It is important that NYC residents continue to express their support for this plan in its entirety. With 127 proposals, it is obvious that not everything will become reality, but we can't just sit by and let our local politicians legislate the immense benefits of the plan down to nothing. A great indicator of this potential is the fact that I have yet to hear one other politician express full support of the initiative, all are reserving judgment... presumably to figure out what position will garner the most voter and lobbyist support. We must get our local reps on board and let them know loudly that NYC wants this type of progressive, sustainable thinking. It will be 2+ years before we see any direct result of this initiative. In those 2 years the residents of NYC must make certain that those results are everything the mayor's plan promises.

They should just ban cars in Manhattan.

Unfortunately there is money to be made with a congestion charge - ironically only just enough money to pay the people who run it, assuming it goes the way of London.

Congestion tax would be good but Manhattan's biggest issue is the yellow cabs - they make up the better part of the car traffic. Would a congestion tax cause a rate rise for taxis? Last time the rates increased, there was a dip in taxi ridership.

I wish the City would make a serious commitment to improving the infrastructure for bicycle traffic.

On a separate note, a congestion tax was introduced on a test basis in Stockholm. The test successfully lowered car traffic but the law was never put in place permanently because residents of Stockholm suburbs voted against the bill (Stockholmers voted for it).

I agree that they should just ban cars in Manhattan. Unfortunately, it is another 'chicken or egg' scenario. Without vast improvements to public transit, banning cars would adversely affect a lot of people's livelihoods. Thats what makes congestion pricing work... the revenue can be used directly for transit improvements, including bike lanes, thus getting more people off the road and eventually leading to a situation where you can start banning the automobile from more and more streets (car free Broadway anyone?).

As for the claim that it won't generate any funds dedicated to transit improvements, it appears London is averaging about $100 million per year of net revenue used towards transit improvements: http://pwm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/2/164

Mt two cents -- I live in Manhattan, and the only useless driving I know about here is driving by rich people who live here, who keep a car in a nearby garage, and use it when they don't have to just because they think affording a car is a status symbol and therefore they impress all their friends with the fact they can afford a car by driving it to places more easily reached by subway, or walking. These people probably won't be affected by congestion prices.

People who will be adversely affected are the working class. They already face a congestion price called parking.

I live in Brooklyn and work in Manhattan and own a car and I support congestion pricing. I get most places I need to go on the subway. I use the car primarily for leaving town for hiking, weekend trips, etc. There are times when it makes sense to drive into Manhattan, but weekdays between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. (when the proposed congestion pricing would be effective) are not among them. There are also neighborhoods, primarily the far east and west sides, which are not currently well-served by transit, though that could change when the second ave subway and 7 line extension come online sometime in the next decade.

Taxis would not pay the fee. The city has made some good strides in terms of bicycle infrastructure in recent years. And though more is needed, the best thing they could do for bikes is to enforce parking violations for people, typically govt workers with permits, who park in bike lanes.

Another thing that could be done to reduce car ownership is to make car rentals affordable. The big car rental companies all use NYC's low car ownership rate as an excuse to gouge customers. It can cost $125 a day to rent a car on a Saturday in the summer (compared to $35/day in many other cities). For people who like to leave town on weekends, that makes it more cost effective to simply own one. And once you own it, you might as well use it...

I live in an NJ suburb of New York.

I think they should just up the tolls for the bridges and tunnels. NJT, Metro-North, and the LIRR do a great job of getting people into the city without a car.

Lots going on in the dynamic of this. The person who said this is just another hidden tax is not too far fetched. At least in knee-jerk response. So much gets so much more expensive in this city it's hard to keep up... literally and figuratively. Due to inflation, the declining dollar value, and resource price increases - both due to scarcity and reptilian greed, stuff just costs more all the time, and disproportionately so in NYC. I know salaries are not keeping up that's for sure. (Why are houses that were $30,000 in the 60s "worth" over $1MM now? OK, I'll reduce the time frame, why are houses that were $300K 10 years ago "worth" about $1MM now?)
Part of my reason for riding in was to save my 'Bloomberg Dollars'. I just hate giving any $$ to this city and 'services' because of how fast the price of everything goes up here. Congestion Pricing has long been supported by the folks at Transportation Alternatives www.transalt.org . It has worked elsewhere, it should be able to work here.
I see all these pictures of sexy monorails and light rails in other cities which would be awesome to see here and look like they would be relatively cheap to build. However the skells and dregs of humanity we have here would rip them to shreds in days.
Bike infrastructure is still very important. As more bikes are getting on the roads I find myself worrying about them as much as the other maniacs on the roads.
I would definitely be whole-heartedly behind the congestion pricing if I knew the proceeds would be spent wisely, but this is NYC we're talking about. It may just end up being a burden to an already cash-strapped section of the population. I am sure it would decrease traffic in any event. I wonder how the Parking Industry lobbyists are going to go at this.

Good Luck,
vsk

The problem with upping tolls on the bridges is it doesn't do anything to address traffic that comes in from upper manhattan or people who are crazy and selfish enough to drive from their fancy townhouses on the upper east side to their jobs in midtown. It's also not practical to install tollbooths on the east river and harlem river bridges. Also, people should pay more for the privilege of driving in midtown than they should for the privilege of taking the GW to New England or Long Island.

Yes, prices are out of control in NYC particularly when it comes to real estate. But that's not going to go away until somebody decides that finance workers don't necessarily need to be paid $500k per year in order to move piles of billionaires' money around.

To make this work, the congestion tax would have to be accompanied by real improvements in public transit infrastructure. That means new subways, better bus service, and a well-managed system that receives enough maintenance and modernization to provide reliable service day, night and on weekends. Politicians can't cut funding every two years, unions can't strike if they don't get their 10 percent raise, and construction bids need to be administered fairly and efficiently. This would work best if congestion fees were phased in slowly as new transit capacity comes online.

This mayor may not be perfect, but he's looking at the big picture and is doing a lot of things right to help make this city livable. And with Pataki finally gone, we may have an opportunity here to actually make some progress.

The bottom line here is that you can't just build tens of thousands of units of residential housing in huge towers in super dense neighborhoods without affecting people's ability get around. If these fees both reduce unnecessary traffic and raise money for needed public works, I don't see the downside.

I am for it. And frankly it will affect the poor who drive into the city. But I would just suggest eliminating street parking personally. That is the biggest subsidy to car owners imaginable. Plus I would rather have nice big bike lanes and outdoor cafes any day.

From www.transalt.org . . .

Congestion Pricing Haters Have It All Wrong

New Report Debunks Flawed Anti-Congestion Pricing Study

NEW YORK, NY (April 24, 2007) – The Citywide Coalition for Traffic Relief today issued a new report, Debunking the Attack on Congestion Pricing, exposing the flawed study underlying the anti-congestion pricing arguments that are being marshaled by the American Automobile Association, parking garage owners, the Queens Chamber of commerce and a handful of Brooklyn and Queens elected officials.

"The Queens Chamber of Commerce study—and that is using the word ‘study’ very loosely-- is nine ways wrong in asserting that the costs of congestion pricing outweigh the environmental, transit and health benefits,” says Transportation Alternatives Executive Director Paul Steely White.

Debunking the Attack on Congestion Pricing outlines nine ways that the Chamber’s report gets it wrong, from its unfounded assumption about the number of drivers that will stay out of Manhattan instead of switching to transit, to the outright misrepresentation of the number of the total commuters who currently drive to Manhattan.

"Congestion pricing in New York would do what it has done for London and Stockholm: reduce traffic congestion, fund badly-needed transit improvements, result in cleaner air and improve public health," said Gene Russianoff, senior attorney for NYPIRG's Straphangers Campaign. "Opponents have to answer a tough question: What's their program to lower congestion and pay for billions in transit improvements for New York?"

"Congestion pricing critics are simply advocates for the status quo. Where are their plans for improving travel times for the vast majority of New Yorkers who use mass transit?" said Jon Orcutt, executive director of Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

"The reality is that in Jackson Heights, like in scores of neighborhoods around the city, residents are suffering every day. Congestion contributes to the polluted air we must breathe and the dirty streets with dangerous intersections we must walk, "says Will Sweeney, Western Jackson Heights Alliance & member of the Citywide Coalition for Traffic Relief.

The Citywide Coalition for Traffic Relief has 140 member groups (over 50% from Brooklyn and Queens) and is steered by Transportation Alternatives, NYPIRG’s Straphangers Campaign, Tri-state Transportation Campaign and Citizen’s Committee for New York City. trafficrelief.org

#####

Transportation Alternatives is your advocate for cycling, walking and environmentally sensible transportation. T.A. seeks car-free parks, safe streets, traffic-calmed neighborhood streets, better public transit and reduced use of motor vehicles. T.A. is a 501c3, non-profit, non-partisan organization founded in 1973.

vsk

From www.transalt.org . . .

Congestion Pricing Haters Have It All Wrong

New Report Debunks Flawed Anti-Congestion Pricing Study

NEW YORK, NY (April 24, 2007) – The Citywide Coalition for Traffic Relief today issued a new report, Debunking the Attack on Congestion Pricing, exposing the flawed study underlying the anti-congestion pricing arguments that are being marshaled by the American Automobile Association, parking garage owners, the Queens Chamber of commerce and a handful of Brooklyn and Queens elected officials.

"The Queens Chamber of Commerce study—and that is using the word ‘study’ very loosely-- is nine ways wrong in asserting that the costs of congestion pricing outweigh the environmental, transit and health benefits,” says Transportation Alternatives Executive Director Paul Steely White.

Debunking the Attack on Congestion Pricing outlines nine ways that the Chamber’s report gets it wrong, from its unfounded assumption about the number of drivers that will stay out of Manhattan instead of switching to transit, to the outright misrepresentation of the number of the total commuters who currently drive to Manhattan.

"Congestion pricing in New York would do what it has done for London and Stockholm: reduce traffic congestion, fund badly-needed transit improvements, result in cleaner air and improve public health," said Gene Russianoff, senior attorney for NYPIRG's Straphangers Campaign. "Opponents have to answer a tough question: What's their program to lower congestion and pay for billions in transit improvements for New York?"

"Congestion pricing critics are simply advocates for the status quo. Where are their plans for improving travel times for the vast majority of New Yorkers who use mass transit?" said Jon Orcutt, executive director of Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

"The reality is that in Jackson Heights, like in scores of neighborhoods around the city, residents are suffering every day. Congestion contributes to the polluted air we must breathe and the dirty streets with dangerous intersections we must walk, "says Will Sweeney, Western Jackson Heights Alliance & member of the Citywide Coalition for Traffic Relief.

The Citywide Coalition for Traffic Relief has 140 member groups (over 50% from Brooklyn and Queens) and is steered by Transportation Alternatives, NYPIRG’s Straphangers Campaign, Tri-state Transportation Campaign and Citizen’s Committee for New York City. trafficrelief.org

#####

Transportation Alternatives is your advocate for cycling, walking and environmentally sensible transportation. T.A. seeks car-free parks, safe streets, traffic-calmed neighborhood streets, better public transit and reduced use of motor vehicles. T.A. is a 501c3, non-profit, non-partisan organization founded in 1973.

vsk

I think Mayor Nanny Bloomie is a very arrogant man. I also highly doubt he rides the subway that much. He's the mayor, I want someone driving him around so he can work and make calls and stuff. New Yorkers shouldn't want him wasting all that time on the subway.

We all have to wonder what Bloomberg is really thinking of with this congestion pricing tax scheme. Maybe he mostly just wants a new tax. Just wrap it up in ‘concern for the environment’, and then people can just demonize those who oppose it.

If he cares so much about traffic jams, congestion and air pollution, why does he let Park Avenue be blocked off? Why doesn’t he do anything about that?

It's true, Pershing Square Restaurant blocks Park Avenue going South at 42nd St. for about 12 hours a day/5 months of the year! This Causes Massive Congestion and Air Pollution!

But apparently it does not bother NYC’s Nanny-in-Chief Mike “Congestion Pricing Tax” Bloomberg?

It certainly supports his claim that the city is hugely congested.

Check out the map! Tell your friends!

http://whataplanet.blogspot.com
http://preview.tinyurl.com/38obfd

Check it out!

Thanks,

Little Blue PD

:)