the minimum wage and stuff like that and not the ability to drive and park in the CBD of a major city which should be a luxury item plain and simple.

[hoosier]

It would be interesting to see what portion of Manhattan commuters come from the other boroughs or the suburbs. It might inconvenience commuters from Brooklyn and Queens but given the abundance of subway lines, that shouldn't be a big deal.

As far as commuters from Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester counties, they absolutely should have to pay a congestion fee for clogging city roads. The train is so much easier to take into the city.

[austin356]

I favor congestion pricing, but this will be a poor execution of it.

And where will this money go? Will taxes be offset somewhere else? Or will NYC just collect the billions and poor it into the traditional endless pit coffers (North America's largest city budget several times over)?

Does the city really want to raise taxes? It is already the most taxed city in North America.

All of these well intentioned poorly executed governmental regulations and taxations will only continue to price out the real New Yorker and invite the high rolling investment bankers who can afford it. Just another way to keep minorities, poor people, and families in the suburbs (where they belong according to the elitists).

[Marcu]

I favor congestion pricing, but this will be a poor execution of it.

And where will this money go? Will taxes be offset somewhere else? Or will NYC just collect the billions and poor it into the traditional endless pit coffers (North America's largest city budget several times over)?

Does the city really want to raise taxes? It is already the most taxed city in North America.

All of these well intentioned poorly executed governmental regulations and taxations will only continue to price out the real New Yorker and invite the high rolling investment bankers who can afford it. Just another way to keep minorities, poor people, and families in the suburbs (where they belong according to the elitists).


Why not, at the very least, reduce the fare for mass transit to offset the generated revenue? That would help whatever goal Bloomberg wants to achieve and shift more people to mass transit.

The fact that this wasn't part of the deal makes me think that all this is is a way to increase the budget under the guise of global warming, congestion, pollution, etc.

[Chicago103]

"Using economics to influence public behavior is something this country is built on," he declared. "It's called capitalism."

I like it how Bloomberg put it that way, I agree.

The market should dictate that driving and parking in Manhattan is a luxury that only those able to afford it should be allowed, people are being forced to ride public transportation only to the extent that people are forced to do or not do all kinds of things because of economic reality.

Parking is not a human right. Some faux libertarians talk all this tough "survival of the fittest" crap when someone needs a heart transplant via medicare but somehow when it involves parking we are supposed to have sympothy for everyone and if you dont you are an "elitest".

[austin356]

"Using economics to influence public behavior is something this country is built on," he declared. "It's called capitalism."

I like it how Bloomberg put it that way, I agree.

The market should dictate that driving and parking in Manhattan is a luxury that only those able to afford it should be allowed, people are being forced to ride public transportation only to the extent that people are forced to do or not do all kinds of things because of economic reality. Parking is not a human right.



He is wrong. When natural economics influence behavior, it is capitalism.

What he is advocating is one statist policy used to offset the negative ramifications of other statist policies (subsidization of sprawl, cars, roads, etc).

I personally prefer taking away the policies that actually created the problems instead of creating new policies to offset their detrimental effects.


And let me say again, I prefer congestion and road use taxation, even if it means it cost $15 to get in the city, I just dislike the way he is going about it.

[Chicago103]

He is wrong. When natural economics influence behavior, it is capitalism.

What he is advocating is one statist policy used to offset the negative ramifications of other statist policies (subsidization of sprawl, cars, roads, etc).

I personally prefer taking away the policies that actually created the problems instead of creating new policies to offset their detrimental effects.

I agree with that in theory but how realistic is it to expect the policies that subsidize sprawl to be taken away overnight?

[austin356]

I agree with that in theory but how realistic is it to expect the policies that subsidize sprawl to be taken away overnight?

well you have a point. And to tell the truth, I have not thought about it deeply enough to imagine a real plan of action for such, especially in a Tri-state area such as NYC. But I am sure measures could be taken which would be build around 1)regional planning integration or 2)regional planning separation (such as treating commuters for Jersey differently than LI)

[Master Shake]

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=3&aid=68971

Mayor Unveils Ambitious Plan For The Future In Earth Day Speech

April 22, 2007

Mayor Michael Bloomberg urged New Yorkers to think ahead in his Earth Day speech Sunday, proposing ways to create an environmentally sustainable city for the 21st century.

Bloomberg says it has already worked in London and Singapore -- and he thinks it can work here. He said it would encourage only the people who have to drive to be the ones on the road.

Opponents to the plan say that the mass transit system could not handle the influx in people, and that the congestion pricing would be a detriment to the city’s middle class.

Congressman Anthony Weiner has been against the plan, and this weekend he described congestion pricing as a new tax that would cost the average commuter about $3,500 a year.

"We are a city that has always been the capital of the middle class,” said Weiner. “Yet with the rising cost in housing, with the rising cost of taxes, it's becoming harder and harder to live in the middle class in New York City. This is going to make it even harder."

Queens City Councilman David Weprin also spoke out about Bloomberg’s plan.

At a transit forum in Little Neck before the mayor’s speech, Weprin said the borough he represents will be hit hard if congestion pricing goes into effect because of limited access to public transportation and would hurt those who rely on access to Manhattan to make a living.

"You're not talking about wealthy people, $8 a day is an enormous charge for those type of people and something that could really hurt them financially,” concurred Weprin.



Well, it looks like I am not the only one who doesn't appreciate Bloomberg's grand scheme to make Manhattan safe for Wall Street limos. Anthony Wiener and the majority of political representatives from the Outerboroughs (ie the Majority of New Yorkers) see Bloomberg's scheme for what it is, a tax of several thousand dollars. As is noted in Bloomberg's presentation at nyc.gov, large swaths of Queens are not served by the subway requiring people to drive.

Bloomberg is missing the boat on several points. One, he fails to understand that many small businesses that serve Manhattan (yes small businesses, not just Wall Street, but the small businesses that actually contribute job growth and wealth to the majority of New Yorkers) are located in Brooklyn or Queens because they can easily enter Manhattan for deliveries and unlike New Jersey, they do not have to pay a toll. This tax system will cause many of these small businesses to locate to New Jersey. By putting in tolls, constant traffic delays, and yes pollution will be the result.

So will drivers who pay a $6.00 tunnel from New Jersery toll and also have to pay an $8.00 "congestion tax". Would this be accepted in Texas, Chicago or anywhere else in this country? This is insane.

Also comparisons to Singapore, Hong Kong and London are not appropriate. I have been to Hong Kong, and was impressed by the lack of traffic. Of course I was more impressed by the spotless and efficient transit system, something New York lacks. The thing is that Hong Kong and Singapore are city-states, that really do not have any immediate competition for business or citizens. London, is frankly London, and no city in the UK or Europe will be able to pull businesses away from London. Even with the congestion tax, London makes more economic sense than other cities in Europe.

This is NOT the case for New York. An additional tax of thousands of dollars, will drive business away. New York unlike Hong Kong, Singapore and London, has a great deal of competiion in the United States, from Jersey City, Stamford, but also from Chicago and Atlanta. Adding more taxes to the high tax New York economy is not the answer. Its hard enough for average New Yorkers to make ends meet, to punish them further is foolhardy.

There is no disincentive to driving within the Congestion Zone. The real issue is that corporate executives who ride around Midtown in cabs and limos are stuck in traffic and are complaining. Now instead of advising the bigwigs to ride the subway in Manhattan where there is actual subway service (unlike the outerboroughs), the decision is made to tax outerbourough New Yorkers. Bloomberg is not a bad guy, but he is just too far removed from the lives of real New Yorkers to see that this plan is going nowhere.

By the way, the Tax will not be limited to rush hour, the government cannot stop itself. The Tax will be imposed 24/7 and be raised every two years. This is how government taxes always work. If you don't think so, research the Port Authority toll system sometime.

Also, Bloomberg's strange obsession with "Green Issues" stems from his presidential ambitions. I believe that he wants to run for President with Schwarzenegger as his running mate. Bloomberg's polling shows him that Green Politics are hot and he thinks this will help his third party run.

By the way, only in New York is a $8 tax considered political vision. Truly sad.

[Black Box]

No, I do not think so.

[Marcu]

"We are a city that has always been the capital of the middle class,” said Weiner

HA

Besides the fact that that's a meaningless platitude, it's just plain wrong.

[pico44]

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=3&aid=68971

Well, it looks like I am not the only one who doesn't appreciate Bloomberg's grand scheme to make Manhattan safe for Wall Street limos. Anthony Wiener and the majority of political representatives from the Outerboroughs (ie the Majority of New Yorkers) see Bloomberg's scheme for what it is, a tax of several thousand dollars. As is noted in Bloomberg's presentation at nyc.gov, large swaths of Queens are not served by the subway requiring people to drive.

The fact that you found a concurrent viewpoint is not evidence of a profound truthfulness in what you saying. It only proves that any tax, no matter how well thought out and desperately needed, is going to be controversial. And in regards to subway access in Queens, just about every corner of Queens is served by public transportation. The fact that Queens is so huge makes total subway coverage an absolute impossibility. Bus coverage makes up for holes between and beyond subway lines. Granted busses don't move as quickly as subways, but that is primarily because there are too many cars on the road. Now how do we get rid of all those cars...



Bloomberg is missing the boat on several points. One, he fails to understand that many small businesses that serve Manhattan (yes small businesses, not just Wall Street, but the small businesses that actually contribute job growth and wealth to the majority of New Yorkers) are located in Brooklyn or Queens because they can easily enter Manhattan for deliveries and unlike New Jersey, they do not have to pay a toll. This tax system will cause many of these small businesses to locate to New Jersey. By putting in tolls, constant traffic delays, and yes pollution will be the result.

How do you make that leap? Sure maybe some businesses might relocate, but how does that create more traffic for Manhattan? Reminds of a South Park episode about underwear stealing gnomes. 1) Steal underwear --> 2) ??? --> 3) profit!



So will drivers who pay a $6.00 tunnel from New Jersery toll and also have to pay an $8.00 "congestion tax". Would this be accepted in Texas, Chicago or anywhere else in this country? This is insane.

Who in New York cares about Texas or Chicago? New York plays by different rules. Always have, and most likely always will. but you are probably right, New York is the only American city that can propose this plan, much less pull it off right now.



Also comparisons to Singapore, Hong Kong and London are not appropriate. I have been to Hong Kong, and was impressed by the lack of traffic. Of course I was more impressed by the spotless and efficient transit system, something New York lacks.


New Yorks subways are just fine. Few subways in the states are any nicer, and that is a largely a consequence of a federal government that spends 100s of billions on a state of the art military while other goverments use that type of money on infrastructure. Perhaps only DC (with all those federal subsidies) and San Fransisco (whose subway serves a minute fraction of the population are better kept.

The thing is that Hong Kong and Singapore are city-states, that really do not have any immediate competition for business or citizens. London, is frankly London, and no city in the UK or Europe will be able to pull businesses away from London. Even with the congestion tax, London makes more economic sense than other cities in Europe.

And New York is well, frankly New York. Why does London make any more sense than Birmingham? Or Manchester? Or Liverpool? Sure geography helps but I think it has more to do with the energy, culture, diversity and beauty of London. Well New York is America's London. Do you realise people have been predicting the demise of New York for well over a century?


This is NOT the case for New York. An additional tax of thousands of dollars, will drive business away. New York unlike Hong Kong, Singapore and London, has a great deal of competiion in the United States, from Jersey City, Stamford, but also from Chicago and Atlanta.


Atlanta and Chicago? Hilarious.


Adding more taxes to the high tax New York economy is not the answer. Its hard enough for average New Yorkers to make ends meet, to punish them further is foolhardy.

The average New Yorker uses public transportation already. And if they don't they should. Why is this so difficult for you to understand. Drive into New York from Westchester or Long Island on a weekday morning, you'll see a lot of Volvos, BMWs and Mercedes. Why shouldn't these people pay a few extra thousand dollars fr the right to burn fossil fuels and make our streets more congested?

There is no disincentive to driving within the Congestion Zone. The real issue is that corporate executives who ride around Midtown in cabs and limos are stuck in traffic and are complaining.


Oh how I pity you, ye of little faith. So you really believe this has everything to do with corporate greed and nothing to do with the environment? That borders on paranoia.


Now instead of advising the bigwigs to ride the subway in Manhattan where there is actual subway service (unlike the outerboroughs), the decision is made to tax outerbourough New Yorkers. Bloomberg is not a bad guy, but he is just too far removed from the lives of real New Yorkers to see that this plan is going nowhere.

There are plenty of suits who ride the PATH, LIRR, Metro North and subway, including Mr Bloomberg. Hopefully we can get that number to increase. Nothing motivates behavior modification better than money.



By the way, only in New York is a $8 tax considered political vision. Truly sad

And what is your plan to reduce fossil fuel emissions? American's refusal to address global warming issues and our disgusting dependence on foreign countries for our energy is what is truly sad. I suppose you think it is your right to have cheap gasoline and to be able to drive an SUV to and from the gas station. God I hate this country sometimes.

[Crawford]

The three false premises on which Master Shake and others base their arguments:

1. A congestion tax is anti-businesss.

Wrong. The congestion tax has for years been pushed by Big Business, the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce, and the Association for a Better New York. The congestion tax is overwhelmingly seen by Manhattan businesses as a business-friendly move.

The fact is that the current traffic mess is a HUGE tax on existing businesses. The congestion tax will ease this burden by incentivizing environmentally-friendly commuting.

2. Some neighborhoods have no alternative to driving.

Wrong. EVERY neighborhood in NYC has frequent, DIRECT M-F transit into Manhattan. Yes, many neighborhoods do not have subway or commuter rail service, but those neighborhoods that lack rail ALL have express bus service into Manhattan.

There is NO PLACE in NYC where one can't walk to either subway, commuter rail or express bus service. I don't think people from outside of NYC know much about the size and breath of express bus services, which is a separate public company from MTA bus (ridership is not counted in MTA bus totals). These services were initially all private but with public subsidies. The City eventually bought all the lines because the private companies kept having labor and upkeep issues. Every weekday over 500,000 riders take express buses from the Outer Boroughs into Manhattan. Even on weekends there is pretty good service. In addition, there are private express services in the Outer Boroughs and (of course) many other public and private express bus services serving New Jersey, Westchester and other locations.

3. The congestion tax hurts the middle-class

Wrong. If you are driving into Manhattan on a weekday, you are spending minimum $25-$35 (and often much more) to park. If you can afford to pay these parking fees, another $8 won't kill you, especially when the $8 is 100% dedicated to improving public transit.

[Marcu]

If you can afford to pay these parking fees, another $8 won't kill you, especially when the $8 is 100% dedicated to improving public transit.


You mean when they shift the existed funds to improve mass transit towards something else? Taxes and fees (or whatever you choose to call them) never go to a specific program, trust, or "lock box". They go to the general city slush fund to be spent on anything. It just amounts to a simple accounting trick.

Atlanta and Chicago? Hilarious.

I never got why people outside New York think New Yorkers are rude, arrogant, and think they are the center of the universe. Can you help me out? and New York to the US is not what London is to the UK. NYC metro is under 8% of US GDP where's London is over 20%.

[fflint]

The other thing that bears repeating--if driving a private automobile alone into Manhattan on a weekday costs $8, then I would argue it is inherently *not* a middle-class activity.

[JManc]

The city wants to reduce its carbon emissions and has seen the success of London's congestion tax, not to mention the added funding for crucial mass transit upgrades that this charge will provide.

New York would be wiped out with even a 10ft rise in sea levels. The city can't afford to witness that possibility become a reality.

even if new york and london banned all combustion engine based vehicles, it would make little difference and all this is is just a money grab...in both cities.

[pico44]

and New York to the US is not what London is to the UK. NYC metro is under 8% of US GDP where's London is over 20%.



The comparison is a loose one meant only to illustrate the attraction people have to a country's epicenter. People will always be drawn to New york. Businesses will always be drawn to New York.

[TheMeltyMan]

The 8 dollar tunnel charge isn't what keeps my car out of NYC...its the meadowlands and the Jersey Turnpike.

[pricemazda]

even if new york and london banned all combustion engine based vehicles, it would make little difference and all this is is just a money grab...in both cities.

No its not London used the money to underwrite bonds that are being used to finance a light rail expansion on the DLR. It was also and primarily used to improve bus services, bus journeys have risen by nearly 50% to over 6 million journeys a year.

The Mayor has also introduced free travel for children, senior citizens and soon those on low incomes and welfare.

Like I have tried to explain, but people haven't listened, poor people don't drive into London. In fact 80% of all Londoners use public transportation to get around. This means 20% of the population causes all the congestion and those 20% are wealthy.

[arbeiter]

For any of these detractors, do any of you fall in the middle class and drive your car in during peak hours to Manhattan from either Westchester, an outer borough, or Long Island? If you do, what is the purpose?

If you ignore state boundaries, it seems unfair that someone in Secaucus has to pay $6 to enter Manhattan and someone from Maspeth has to pay $0. A lot of the people on here complaining about this are not New Yorkers, and don't really understand the dynamics of this area.

The only things that Manhattan has that outer boroughs do not are jobs and world-class attractions. Otherwise, the pharmacy on 14th street is the same as the one on Beach 103rd Street and on Utopia Parkway. And for the daily commuter into Manhattan for work, they cannot possibly be lower-class - there is no economic formula that would make it more cost-effective to drive to their job, unless their employer gives them cheap or free parking. At my job, 23 the 26 employees take the subway, PATH or express bus, and live anywhere from New Windsor to West Orange to Chinatown. The other 3 are the owners, who make high 6 figures a year, and drive from their brownstones in Brooklyn and pay for parking spaces. Not exactly the heroic middle class.

[arbeiter]

It was also and primarily used to improve bus services, bus journeys have risen by nearly 50% to over 6 million journeys a year.


Right - even a night bus at 3am in Clapton or Bow comes every 10 minutes. New York can't match that.

[Master Shake]

Look I am not some crazy libertarian, although I don't buy the current "Green" rhetoric discovered by Bloomberg in the last month. I am just talking common sense. Who on this Board, including Chicagoans probably the City most comparable to New York, would support this tax on their own City? Who would say this tax would be popular in their own city? Say it with a straight face, please.

By the way, if Bloomy is so concerned about carbon footprints, he should first stop flying to his private Carribbean Island every weekend.

I live in Brooklyn and ride the subway everyday to work. The New York City subway system is utterly disgusting and not worthy of a third world country. Sad, but true. But I will admit the system gets you around.

Yes, New York might have the overall best transit system in the States as some have alleged, but that is alot like coming in first in the Special Olympics, it don't mean much.

Here is the deal. This is an additional tax on the most taxed populous in America, it will kill jobs and only hurt working class folks. Who am I talking about? Does anyone in your family work with tools, have to transport heavy machinery to do their jobs? Make deliveries for a living? These jobs still do exist in the information age, you going to bring them on the subway...in rush hour? Good luck.

What you fail to understand is that the rich that you want to punish so badly will not be affected, $8 is nothing to them or they will have their company pay the cost. But for the small businessman, deliverymen and there are many who have to drive into the city everyday, they will be hit.

Lets talk about the rich by the way. Most live in Manhattan and will be free to drive in whatever cab or limo they choose without restriction. A friend of mine has joked that Traders will be racing their Lambourghinis and Ferraris up and down Park Avenue once the traffic clears up.

Most doctors and hospitals are in Manhattan, so good luck taking your sick grandma to her specialist. This cost will add up right quick.

Of course, the Chamber of Commerce and other representatives of mega corporations will support this tax. Again their members are the bankers and corporate execs who refuse to ride the subway in Midtown freakin Manhattan and insist on riding in town cars and cabs to meetings. They don't like the traffic and want to price other people out from doing their jobs.

Here is an important point, who will suffer with this tax? Every delivery of food, bread and other goods goes up. Who goes out of business? The local restraunt entrepreneur, the local hardware store, the local books store that is still barely holding on. Will this affect McDonalds, Subway or Starbucks? No, but it will be the death knell for small local businesses that make this City great. So, of course the Chamber of Commerce supports this, because the Chamber of Commerce (which like Bloomberg until a few weeks a go, could give a rats ass about "Global Warming") represents big corporate business.

Please propose the $8 surcharge on every cab ride or town car ride INSIDE the so-called congestion zone, and every "progressive" hypocrite Manhattanite will be screaming bloody murder.

Also, there is no way for this to be enforced. Will there be tolls on 86th Street? Tolls on every bridge? This will be a total traffic nightmare.

No we are told the miraculous police state camera system will monitor every car that enters Manhattan. Just what we need, more constant monitoring of basic movement by Big Brother.

There is a value to freedom, something magical about it, something American, that we should seek to retain. Improve the public transit option and stop taxing New Yorkers into oblivian.

[Taller Better]

It works out to about $1600-$2000 a year for a worker. That is a hefty tax.
I use transit and a bike and don't even own a car, though.

[arbeiter]

Lets talk about the rich by the way. Most live in Manhattan and will be free to drive in whatever cab or limo they choose without restriction. A friend of mine has joked that Traders will be racing their Lambourghinis and Ferraris up and down Park Avenue once the traffic clears up.


I am going to ignore your multiple spelling and grammatical errors. People within the zone will still be charged $4.

Many of the best hospitals are in Queens and Brooklyn. You must have not lived here very long. What part of Brooklyn do you live in? People who drive their grandmothers to Manhattan specialists don't constitute a huge percentage of NYC's population.

[pricemazda]

you can also use the system to encourage the use of smaller and cleaner cars. For example in London battery powered cars are exempt. As are mopeds, which has boomed in London. Also cycling has doubled as the road space has been freed up without cars, it has become safer for cyclists.

Bus journeys have become more efficient and quicker and congestion has been cut by over 15% and average traffic speeds increased.

Why shouldn't drivers pay for the ACTUAL cost to the planet of their pollution? The polluter should always pay. The US has the biggest cars that are not fuel efficient. If the US were to have European mileage standards you wouldn't need to import ANY oil at all.

No one mentions the cost to the City's health departments or to HMOs because of vehicle pollution which causes respiratory problems and asthma.

People can't see further than their own selfish bubble to be able to drive their suburban SUVs into one of the most congested and polluted cities in the world.

[KingKrunch]

So will drivers who pay a $6.00 tunnel from New Jersery toll and also have to pay an $8.00 "congestion tax". Would this be accepted in Texas, Chicago or anywhere else in this country? This is insane.
I just watched Bloomberg's speech on nyc.gov and he said that everyone will pay the same amount. People using the tunnels will pay 8$ and people entering from Queens will also pay 8$. There will be no additional toll for the tunnels ;)

Other arguments brought up in this thread have also been addressed in his speech. The income generated by the congestion fee will be used to fund public transportation and not for something else.

With regard to some neighborhoods that are underserved with transit the mayor said that bus service will be significantly improved before the congestion fee will be in effect.

I think some of the discussion in this thread could be avoided if people actually watched the speech as a whole and not just read some summary from a newspaper before critizing the plans.

[pico44]

Many of the best hospitals are in Queens and Brooklyn. You must have not lived here very long. What part of Brooklyn do you live in? People who drive their grandmothers to Manhattan specialists don't constitute a huge percentage of NYC's population.


:haha: I was thinking the same thing. There are huge tertiary care medical centers all over greater New York. But an admirable attempt to pull at our heartstrings I must say, I nearly shed a tear.


Also, I agree with Pricemazda about the need to encourage the use of fuel efficient cars. America has been addicted to horsepower for nearly a century, and it's time we let that go. I believe Bloomberg mentioned a tax credit for those who purchase fuel efficient cars.

[ctman987]

Quite honestly many cant deny that this looks like just another way to make Manhattan a playground for the wealthy. Prices continue to rise in Manhattan. Many are being pushed out of Manhattan by higher rents and rising costs of living to make way for the wealthy usually white upper class. This does not mean just young professionals and empy nesters either. Lower class families are being priced out to make way for a growing number of toddlers who parents have high paying jobs in Manhattan and want to live only in Manhattan.

People are slowly being pushed out of Manhattan and even out of the outer boroughs. Adding an $8 charge to enter Manhattan doesnt help to diverse Manhattan as it is becoming threatned to have the make up of the suburbs...all upper class usually white families with baby strollers who are strolling Fifth Avenue instead of their subdivision or the local mall

[Master Shake]

Most of the best hospitals and doctors in the New York region are in Manhattan, period.

I raise legitimate criticism of the proposed tax system, and you resort to personal attacks. My criticism of NY subway's cleanliness, only part of the problem by the way, may be because of some personal failing, I will check with my psychologist on that one, but more likely it is because I love subway systems and have ridden subways from Prague to Bangkok and all but the Rome subway system were spotless compared to New York. Rome indeed has a subway that is worse than New York on every level of measurement. New Yorkers set their standards far too low.

But if you ride subways elsewhere, you see that riding the subway can be a pleasant, uplifting experience. You see the mentality in New York is that the subways are still for the poor and working class, and the service reflects this. I would like to see this improved. Do you know they perfume the air in the Paris subways, it smells wonderful. Its possible with the right priorities to make public transit a real alternative.

[donybrx]

Most of the best hospitals and doctors in the New York region are in Manhattan, period.

Stated more fairly, several of the best hospitals and doctors in the New York region are in Manhattan. period unnecessary.....

Some are in Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, Long Island and so forth.

[-GR2NY-]

One aspect is that the main reason anyone would move away from NYC metro is because of the high cost of living.

So, this $8 fee might be salt on the wound of people who already feel they're getting raped daily by the city.

[JManc]

No its not London used the money to underwrite bonds that are being used to finance a light rail expansion on the DLR. It was also and primarily used to improve bus services, bus journeys have risen by nearly 50% to over 6 million journeys a year.

The Mayor has also introduced free travel for children, senior citizens and soon those on low incomes and welfare.

Like I have tried to explain, but people haven't listened, poor people don't drive into London. In fact 80% of all Londoners use public transportation to get around. This means 20% of the population causes all the congestion and those 20% are wealthy.

i'll give livingstone that but it makes living in a rediclously expesnve city like london even more expensive for the middle class. although i would not drive in that town even if i was a russian oligarch and would take the tube.

also, unlike manhattan (with geographical barriers limiting access), how does london get away with the congestion charges in certain areas with (into zone 2 or 1?) with all those streets?

[pricemazda]

It works fine, its clearly signposted.

But 80% of people use public transport, its only 20% who still insist on driving into London, causing all the pollution and congestion.

[JManc]

are there toll booths?

[pricemazda]

no, just cameras. You have a few days to pay the charge at tens of thousands of pay points, or on the phone or internet.

The cameras take a picture of your number plate then cross-reference with people who have paid the charge.

I don't see what the big deal, people accept paying tolls to travel long distance, why not to enter a city?

[JManc]

so if someone had a thing on their car like james bond that rotated the license plate, they could get out of being billed for a toll.

[pricemazda]

i suppose, but the US Embassy won't pay up, they owe £100'000s

[Marcu]

Since this is, after all, a development forum . . . what will the effect on new construction be? Are cement trucks, dump trucks, and other construction vehicles exempt or will they be subject to the 8$ fee/tax the 4 or 5 times a day they may have to enter and leave manhattan?

[Inkdaub]

The truth is that the vast, vast majority of people who drive automobiles don't do so because they have to...they do so because they want to. No matter how negative an impact on the world around them...they make the decision to drive an automobile. Forgive me if I don't weep with sympathy whenever this selfish mindset isn't being catered to.

The moral of the story is if you don't want to pay the eight bucks...get out of your car.

[NYguy]

NY Times

A Concrete Plan to Speed Up Buses in Traffic

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/04/27/nyregion/27islands-450.jpg

A bus stop called a bus bulb at Broadway and Spring Street is one of several being built for faster loading and unloading of passengers.

By WILLIAM NEUMAN
April 27, 2007

It is springtime in New York and everywhere bulbs are blooming. Daffodils. Crocuses. Bus bulbs.

In a program intended to help buses move more speedily down the traffic-and-construction-clogged streets of lower Broadway, the city is building a series of extensions to the sidewalk that should make it easier for buses to load and unload. In the taxonomy of traffic engineers, these extensions are known as bus bulbs.

Although the Broadway bulbs are rectangular, not bulbous, the term actually comes from the fact that in other parts of the world where bus bulbs have been used, like London, they tend to be rounded extensions near a corner.

The Broadway bulbs are concrete islands set just off the sidewalk. They are about 130 feet long and 9 feet wide.

The first bulb on Broadway was finished earlier this month at Spring Street. Another has been completed at Grand Street. And workers are building two more, at Walker and Franklin Streets.

The idea is that buses lose a lot of time pulling over to a curb and then pulling back into traffic. The bulbs essentially bring the curb to the bus, which does not have to pull over but instead stops in front of the bulbs to let passengers on and off and then continues on its way.

That is the theory at least.

Earlier this week, as this reporter waited at Broadway and Spring Street, a taxi pulled up to the bulb to discharge a fare, just ahead of an approaching M1 bus. The bus had to wait for the taxi to move on before it could pull up. Then, once passengers had boarded, the bus was blocked by a truck that was double-parked just beyond the end of the bus bulb, forcing the bus to pull into traffic to get around.

David Woloch, a deputy transportation commissioner for the city, said that by early July the city will mark the lane that runs beside the bus bulbs as a bus-only lane, from Houston Street to Ann and Vesey Streets. And, he said, the Police Department will enforce the bus-only restriction by ticketing cars that encroach on the lane.

Bus drivers were skeptical.

“I think it’s a waste,” the driver of the M1 bus that was blocked by the cab and the double-parked truck said of the bus bulbs. He would not give his name because he said he did not want to draw the attention of his superiors at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. “It’s not going to do anything. Get rid of the cars and that’ll do something.”

On another day this week, a driver on another M1 bus was also skeptical. He said that the police do not do enough to enforce bus lanes elsewhere in the city. “That’s never worked,” said the driver, who also asked that his name not be used. “It doesn’t work on Madison. It doesn’t work on Fifth Avenue because people park in the lane. Or cabs drop off in the lane.”

As the bus continued south on Broadway, the driver pointed to the lane next to the curb, which was marked on the pavement as a bus lane. Despite that, the lane was mostly full of parked cars, most of them with city-issued placards on the dash, showing they were used by law enforcement personnel.

More than one bus stop was blocked with parked cars as well, some with placards, others with drivers sitting at the wheel. While the cars with placards are allowed to use the bus lane under the current rules, parking in a bus stop is prohibited.

“This is always like this,” the bus driver said. “And you know what’s missing? There are no ticket agents down here.”

Paul J. Browne, a deputy police commissioner, said 1,862 tickets were issued last year to drivers for using a bus lane. In addition, 4,205 tickets were issued for parking in a bus lane and 2,669 tickets were issued for parking at a bus stop.

That works out to just under 24 tickets a day in the three categories of tickets combined. He said the tickets were primarily issued in Manhattan.

So far this year, he said, 3,537 tickets have been issued for bus lane or bus stop violations.

“It may be a perception among some drivers, but in fact there is enforcement,” Mr. Browne said of the bus drivers’ complaints. “It may not be at the level they want or in an ideal world the level we want, but the fact remains we do enforce it every day.”

The new bus lane is intended to be different, partly because it will occupy the lane of traffic one lane from the curb, so it is less likely to be blocked by parked cars.

The city will spend $355,000 to create the lane and the four bulbs, which include metal fencing designed to make them more visible.

The bulbs and bus lane on Broadway are intended to encourage bus use in a stretch of Lower Manhattan where a large amount of construction regularly tangles traffic. The city plans to enhance five other bus routes, one in each borough, with dedicated lanes and high-tech equipment to make them more efficient.

“I think it’s great that they narrowed the street for the bus stop,” said Toni Oliveri, who was waiting one afternoon this week at Spring Street for the X27 express bus to Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. She said that people would no longer have to jump out from the curb, as they often did, to get the attention of bus drivers.

[SSLL]

I think it's fair. NY has a good amount of transit for people, and it'd raise money for the city.

[miketoronto]

Charges in downtown areas are stupid.

NYC has the highest transit use to a downtown in North America. Something like 80% of people going into Manhattan do so by transit.

Car drivers are a big minority in Manhattan. I understand that the small percentage of car drivers adds up to millions of cars. But in the grand scheme, its a small number of people driving into Manhattan.

Its time to stop punishing downtown. Downtown is not the cause of massive traffic in our metro areas. Its the suburban office parks.
If anyone needs to be charged a toll, charge the office parks, because thats where the traffic and pollution is being made.

[tackledspoon]

Charges in downtown areas are stupid.

NYC has the highest transit use to a downtown in North America. Something like 80% of people going into Manhattan do so by transit.

Car drivers are a big minority in Manhattan. I understand that the small percentage of car drivers adds up to millions of cars. But in the grand scheme, its a small number of people driving into Manhattan.

Its time to stop punishing downtown. Downtown is not the cause of massive traffic in our metro areas. Its the suburban office parks.
If anyone needs to be charged a toll, charge the office parks, because thats where the traffic and pollution is being made.

Cool tirade. I like how wrong it is.
Like you said, millions of cars come into New York every year and many of the people driving those cars have suitable transit alternatives. Nobody is punishing downtown. This is a plan that will ultimately help downtown and increase transit useage. It doesn't matter how small a fraction of commuters choose to drive into the city. In a metro the size of New York, that's still a significant number of individuals who produce an even more significant amount of carbon emissions. This plan won't keep those people out of downtown, it'll usher them towards more responsible forms of transportation.
As for suburban office parks, there's no doubt that they're horrible sources of pollution, but they aren't under Bloomberg's control and he's doing what he can to keep New York from being a part of the problem. I respect that.

P.S. Where did you get that statistic about transit usage into New York?

[alex1]

^exactly.

The real punishment is the people who must ingest the pollution cars create. This is easily a great idea on just about every single imaginable level.

1. reduce pollution
2. reduce traffic
3. increase public transit usage and revenues
4. decrease the footprint for car storage (i.e. parking garages, surface lots)
5. less noise pollution from cars
6. less dangerous for bikers/pedestrians

All the gloom and doom predicted from those opposed to taxes in London never came to be. It has made the city better in fact. While few cities can get away with implementing such a high tariff, I believe nYc is easily one of those that can make the transition easily.

SanFran is another place where such a plan can succeed.

[sbarn]

Ironically, the day after Bloomie announced the Congestion Charge Plan, the City Council passed a law which essentially outlawed PediCabs from the City. :koko:

[Marcu]

For those that support the fee, which price would make you change your mind? $20? $40?

[crisp444]

I think that if the fee is implemented, it should only be done so once per day per car. It's truly assinine to charge delivery trucks from Long Island City, Queens $8 each time they drive a mile into Manhattan. Or, if the city really wants to make each car pay every time it enters, make an exemption for commercial vehicles.

This is a misplaced way to charge people the "true costs" for their pollution. While the wealthy are chauffered around up and down the island of Manhattan from Battery Park City to 96th street and don't pay a dime of these "true costs," the delivery trucks from Brooklyn and Queens are paying for the few times per day they enter to do business and then drive back.

[tackledspoon]

I think that if the fee is implemented, it should only be done so once per day per car. It's truly assinine to charge delivery trucks from Long Island City, Queens $8 each time they drive a mile into Manhattan. Or, if the city really wants to make each car pay every time it enters, make an exemption for commercial vehicles.

This is a misplaced way to charge people the "true costs" for their pollution. While the wealthy are chauffered around up and down the island of Manhattan from Battery Park City to 96th street and don't pay a dime of these "true costs," the delivery trucks from Brooklyn and Queens are paying for the few times per day they enter to do business and then drive back.

How many times does it have to be pointed out that this isn't going to be applied to all cars (there's a good likelehood that there will be special provisions for delivery trucks) and that there's a congestion fee being implemented in midtown and lower manhattan that will affect those very rich people of whom you spoke.

[The Cheat]

Gridlock Sam's Congestion Pricing Op-Ed
Daily News, April 23, 2007

The Mayor is right on target in suggesting congestion pricing (CP) for the Big Apple. We need it to reduce traffic strangulation, make business more efficient, allow us to grow and maintain our pre-eminence as the least gas-guzzling and most energy efficient city in the US. We also must maintain our competitive advantage with other world cities; no wonder our closest competitor London, has already implemented this NYC-born concept (Nobel laureate William Vickrey, Columbia University).

I'm a veteran, as a former city official, of three earlier attempts in the 1970's and 80's when we lost in the courts and in the legislature. The opposition was largely Brooklyn and Queens based even though those boroughs benefit enormously from CP. Here's what the Mayor must do to make this saleable in Bay Ridge, Bayside, Bay Terrace and Pelham Bay:

* Eliminate tolls where they don't belong. CP should only be applied where there's heavy congestion and good transit (i.e. Manhattan south of 60 th St.). Remove tolls from the Verrazano Bridge. Let free bridges ring in the Rockaways. Let Long Islanders (which includes Brooklyn and Queens) pass easily without E-ZPass to the US mainland (i.e. Queens-Bronx bridges). More city drivers use these crossings than use the ‘free' East River bridges.

* Staten Islanders will be happier since they will finally be able to get home without paying a toll. But they deserve more; their borough is strangling with traffic. Widen the Staten Island Expressway and twin the Goethals Bridge.

* Get trucks off Brooklyn Streets by rebuilding the Belt Parkway to allow commercial vehicles. Add a few more parks adjacent to it while we're at it. The car-only restriction is a Robert Moses anachronism.

* Give all city residents five free trips/year that they can barter if they don't use them. One of the biggest complaints I hear is “what do I do if I have to go into Manhattan to the doctor or want to catch a play?” Bartering is a version of the federally sponsored FAIR concept "Fast and Intertwined Regular" lanes currently being considered for the San Francisco Bay area.

* Apply CP to transit. Reduce the bus fares in the subway-less neighborhoods to $1.

* City employees must not be exempt and before the city gets moving on CP it must clean up its own act and crack down on government abuse of parking.

* Educate the public. Somehow they accept CP when their cars are parked but not when they are moving. Park at Rockefeller Center during the holiday season and it could cost you $60, Long Island City will cost you ten and you'll get change for a fin in Douglaston. The economic model shows that parking fees will go down with CP. There will be a transfer in funds from private parking operators (many are my clients- at least till this comes out) to public coffers.

* Activate the masses who are riding subways, buses and taxis. Borough pols are adept at telling which way the wind is blowing.

I'm convinced that once people get rational about CP they'll see what a win-win it is. The rich move faster, the poor get better transit, we all get better air and our city gets greener.

Source: gridlocksam.com (http://www.gridlocksam.com/ss_hottopic.html)