In 2009, Governor Paterson pushed thought new taxes for the MTA
*Payroll Tax
*Auto Rental Tax
* Auto Registration Fee $25 annually
* Taxi surcharge
In addition, the Legislature gave the MTA authority to raise transit fares and tolls at will every odd year. Starting in 2011 transit fares and tolls have increased every other year and al of the revenues have paid for higher salaries, expanded benefits, pensions and the over budget 2nd Ave subway and still incomplete East Side Access.
Over $15 Billion in new taxes and not much to show for it except the partially completed 2nd Avenue subway tunnel. East Side Access is still 4 years away.
116
To go from W 61st and W. End Ave to the nearest subway station, Broadway and 72nd costs over $10 with a 'congestion surcharge' added in.! The 1 train on 66th, and 61st and Broadway going north doesn't run on the weekend and no one at the MTA can say when it's going to be back in service. What a pathetic state of affairs.
60
Another tax , Another fund stream they can use for “ community programs” . Used for the MTA? Yeah sure , like the lottery was to be for schools and the bridge tolls for the MTA. Look at the social welfare fraud , it’s unreal , all those blue barrels you see when you go into many grocery stores in nyc is for food stamp fraud. Google it , many articles were written with no result. This money will go down the rabbit hole like the rest
73
There will be a lawsuit that will put an end to this and that will be all she wrote. One Police Plaza is in the Congestion Zone as is 26 Federal Plaza which houses the FBI. All of these law enforcement people drive there own vehicles to work. But most importantly, 60 Centre St. is in the zone, the New York Supreme Court, whose employees and Judges also drive in and who zealously protect their own prerogatives. They are going to be very sympathetic to any argument why the Congestion Pricing Plan is illegal. Then there is the Federal Court at 40 next door that might have, will have, their own issues. Lower Manhattan is not a bridge or a tunnel but a city. And it is not London which is in a completely different country regardless of what Brooklyn trust funders with their bicycles might suppose.
51
The answer to every problem in NYC can't always be let's just spend more money and raise taxes. There has to be another approach or NYC will end up like other cities where the tax base packs up and leaves the what. I cannot understand how it is fair to make me pay for mass transit with a new tax when I already pay plenty of taxes that are supposed to pay for suc things, on top of that I've lived in nyc my whole life and haven't use the MTA in at least 30 years so I shouldn't have to pay for everyone else let the riders pay for there mode of transport and I'll pay for mine.
38
All neighborhoods bordering the Fee Zone will become more congested and more polluted, and not just in Manhattan. Western Queens is going to bear the brunt of it from the east with Long Island drivers.
34
Why was there no section "Who are the biggest losers?" in this article?
This will have a huge impact on people who are trying to make a living driving cars for hire. They are already struggling with 8 known suicides and counting in the space of about a year. It's not their fault that the transit system has been egregiously mismanaged for decades, but they will suffer disproportionately from the cost of congestion pricing.
Let's face it: there is little that can be done to expand service in the NYC subway system, at least in Manhattan. Because that is what is needed most. There are a finite number of tunnels, serving literally hundreds of millions more customers than two decades ago*, though I know ridership has declined in recent years. The construction of loads of apartment complexes in the boroughs (with numerous buildings in downtown Brooklyn and the Gowanus area alone drawing many thousands to live) doesn't help.
Unless the MTA has some Jetsons-like solution in mind (or trains can be sped up significantly, safely -- which seems unlikely), the only thing straphangers can reasonably hope for is largely cosmetic: improved quality of the trains and stations. It's hard to see how commuting on the subway during am/pm rush hours is going to become tolerable again.
*https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/publications/State%20of%20Subway%20Ridership%20-%20Mar717.pdf
38
What is a politician to do? He has much of his constituency demanding an improvement in the subway system. He (or she) also has much of his (or her) constituency insisting that they will not pay a fee, tax or higher subway fare to pay for all these improvements. Does that sound inconsistent or impossible to resolve?
I get it though; almost all want better service but either can't reasonably pay for it or do not want to lose hundreds or thousands of dollars every year to some project from which they will not likely personally benefit.
As to those who say wring out the waste, fraud and abuse - of which there probably is a few billion dollars each year - good luck with that. Defining what constitutes waste, fraud and abuse and then ferreting out any reasonable percentage of it (and possibly prosecuting criminally) will be difficult if not near impossible. Moreover, the dollars necessary to find it and eliminate it will substantially offset any savings.
7
I happen to live in the congestion zone and have a car. I haven't heard anything about how this affects those of us who live in the area.
43
@M Troche
Agree. I’m so confused. If I’m in the zone and want to get to tunnel in the am I’m going against traffic. So does that charge? Or coming back to the city simply to go home I should be charged??
21
I feel that many of you who support congestion always tend to look at the effects to why there are those who end up driving, but fail to look at the causes to why that is the case. Unfortunately, some need to understand that the boundaries of NYC aren't where the subway lines stop and transit deserts do exist even within city limits. The problem for them is that express buses and commuter trains in their areas weren't designed for those who don't have a regular work schedule and make it harder to get around without driving any other time of the day. For example, express buses only go to Manhattan during the morning rush hour while coming back from there during the evening rush hour, but those whose schedules aren't with the bus have to take more time because they most likely have to take a bus to a subway station to get there. Meanwhile, unless it's during peak hours, commuter trains are known to have sporadic schedules throughout the day making it more convenient to drive even if there is traffic. Until those are fixed, many will end up driving as a result. Also, getting the MTA to build the IND Second System and Triboro RX would have helped a lot of outlying areas that have the said transit deserts by extending subway lines to them. Then again, most who support congestion pricing are probably apathetic to such and don't understand what the rest of us go through, which is why I feel that some of you either don't drive regularly or can just easily afford it.
19
If I recall from history ,what my dad told me and from what I read in the book “ the power broker”
Both the 7 and the E/F would be extended to marathon parkway in little neck
The 2nd Avenue subway would run from 125 street to south ferry
Decades later what has been accomplished? A 3 stop stub from 72-96 on second that went billions over budget.nothing else has been done
Something else that I’m surprised that no one mentioned- if you register a car/truck in the “NYMA” area there’s a mandatory surcharge
Where is all this $$ going?
23
@El Barto
Much of the reason a lot of that didn't get built was mainly due to the economy that the MTA was facing back in the 1970's and found it hard to recover from it. However, they did put a new subway line on Archer Avenue in Jamaica during the 1980;s, but that was to replace the ones lost by the Jamaica Avenue El that was being demolished. Meanwhile, the Triboro RX has been brought up a few time, but has been built mainly due to part of its route involving tracks already belonging to freight lines that don't want to share or yield to this. Having that line would have brought subway stops to both Randall's and Ward's Islands. As for Staten Island, the only time there has ever been an attempt to give it a subway line was to connect it from the BMT 4th Avenue Line, but this was scrapped due to how expensive it was to build it either over or under The Narrows. Had these lines been built, such areas wouldn't be transit deserts that would make people resort to driving. The way I see it, I always feel that those who support it either because they don't need a motor vehicle of any kind on a regular basis to get around or that the can easily afford it on their income and won't be deterred by such. Either way, they do tend to act apathetic towards those that have to drive a lot in order to get around. Unfortunately, not everyone has the luxury to get around without a car and live close to everything like they can.
17
Another finely conceived and well-thought-out tax-and-spend program.
None of the proposed exemptions can be effectively administered. Do I need to get a doctor's note to prove that I was going to a medical appointment?
And then there those of us for whom Manhattan is our primary address. Not only do we pay the highest taxes in metro-NY, those of us who own a private car must also pay to garage our cars. And then we must pay premiums rates to insure our vehicle.
Where is our exemption? Even in London, those living in the City are exempted from paying the entry fees.
57
There is something perverse about making driving even more onerous while having a woefully inadequate mass transit system. Another example of New York logic.
55
The price of everything just went up in Manhattan.
As these cost will be pasted on.
And congestion is caused by construction ,delivery vehicles and taxis not private cars.
But lets throw money at the MTA so they can pad more labor costs....
Enuff !!
34
I'm all for it, but seriously, that map leaves out the upper east and west sides where there are huge concentrations of the über wealthy?? Really??
25
@Matthew
Another poorly thought out comment. You think it's OK to float in and float out while those of us who live in Manhattan have to subsidize your obnoxiously poor driving by paying premium taxes.
By all means come to the City, but if you don't want to pay for the privilege of comfort (e.g., your personal car) then by all means take a NJ Transit train... if it runs.
10
There are other parts of the city besides Manhattan so they can't take New Jersey transit
2
@JRW
Dude, I'm an ex-NYCer since 1979. I never, ever drive into NYC from my recent exile from the real estate wars. You have no idea what it means to be at the mercy of NJ transit. I do. I know what it means to have to re-think every dr. appt I make with my docs all still in NYC knowing I might not make it in. I know what it means to stand out in 3 degree cold just a few weeks back and listen to NJ Transit announcements literally saying they have no idea what is going on.
Look at that map. it leaves out everyone north of 59th st. Your comment is lazy at best.
22
My husband is the sole proprietor of a small construction firm. He and his subcontractors must drive into Manhattan to bring tools and supplies to and from projects. This tax is going to impose an onerous burden on small businesses that must make deliveries in the tolled area, which from this articles sounds to be all of Manhattan below 60th Street.
What they will do, because their profit margin is already slim, is to pass the costs on to their clients. So if you live in Manhattan, do not own a car, and think that congestion pricing is a good idea -- think of the number of deliveries your apartment building, or you (Fresh Direct, anyone?) receive weekly, consider the paint job, kitchen or bath renovation, or other project you had planned.
Then add the cost of congestion pricing to your maintenance, grocery bill, or renovation costs, because you will be paying it; the providers cannot afford the additional costs.
43
@RCT
Well, what if we do nothing? What if populations tick upwards and the city keeps going on a Hudson Yards-scale building rampage, and CO2 keeps heading up and up and up, and everyone wants to be in an SUV heading into the city? Do you see any problem with that? None at all? It's just a wonderful, sustainable future?
33
"Fewer cars will also mean cleaner air, more room for cyclists and less fraught crossings for pedestrians."
Ah hahaha. Bikes are my biggest fear in terms of walking about the city. Completely violating transportation rules en masse all over the place. Going the wrong way, going through lights, still out in the car lanes when there is a bike lane, whizzing past pedestrians with glee, making unpredictable zigs and zags. Citibikes so heavy and clunky less able bikers can't even start from a full stop without leaning this way and that often veering into pedestrians in crosswalks. More of that will be a nightmare.
55
@Matthew Cars are by far a greater risk to pedestrians than bikes. By every metric there is.
27
@Marta
Abso-lutely. Merely because two tons can kill more effectively. But I don't dodge cars. I dodge bikes. On a daily basis they are the bigger menace in terms of what I have to watch for. Bikers are, by-and-large, completely lawless in ways car drivers simply are not. Driving the wrong way is rare with car drivers, but entirely commonplace with bikers. Driving on sidewalks, although seems to be new thing with drivers in some areas, is commonplace with bikers.
35
Bikes are a menace , the free for attitude of bikers makes me sick, the cops have a hands off policy on them for fear of being on you tube. This doesn’t and will work without enforcement and people registering their bikes like a car
32
What is the main purpose of this tax?
To reduce congestion? Well, how about putting a limit on Uber drivers first? Since Bloomberg allowed them into the city traffic has become abysmal. I can’t imagine what that has done to air quality.
Taxis should be exempt. They already pay the city for the medallions to circulate.
29
@J.Q.P.
The main purpose?
Reduce congestion.
Reduce pollution.
Find a relevant revenue source to improve mass transit which is the logical alternative to people wanting to be in cars. Incent those people out of their cars and into mass transit.
Win. Win. Win.
14
@J.Q.P.
I have watched this concept of conjestion pricing and am dumbfounded by the process and this plan. If all of Manhattan below 60th street has to pay, then that is about 75% of all daily traffic because above 60th Street is all residential, schools, small retail shops.
BUT, the area is much too large! Why not from 3rd Ave to 7th Ave and from 59th street to 32nd Street.
do this for 4 years and see what happens. the area proposed is way too large.
Taxis's should definitely not have to pay! they already collect enough for the tax collector.
14
@Matthew
no, no, no. see my response above.
the other thing the city can do to keep cars/trucks moving is to use the system wherein all pedestrians walk across the grid, then vehicles get to move without waiting for people to cross the street. THAT IS THE SINGLE GREATEST CAUSE OF CONGESTION IN NYC/MANHATTAN.
8
Here is an idea, Why not just create a tax surcharge on vehicles parking in the propose area. After all the ones driving into the city have to park somewhere, doing it this way it will only target the ones that want to drive to the city instead of taking transit.
Of course exemptions should be made for the disabled and midtown residents. On commercial vehicles since they park on the streets, raise the meter price. Doing it this way the city will save a lot in setting up ez pass, cameras etc. Parking lots are already in service just add the extra tax and get it over with.
Just an idea anyway.
9
@Manny
Hmmm, because some people live in apartment buildings with parking, so you would do what? Add a tax to the building? And the building would pass that along to the space users? And townhouse owners with private garages? So you add it to the real estate taxes and somehow the city manages to claw it back? And what about the townhouse owner with a garage that does not have a car?
And what about people that drive through Manhattan out to the boroughs/Long Island/NJ and never park?
3
@Matthew
i agree. bad idea, this taxing while parking.
1
@Matthew
Sorry my English is not the best, what I mean is that the parking garages in the “ hot zone” will collect a tax on those who park there by the day not the monthly residents that have a space there. As of now monthly garage spaces are exempt from the high parking tax, so they won’t be affected.
4
This will be disastrous for Manhattan for many reasons that will only be seen after it is put into effect. Disastrous for jobs, increased costs on businesses and some businesses will close.
And the subway will not be fixed. $100 billion has been invested in infrastructure since the eighties (there's a NYT article on this) and what has been the result? The MTA has a moral hazard/incentive problem, not a money problem. It is the PDVSA of NYC.
22
Here's the problem You may get more $, youll pool it into mass transit and you want more people to use mass transit on a system that cannot be expanded, no new lines, no new bus lanes, so the system will be even more crowded and lets be honest here, the rich will pay the fees and continue to drive in and out and commercial vehicles will pass on the cost to customers, you and me.
A joke
22
I live in the zone - why should one trip uptown and back to assist my 80 year old mother incur the same charge as an uber driving around all day? This is nonsense.
Regardless... the mta does not have a revenue problem as is - it has a spending problem - Albany should stop siphoning money out of the mta to pay for non-mta expenses. Giving Albany more mta money will just mean more siphoning.
If you really want to solve congestion - which you don’t - because this plan is all about the benjamins - cap the amount of ubers and lyfts. Now If you really want to raise money for the mta - and be fair about it - stop siphoning from it, bring back the commuter tax, cap union overtime and no show abuse, get a pied a tierre tax (and an empty store front tax), a free parking personal vehicle placard tax, legalize and tax marijuana and downstate gambling. Unfortunately it is the unions and real estate that put Cuomo et al where they are - but remember it is also the voters who ultimately pay for all this.
117
@Jeff
some really good points here.
cap ubers
pied a tierre tax
empty store front tax [city PAYS them when vacant]
tax ticket exempt parking passes,
also, this system should be based on time in the zone, not daily. London uses time and it works.
18
@Jeff NYC did cap the number of uber licenses.
11
@Jeff
some really good points here.
cap ubers
pied a tierre tax
empty store front tax [city PAYS them when vacant]
tax ticket exempt parking passes,
5
"State legislators are currently considering several possible exemptions for drivers who are low income, have disabilities or are going to medical appointments."
This is acceptable only if they are willing to exempt people who are low income, have disabilities or are going to medical appointments from train/bus fare.
4
so the world is basically divided into 2 mindsets - those who want to keep what they have, and those who believe that greater equality raises the fortunes of all
AOC is perhaps the leading temporaneous proponent of facing the true costs of meeting the needs of an ever increasing population hampered by a likely distressed infrastructure supporting it
Xrump seems to embody the keep-as-much-as-possible-for- me-and-mine mindset, evidently with little concern for the greater good and future
moral: 10,000,000 vote margin needed in 2020
4
Yet more congestion pricing reporting that ignores big traffic delays caused by huge construction projects like Hudson Yards.
I see the Times again omitted the big Giuliani cuts to NYC Transit, bigger Pataki era cuts to the MTA budget. Over the last 20 years that tens of billions of dollars cut from transit.
Then what happened to the commuter tax?
12
@Yaj
Yes...what happen to the commuter tax!
3
Good job NYC for recognizing that you need to boldly innovate in order to fix the transit mess. Many people will complain, but this proven technology has worked in other global capitals starting with London.
Los Angeles and San Francisco, you need to follow in the footsteps of your sister city back East. It's surely a lot more sustainable than building more parking garages for the cars that are overwhelming your streets and freeways, as well as fouling your air.
8
@lah I never knew raising taxes on the working class that drives into the city was innovative !
14
@Homer: You can classify it as a tax on people that choose to move around in an unsustainable 4000 pound shell rather than take mass transit. I would exempt some forms of handicap vehicles. That's it.
6
I find the idea that subway riders will benefit from this investment laughable.
Last year, in "How 2 M.T.A. Decisions Pushed the Subway Into Crisis," the NYT detailed how the increase in subway delays was attributable to 1) faulty sensors and 2) more slow zones & greater space between trains.
The MTA alleges that 40+% of sensor equipment is >50 years old; in 2018 the NYT pointed out that less than 7% of a $836 million emergency investment was oriented at signal replacement. The Village Voice points out that the MTA wasn't been targeting increased delays, which are clearly attributable, but instead using the emergency funding to do general maintenance and operations.
Only in JANUARY did the MTA finally agree to increase train speed, after more than a year of awful delays.
What's another badly spent $1b, or $15, if it's all aimed at the wrong things and instead goes to pay off contractors and middlemen?
https://nyti.ms/2I4ct4K NYT article
https://bit.ly/2JNrvgq Strategic plan not targeting delays properly
https://bit.ly/2U1vHOb train speed
9
@Informer
This is why I feel that a more thorough audit on the MTA to see where their existing revenues are going to is needed before even thinking about congestion pricing. By doing so, they won't even need to have to resort to constant fare hikes if everything goes to where it's supposed to go to. However, the anti-car fanatics may not like this if it will make congestion pricing feel both unnecessary and even obsolete.
7
As usual, the overreaction to change
It won’t be as good or as bad as people think
But a step in the right direction - you shouldn’t be able to take a car into Manhattan for free during their work day
Also congestion pricing is a good economic tax to the clowns that clog our streets
10
@DMB
I don't find it an overreaction to be against a form of tax that a certain group doesn't want to feel like a cash cow to help fund a system that they can barely use themselves.
3
It's about time. Win-win-win. See, Democrats can enact good legislation.
5
For God's sake, NY Times, please stop swallowing the hype by referring to this as "congestion pricing".
Call it a Middle Class Motor Vehicle Tax.
If the motivation behind this was really to reduce congestion in Midtown we would see a severe reduction in the numbers of Ubers and Lyfts (now at 130,000) which are the main culprits.
We would see a massive effort to encourage low-cost ferry service across the East River. (Yes, ferry service. No one's talking about that.)
This is just another tax. So let's call it that.
24
@Call It What It Is
Ok, it's a tax on congestion, pollution and the selfishness of needing a 2 ton, 15' long personal vehicle where it makes no sense to allow. Are you good now? Or are you one of those folks that doesn't think life shouldn't involve taxes? As if society will just magically appear before you and function without any means of support.
8
@Matthew
You're missing the point.
This purpose of this tax is to raise funds for the MTA. But it's being sold to the gullible as a way of reducing traffic congestion in Manhattan, which it will not.
If the governor, the mayor, and the legislators were sincerely trying to reduce traffic congestion in Manhattan they would start by significantly reducing the number of Ubers and Lyfts (an incredible 130,000) which have been permitted to do business on city streets since 2014.
But they don't. Because those 130,000 vehicles are a source of income to the city (a new $2.75 tax on every ride). So don't expect the congestion and air pollution in Manhattan, particularly Midtown, to be reduced at all if this tax becomes law.
8
@Call It What It Is
I'm not missing that point. That IS the point. Fund the MTA. So people will use it MORE and drive LESS.
3
This will be a boon for parking garages located north of 60th Street! Where can I invest?
6
I am retired living in the East Village, so only use my car occasionally to leave and return to the city. I could deal with it. But there are tens maybe hundreds of thousands of others in my and surrounding neighborhoods that, unless there is a resident exemption, this plan will be like an virtual BERLIN WALL on their livelihoods and lives. I believe our local representatives will ensure an exemption as they worked to do last time. We live in largely low rise residential communities where congestion is not a big factor. I think that also the countless small local businesses, in the Village, Soho, Little Italy, Chinatown, etc., will be deeply impacted. They largely count on a Bridge and Tunnel clientele who drive on a Friday or Saturday or weekday evening to fill up their restaurants, or stock up on bagels, lox and herring on weekend mornings. I personally would love if the bridge and tunnel crowd would disappear, but it would be an economic disaster for these businesses. The local tax losses would more than offset the revenue gains from thom the tolls, and destroy the unique nature of this part of the city. As they say, be careful what you wish for.
16
I think you have it backwards. Those who can't afford the congestion charge probably aren't the big spenders at restaurants. Those who have more money to spend but don't like sitting in traffic will now have more incentive to patronize city establishments. But let's not exaggerate the impact of the fee. It will be comparable to a bridge toll and way less than a train trip, and neither of these seems to be stopping people from coming in at present.
7
@Marty
I don’t think you understand economics very well. There are alternatives to eating, shopping, etc in Lower Manhattan these days, all over Brooklyn, and LIC and Queens for example.
Thought experiment: Since this whole thing, the pols are now admitting, has nothing to do with congestion but revenue, why not revolve it around the different areas on say a monthly basis. You live in Park Slope, say? Okay no one can drive and patronize your neighborhood businesses during the month of August. So everyone just goes to Williamsburg, Dumbo, or Fort Greene in August. Meantime your businesses go belly up.
People from Brooklyn especially think that Manhattan is the Nirvana, the Golden Grail. But it is just not so any more.
5
While reducing congestion is sorely needed, and this stick is a good approach to it, while also raising revenue for the transit system, it should be noted that even $1 billion in revenue is less than HALF what the MTA currently spends annually on debt service. $2.731B is currently being spent on debt service.
Part of the reason the MTA is falling apart is because of the debt that started to be accrued under Governor Pataki. When 16% of operating revenue is simply going to pay back Wall Street for loans, some of which date back to the 90s, that's a problem.
11
@Phillip Roncoroni, the congestion pricing proposal is seeking to increase the debt service cost by an additional $1 billion per year in order to borrow $15 billion up front for new spending. If you are concerned about the current debt servicing, this proposal will exacerbate the issue.
6
I think the legislators who may vote for this new tax on the working class are underestimating the backlash it will create.
Not only a backlash from the money being taken from their pockets but by the inevitable bureaucratic misery that will result from its implementation. Unexpected tax bills arriving in the mailbox, the need to resolve disputes where there had never been a need for a dispute in the past. Etc.
I urge every voter to make note of any legislator who votes for this tax. Write the name down and disseminate it however you can.
Then VOTE THEM OUT.
10
In the grand scheme of things, CP will help ensure that the status quo remains the same, with the automobile being of primary importance and biking / public transit receiving lower investment over the long term, not the other way around. CP perpetuates the paradigm where automobile drivers are profit centers, paying enough in taxes to cover their own costs plus subsidizing other functions, whereas public transit is a cost center, requiring other government funds to keep it afloat. As the government wants more money to spend, they will seek to increase the number of cars to bring in more from CP. At the same time, the cost of a proposal to convert traffic lanes from car use to bike use will go up (as the increased traffic will reduce the number of drivers and thus the income from CP), which will lower the number of new bike lanes approved. CP is just another tax on drivers, and as the prior taxes have led us to our current state, one more tax on drivers is not going to fundamentally change things. Even the amount of the new tax is not fundamentally different, with parking daily tax near $10 as compared to $12.50 of CP. Yes, the mix of drivers will change at the margin to favor the wealthy, as lower income people change their behavior to drive less, while higher income people may drive in more often following the initial drop in traffic. As London has shown, there will be an initial drop in traffic, but it will be short lived as others take advantage of the freed-up capacity.
4
On the other side of the issue, the proposed up-front investments in public transportation need to happen whether or not CP is approved, as they are being driven by public demand and the risk of incumbents losing elections as outrage grows. Once those initial investments are made, however, the calculus has not changed with respect to the government's incentives over the long term to continue investing in public transit, such as to approve new tracks to serve transit deserts. If public transit remains a cost center, then each new investment in public transit will require proposing new taxes or taking money away from other existing areas. Both of these are politically dangerous, whereas the status quo is the status quo. If the public wants public transit to become the favored method throughout the region, proposals to make the system revenue neutral or a profit center would go further to achieve that goal than CP.
1
To understand the genius and sophistication of this plan to solve and innovate in urban transportation policy simply Imagine a carpenter whose only tool is a hammer. This is truly a missed opportunity to innovate and lead. What NYC is getting is not first rate transportation policy but rather second rate tax policy.
4
@Harris Silver The status quo for NYC was untenable. Nudge taxes are innovative have worked in the congestion context elsewhere. And yes, it will effect me as a Manhattanite and an auto owner. I'm willing to try it, adjust it where necessary, and get on with the future.
6
The real reasons for congestion relate to:
overdevelopment, construction, high housing costs/gentrification (pushing out people and lengthening commutes), Uber, ecommerce delivery and bicycle lanes (which narrow streets.)
Not that it would happen, but congestion would certainly be reduced if all those apartments for billionaires and millionaires were given to regular people :)
Actual affordable housing so people could live here instead of long commutes from Yonkers, the Bronx, Queens, SI etc. Regular people could walk or bus to work. What a thought.
Of course, reducing Uber and limiting development would also reduce congestion.
As for revenue….
Tax: billionaire pied-a-terre and Uber.
Congestion pricing - the costs - will ensure the swift transformation of Manhattan into a gated community for the rich and super-rich.
17
In the middle of the article is says that the congestion fees are required to generate 1 BILLION a year. That means this is not about congestion. Its about revenue generation. Expect these fees to go up. It already costs a crazy amount to travel on the GWB. Also expect anyone working for the city to be exempted from the new fees.
15
There will be many unintended consequences among them:
1) Gridlock north of 60th street and at all toll collection places
2) Increased air pollution because of this gridlock
3) Increased costs of groceries and other goods that come in by truck.
4) Increase in small motorized bikes and scooters causing third world chaotic conditions on the streets of Manhattan.
5) Increased air and noise pollution from these bikes and scooter.
6) Overall slower transportation from gridlock.
7) Falling Real Estate Values especially in the UES and UWS.
These are a few; there will be many more consequences that will be apparent only after the law takes effect.
13
@Mackaroo Lincoln Center lies just above 60th Street; would cabs and other cars be able to get through the gridlock to drop off their passengers?
@Mackaroo CP actually reduces gridlock, air pollution, and delivery costs. By reducing traffic, it is easier for taxis and delivery vehicles to get around. The current situation is very "third-world"!
5
@Mackaroo
Thousands of downtown small businesses, shops, restaurants, galleries, bakeries etc that rely on a Bridge and Tunnel clientele who drive in on weekends and evenings and basically keep them in business. I live in the East Village, and they sure as heck aren’t making any money off of me. This would be an economic disaster for them, and the local tax loss would be self defeating for the City, likely a net negative stacked up against the toll revenue which the city would not even get a penny of.
3
Anyone who regularly commutes into New York by car knows that over time it has taken longer and longer to make the trip. More cars going over the same number of roads just does not compute. People need to be motivated to take mass transit. It is one of the downsides of population growth.
12
Want to bet it won't raise all the expected? Want to bet folks will find ways around the collection points making other issues? Want to bet it won't increase the costs of almost everything? It is a decent idea, but probably over promised to under deliver.
3
@vulcanalexIt will cost a lot just to collect the tolls. Some productive people will throw up their hands and leave the city. Also, has the bottle deposit law, begun around 1988, led to clean streets? It certainly did increase the costs of beverages and of the cost of running a grocery store.
2
It would be ridiculous to make residents pay these fines (especially when the vast majority of them do not even own cars).
Why doesn't the state instead focus on regulating the number of Uber/Lyft cars (just like they do the taxis), toll all non-residents, and quit funneling money that should be going to the MTA elsewhere?
11
"Subway riders stand to see more reliable service and fewer headaches with hefty new investment in the transit system. "
this logic is so backwards... less drivers means MORE subway commuters which means MORE congestion and delays. there's no chance that the MTA will see any of this money anyway.
11
@Chris H
Per yesterday’s article, the revenue is strictly going to capital projects. That could mean a new waiting room on the Garrison Metro North stop, or a revamped station in an assemblyman’s North Bronx district. What it does not mean is that the current “crisis of breakdowns, delays, overcrowding, lack of maintenance, etc” in the NYC subway are going to be fixed. The commuters are being messed over once again by the politicians and interest groups.
9
U.S. Embassy in London has refused to pay congestion pricing despite insistence of British authorities. What is policy for the U.N.?
13
I support this. Nyc traffic has got completely out of control and something needs to be done. It is not just a problem below 60th street though.
I plan on taking public transportation more often instead of driving.
11
As someone who occasionally drives through Manhattan' I'd be happy to pay $10-$15 for less traffic.
11
The real problem is, and will continue to be, the fact that our federal government takes in multiple billions of dollars more in individual and business federal income taxes from NYers than what it gives back in infrastructure investment. OUR money gets spent on infrastructure and other things in the South and Midwest where states don't have income taxes, and warplanes and cages for kids at the border, and it is absolutely conservative wealth distribution made naked and transparent by the SALT cap. Taxing outerborough, transit-desert dwelling people of color will not make up for the money we spend on roads in Missouri while those people continue to blame us for their problems. Congestion pricing advocates ought to demand Congress stop redistributing OUR money to parts elsewhere, and we need to begin considering more drastic measures to force to. Congestion pricing won't even alleviate traffic, as the recent uptick in London clearly shows.
10
I have some problems with congestion pricing.
First, the money is going to the MTA, which is mismanaged and lacks public accountability. I just don’t trust that the money will be appropriately allocated. If there were real accountability with the MTA then that might be a different story, but as is, knowing that teir 1 pensions will pay out more in retirement than when in employment, I can’t support this.
Secondly, and this is annecdotal (so take it for what it’s worth) but when my wife was pregnant she had to take the car from Brooklyn to work during the third trimester, she was just too sick, and frankly during rush hour the subway was simply not realiable or plausible.
Now that our child is born, we visit my folks up on the uws. We drive most of the time bc she doesn’t have her shots yet, and the hour and 10 minute train ride with three transfers is far more difficult than driving. Although when we drive we wouldn’t have to pay the tax to visit them, I fear this policy will cause a major issue with parking on the UWS and UES, as commuters will choose to leave their cars there. I fear this will make it harder for my parents who also own a car up there, as traffic will get worse.
Finally, what about all those people who work in garages, and the rents and maintainances that are offset by those businesses. A lot more than just commuters will be affected by this policy, and I for one am not so sanguine that the desired results will be achieved.
12
@ekf6 But the answer can't be no answer. Things as they are are not acceptable. More cars trying to get into the city on the same number of roads does not make sense. Mass transit is the only way to alleviate the congestion. The state could put a special mass transit tax on all car owners but that would't be fair for those who don't drive into NYC. Maintaining and improving mass transit has a substantial cost. Where else would it come from?
9
@USS Johnston The congestion has gotten worse bc of the influx of ubers and lyfts, loss of lanes for the creation of bike lanes, and a building boom. As far as funding the subway, how about as a policy shift torwards maintanence as opposed to expansion. Do we really need to build a new JFK now? Is the 2nd avenue subway worth the money given what it would serve? Could we revisit the way the MTA spends? Do we need to phase out the metrocard? I mean, without accountability I don’t see why the MTA should get public funds.
12
@ekf6 Interesting points. If your wife was so ill perhaps not working or working from home was the correct option. Skype is great for visiting, just stay home.
5
It’s about time, great idea to thin out traffic and pollution. I have a feeling mta will still be the same
5
What about residents who live in that area and park their cars in garages?
2
There are wounded veterans undergoing unbearable physical rehab who do less whining than drivers of private vehicles who resent having to pay extra to bring their cars into Manhattan.
7
The FDR will be a parking lot.
8
Finally! Better air quality, less congestion, and making the city safer for pedestrians and cyclists.
8
@Jill
It would be better in all of those ways if folks from Brooklyn would just stay in Brooklyn. I should not have to worry about being permanently maimed by one of their speeding bicycles blowing a red light when I cross my local street.
8
Please just don't add more bike lanes. Current bike lanes make the city more dangerous IMHO. Mostly used by food delivery people who disregard the rules of the road and tourists on Citibikes who don't know what they are doing. We aren't Amsterdam; for better or worse biking isn't part of our culture. I know there are bike enthusiasts who practice safety but they are in the minority. Also don't allow motorized scooters. I recently was in LA where they are sanctioned and they are crazy dangerous.
18
If you live in NYC especially downtown you see the bike lanes used by all kinds of biking folks not just delivery people. Sorry but no.
7
@Lisamugg. Uhh, we need more bike lanes to make biking safer. Biking is a wonderful form of healthy, efficient transportation. Bike lanes a much more productive usage of road space than car lanes.
8
@K Henderson
I live in downtown NYC and he is totally correct, although I cycle myself and love the bike lanes. These scooters and electric bikes are supposed to be illegal. But there is no Police enforcement under DeBlasio, just like there isn’t against the ever more reeking odors emanating from open pot smokers. Why aren’t we being protected from that second hand smoke and pollution when it isn’t even legal yet?
10
This is wonderful news and couldn't come soon enough.
I'm mostly excited by the potential for less traffic on the streets, which will lead to a better pedestrian environment for the rest of us.
That said, NY and MTA need to manage this money properly: the subway is in crises, and we need efficiency and competency to pull ourselves out of this.
12
That is not going to solve anything, that is how they want to sell it but what it really is, is another way tax the already heavily taxed Tri-State residents. Congestion is mostly caused by commercial vehicles, yellow taxis, limos and now Uber. They will not stop driving into the area of congestion because, simply, that is how they make their living.
15
@The J
Congestion is not caused by yellow cabs. Their numbers are regulated by the city at about 14K taxis. That number has not changed for years.
What HAS changed, is the deluge of Uber/Lyft drivers all searching for the same fare.
Talk about congestion!!
16
It does not matter where the money comes from, the MTA has proven time and again that it cannot manage money properly. Two examples: constant station upgrades and the Second Avenue Line. While these are both valid expenditures, there are much higher priorities on the list of what needs to be addressed. Even if there was some way to make this tax equitable, it would be good money chasing after bad. The MTA should show the reason why this tax is needed before it is approved. But, yet again, the middle class worker will be burdened. I am a life long New Yorker who seems to know the MTA better than anyone making this ludicrous proposal.
13
This will be a strategical nightmare. Will out of town cars be charged twice, once going into the city, let's say to Brooklyn, then again when leaving going back thru the city? What about if you need to drive around the corner at 60th. St., then come back because of traffic. Is that a double charge as well? Many functional questions to answer.
4
Ed
My mom is south of 60 street she’s elderly with limited mobility if I drive in with groceries and medicine and get stuck in traffic will I be charged? Will I be charged a second time leaving the zone?
This is a money grab plain and simple and if history is any indication the $$$ will be raided and used for other purposes
14
@Ed Hillsdale Well, those cars could choose to enter Brooklyn via the Verrazano and avoid that charge. A huge amount of weekend traffic in midtown is caused by folks cutting through Manhattan to get back to Long Island. Or Take the FDR directly to Brooklyn Bridge. If this diverts them to the JFK Bridge to the North or Verrazno to the south, then mission accomplished.
3
@El Barto Yes, you will be charged. Street space is limited and if you want to use it there will be a charge.
3
It would be easier if they bothered to build a train that connects Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens. Every train has to go through Manhattan for some god awful reason and it makes absolutely no sense.
7
@George Gu other than the trains go where demand is greatest, sure, it makes no sense at all.
No one is putting a congestion charge on driving from Brooklyn to Queens to the Bronx. Knock yourself out.
3
Makes sense. More room for Uber and Lyft. T
6
You actually want people to waste more money on an organization like this?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html
9
Winnie, I noticed you have written extensively on this topic. I am curious to hear why you don't mention/cover bus riders. Buses in Manhattan are pathetically slow (they average speed of 6 mph). In fact, the bus route on 42nd street averages 3.2 miles per hour!
6
@Charlie Nucci I was surprised that she didn't mention that buses should move faster with less traffic.
4
Has anyone came to the conclusion YET that there's simply too many people in one area?
18
@Moehoward not too many people, too many cars!
2
None of these taxes or fees would be necessary if the MTA didn't agree to overly generous contracts with the union thugs. There is no reason a conductor on the railroads should make $150k a year with retirement with full pension at age 52.
24
@Jon W. Your figure of $150 would be with overtime because the average salary for a conductor is one third that amount. There are two options if there is a need to operate a train: hire or pay over time. May governmental organizations try to avoid the additional cost of benefits and opt for overtime.
3
@Jonathan W
The original deal with most unions was, "hey, as union members, we will guarantee a superior work product in exchange for job security, a safe work environment and "decent" wages and benefits "(debatable what decent is since a lot of these workers make over $100k derived from our tax dollars)
That is a broken deal. The union wages have skyrocketed while the work product put out by many (but not all) workers have remained stagnant.
Plus, when it comes to computing the income these union workers receive in retirement from their pensions - this calculation include monies that particular worker earned from their overtime work. No way overtime should be included in that calculation.
Such a sham.
What we have, is a broken system and increased fares which rewards these workers with higher pay and benefits..all on our "dime"
If you make your living off the public's taxes and this "offends" you..ok, no problem - quit and go into the private sector.
6
The richest city in the world can't afford a decent subway system. Wall Street piggies grow fatter by the day. Maybe New Yorkers aren't as smart as they think they are.
18
@Reilly Diefenbach I doubt that it is the richest city in the world either.
@Reilly Diefenbach that and our federal income tax money our citizens pay gets spent in states like yours instead of ours, but by all means continue to insult the people your state depends on to subsidize your roads, highways, bridges and ferries.
10
so if one needs to drive into town for say, a surgeon's appointment at nyu, they would be penalized? ridiculous.
8
@linh Yes. Many of my neighbors visit specialists in Manhattan.
4
@NYC Taxpayer Maybe this become a boon for Weill Cornell as they are above 60th street?
4
@NYC Taxpayer Simple solution is to have robotic medical visits, saves a lot of money.
OK, this solves a personal conundrum. I've been wondering how all the wealthy shoppers who might frequent the designer shops at the Hudson Piers might travel to get there. Subway extension, I don't think so. Some would walk I suppose but then the bag-schlepping? So now they can hop in their cars and pay a measly ten bucks for door to door service. how's the garage space over there?
7
The only winners are the broom pushers on the subway platform that pull down $180,000 per year including benefits, and the transit union. Not one dime will go to fixing the decrepit subways. This is America, not China. We don't do infrastructure anymore. And by the way, if you want revenue, go after the 20% of bus riders who beat the fare. Another source: homeowners in Forest Hills who pay one fifth the property taxes that homeowners a mile away in Great Neck pay. But hey, the money always flows from the wealth creators to Democrat voters, doesn't it?
12
Ok I need to clear up some of your misconceptions
I have a friend who’s a subway cleaner he doesn’t make anywhere near $180k with overtime plus he has to deal with addicts drunks the homeless etc without police protection I don’t think he made $80k at the end of the day
There used to be a difference of several thousand dollars between nyc property taxes and those of suburbia but thanks to Bloomberg the difference is only around $2000 a year . I have family and friends in both forest hills and great neck and btw it’s about 12 miles between the two areas not a mile
12
Forgot to add
I agree with you about fare evasion
What stoonad came up with buses that allow rear boarding?
Change the design of the subway turnstile to make it a lot harder to jump or duck under
Lastly there are stories that the LIRR fails to collect somewhere in the order of $128 million a year between trains too crowded to collect fares and those with no ID $ or credit card
It’s time to institute pay before you board setups and I wouldn’t be surprised if metro-north has similar problems
9
You couldn't pay me enough to clean up our subways.
Those who keep our subways at least halfway decent don't earn the amount you say, but okay, keep disparaging them.
5
If they do this they must tax every driver. Let the poor pay taxes and maybe they will understand why so many Americans vote for republicans.
13
@Tom LET the poor pay taxes? how gracious of you. do you think they don't? perhaps you misspoke. I hope so.
6
I'm guessing that the part of the overall plan dedicated to cost-saving measures to be enacted by MTA were left out of the article due to deadline and word-count constraints?
No? What a shock.
12
What about fees for gas-driven motorbikes? Without taxes on them, they will proliferate. In cities where motorbikes predominate the air is horrible, eg Hanoi and Chiang Mai.
6
What most of the negative commentors are missing is that driving in Manhattan, whether you're a resident of the borough, city, state is a selfish act. You are harming the environment (not to mention adding to noise pollution and making the city more dangerous among other problems) to preserve your private oasis. Be green and take public transportation, your children will thank you...
11
This is outrageous. It's not a fee, it's a tax. It must be stopped. It will hurt many people. Whenever the bureaucrats fail us, which is often, they find new "fees" to charge.
I don't drive when in Manhattan, but I own a car for out-of-city travels and trips. How many times will I have to pay this tax when I need to go somewhere?
The problematic MTA needs top to bottom reorganizing It has failed our community due to its utter inefficiency.
That wealthy political hacks, probably none of whom ride the subway, control the future of public transportation in NYC continues to be, at the very least, laughable, and at the other end of the spectrum, marginally corrupt.
Residents of NYC haven't failed the subway. The ruling elite, including our incompetent bumbling Governor Andrew Cuomo, have made a mockery of a once-proud subway system. Cuomo has never had a plan, or even a vision, for the future of this region.
How many of these fat cats running and ruining the MTA have university degrees in urban planning or transportation engineering? I'd really like to know.
I'd like to see a list of every MTA board and commission member with their college degree, place of employment, political affiliation, terms of service listed, and who appointed them.
The MTA has never been about visionary thinking or planning for the future. It if were, there would have been subway expansion to airports and poorly served areas of our city including parts of Brooklyn and The Bronx decades ago.
11
@Jason Bennett If you're doing well enough to own a car in Manhattan for out of town trips, you're doing well enough to pay $10 each time you leave home and come back on these trips. And your money is going towards helping a system for those less fortunate than you to get around as well.
7
Who are the biggest losers? Handicapped people who cannot use the subway. Bus service is unreliable if you need to be on time. Stops are farther apart. Headway is longer. Stops are skipped for long distances during rush hour. The moment you enter a taxi, the cost is $5.80 (2,50 + 3.30) and $6.80 during weekday rush hour. This helps the subway rider and no one else. Fairness?
10
@BDL reducing congestion will do wonders for bus service!
3
What about the congestion caused by taxis, and particularly private ride cars by the likes of Uber, Lyft, and all the private limo companies? (Take a look at the photo at the head of this article! Cabs and limo services vehicles predominate!)
Congestion in NYC has soared in recent years because the streets are awash with hoards of various car service vehicles (most with "T...C" license plates). It's evident on almost any and every street! Take a look the next time you're out.
Why isn't THIS clear source congestion being targeted more? The people using car services can, in many cases, afford to pay more than many people using their own private cars. Same thing for all those using big black limos and SUVs!
13
@NYer They're not targeting this source of congestion because this tax isn't about reducing congestion, it's about paying the pensions and benefits of retired MTA workers. It should be called the MTA Featherbedding Tax.
6
@SA
"...paying the pensions and benefits of retired MTA workers..."
What's so bad about honoring pension and benefit commitments? (made by NYC or anyone else).
And why are some people so disdainful of "pensions and benefits" of government workers, union workers, or any workers?
Or social security, Medicare, or the general social safety net for retirees?
10
The greatest city in the world, ha!!! That ship has sailed. The city is SO expensive, only the very rich and tourists will be in NYC...oh, that's already happened. You used to be able to live in the city on your own, now you need several roommates and it's not even in Manhattan, it was Brooklyn and now it's moving to Queens. What a lousy quality of life, working to pay for rent, transportation and food. Sure the traffic is awful, but I would put the blame on the Bloomberg administration, for making Avenues two lanes from four. No, I don't have any answers on how to fix the city and what ails it, but I don't think congestion pricing is the answer.
9
I wouldn't mind so much if the subway wasn't as horrible as it is.
3
@rob blake
Well, the idea is that, with a reliable stream of new funding, maybe we can make the subway & buses good again.
4
@Alicia
We already paid for the Brooklyn Bridge once; don't try to sell it to us again.
6
Another sign that Manhattan is no longer for New Yorkers - it's a gated community for the world's 1%.
6
De Blasio proposed a millionaires tax, absolutely confident that Not Mario would never approve it, so instead we get a new tax on the middle class, a tax on people who can no longer afford to live in Manhattan but must still work there. Both these guys are real presidential material, let me tell you.
11
The biggest winner will be Uber, Lyft and the ride sharing apps. They will only have to pay once per day and this gets others off the roads. To be fair, these taxis should be charged by the hour while in the zone.
6
@Fernando
So if you want to take an Uber from say the Village to the UES, do you jump out at 58th St, walk across 59th and jump in another Uber for the rest of the way? This will be like Berlin back in the old days, or an international border in South America. It is totally crazy. New York will never be the same!
3
This is INSANITY. One of the main reasons I use ride sharing services is because the subways are SO UNRELIABLE! So, the MTA has been woefully negligent in how they appropriated funds, resulting in the mess we are dealing with now - but they have once again raised the cost of using public transit. The result is that I am effectively footing the bill for their mistakes on THREE fronts now: taxes, cost of public transit, and congestion pricing. With no discernible improvements in sight!
7
Put WORKING elevators in ALL of the subway stations! That will eliminate the need to bring a car into Manhattan for my elderly parents.
27
I do not get why drivers should subsidize the transit system. Drivers do not ask bus and subway riders to provide money to pave the roads.
3
@Diosa I don't get why non-drivers' tax revenues should be used to maintain our roadways. Non-drivers don't ask drivers to provide money to install sidewalks. /s
10
@Diosa
They don't but everyone's tax dollars pay for that.
3
@Diosa
Drivers take up an unfair and undemocratic amount of space per person. You want to bring your personal 2-ton hunk of metal into one of the busiest, most crowded places in the world? Fine, but you should pay for that privilege.
13
It's a highly rational and effective solution to traffic. I'm glad the city is doing it.
13
Subsidize ride app services? These have caused so much congestion in our city. So many cars come from out of the city, and they stop anywhere, often blocking traffic completely. I understand congestion pricing, but contributing to a for-profit industry that's poised to make billions doesn't feel like the way to make rides accessible.
9
I live in downtown Manhattan and work in central long island. Does it mean I will have to pay the fee when I return home from work every day? It makes no sense to penalize the city residents who already pay the city taxes
11
@VL Yes, whenever you enter the CP zone you will be charged the fee. But if you use one of the MTA-tolled tunnels or bridges that toll will be deducted from the CP fee.
4
@VL One might also argue that it makes no sense to take a private vehicle to Central Long island when there is already an establish subway and rail service to get you there. Maybe it's very important for you to drive. That importance now costs $10. Seems like a good deal if you need it. If not, take the trains
10
What if I rent a Zipcar in lower Manhattan, drive to NJ and then come back through a tunnel. How would that work?
I am concerned that out-of-towners will drive into the city and park north of 60th Street often creating 1 - more congestion there and 2 - and making it harder for residents who live there to park on the street under alternate side parking rules. I totally approve of congestion pricing but to avoid the above, it must be coupled with stickers for the cars of people who live in northern Manhattan allowing them continued access to alternate side parking. Cars that drive in from out of town should either park in lots or face ticketing for illegal parking in spaces reserved for Manhattan residents.
16
@wsidemike
I'm curious...alternate side parking spaces are 'reserved for Manhattan residents'? I must not have gotten the memo.
4
@wsidemike The 4 days per week ASP rules on the UES and UWS will discourage commuters from parking there. We might see more commuters parking on-street near the Queens and Bronx subway lines and terminals.
@NYC Taxpayer No it won't. Many already do it and more will.
1
With the advent of e-commerce our cities have become plagued by delivery trucks double parked everywhere. That's the place to start if you want to deal with congestion.
7
There are residential neighborhoods all over Manhattan. Among the wealthiest with many car owners/users are above 60th Street. Of course, there are extremely wealthy people residing in many areas of Manhattan, and midtown and lower may have a lot of the congestion that needs to be addressed and. However Manhattan below 60th Street also has lots of ordinary folk living there who it seems will be taxed if they want to drive/be driven in and out of their neighborhoods, whereas their neighbors above 60th will not as long as they head north or over to the FDR. My sense is that residents of immediately affected congestion-pricing zones in Europe may often be exempt from the congestion fees/taxes. Hopefully this will be the case in Manhattan too.
I am in favor of people taking good public transportation as much as feasible, but not exempting people who live below 60th Street from the planned congestion pricing just seems inherently unfair. I am not sure how the exemption would be implemented properly, for example how to exempt those who live below 60th Street and don’t have private cars, but need to avail of ride-share services or yellow cabs, or how to prevent people from letting others improperly use their exempt transponders, etc. But there must be fair workarounds that already exist or that can be engineered.
2
@AMB The vast majority of car owners above 60th street are middle class, not wealthy. They're the ones who have to park their cars on the street and deal with ASP because the garages are so astronomically expensive.
3
I find it extraordinary that the will of one man, Robert Moses, who while building almost all of the highway and bridge infrastructure of the greater New York area from the 1930's through the 1960's did everything in his considerable power to block mass transit of buses to Long Island and trains to all Boroughs, and has left behind the enduring legacy of bias towards the automobile and its ensuing gridlock. It is due to him that mass transit is underfunded and shoddy. Isn't it time to level the playing field for those who don't use cars and instead build transportation that leaves autos out of the city?
21
@D Morris I agree 100%!!!! The Cross Bronx is a pit. The worst road in America. Thanks to Robert Moses.
7
@D Morris
The MTA is shoddy but it certainly isn't underfunded.
5
exemptions for low income drivers? i make $250k/year and cannot afford a car, so i ride my bike 50 miles/day, breathing the smog spewing from the exhaust pipes of those unfortunate low income motorists.
15
@Patrick you make $250k and cannot afford a car?? Where is your money going...
16
@Patrick, that is, low-income-but-can-still-afford-parking-gas-tolls-insurance-and-a-car. Truly low income people should not place driving a personal automobile into lower Manhattan.
2
An idea whose time has come! Bring it. Our streets are a huge resource which has been given away for nothing for too long. Our public transit, while amazing in many ways, is basically a joke compared to every other major city (outside the US) on the planet.
Finally, we will be able to move people around efficiently - perhaps even pleasantly - and hopefully move people out of cars and into subways and buses - which is better for the society and planet as a whole.
Let's add resident parking requirement uptown to make sure we don't become a parking lot for commuters (as this is another valuable resource). More and better bike lanes while we are at it too!
It's not the end of the world - people who need to drive - can do so - and pay the price as they should.
This makes so much sense on so many levels.
I say exempt everyone from 9PM-5AM and all day Sat/Sun/Holidays. Or charge a low fee like $2.
Please make sure the money goes to public transit.
28
Cities in the US have devolved into pension and benefit obligation servicing schemes. So much revenue has been diverted to bloated staffing that none is left for the basic functions that government is obligated to provide. That simple fact is the driver behind the otherwise illogical, regressive and elitist evolutionary path cities now take: pushing out regular people with pencil towers and the Hudson Yards, excessive fines and fees, sales taxes higher than many state income taxes, and now congestion pricing. In London the result has been the rich fly by in now relatively empty streets while pedestrian and cyclist safety has collapsed.
13
Terrible idea. Get rid of Ubers in the zone.
San Francisco is considering making certain parts of certain streets "buses only" -- no cars.
I am not suggesting this as an option. Congestion pricing and no-car-streets will accomplish one thing: make traffic elsewhere even worse.
7
I am in favor of a congestion charge. I would, however, also like to see a discount or rebate for non-commercial vehicles that enter with three or more occupants. Encourages car pooling. That could help lessen the impact on residents of Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and The Bronx who live in "subway deserts".
3
How exactly would you enforce your rule?
1
@Pete in Downtown You could also use the same logic to have 3-4 people split the $10 fee. I think that's what they are trying to start. Those who still want to drive should carpool, and then the fee is reduced dramatically by sharing it
3
@Michael Blazin. The same cameras that are used to identify a car's license plate could "count" the number of occupants. An occasional police car standing there to make sure that the passengers are not mannequins would help keeping people honest.
1
This is not unlike the Metropolitan Commuter Tax - MCTMT. Remember that? It was a tax initially on everyone who worked in NYC and surrounding counties and had to be paid by people like me who have a small business. That was an attempt to the keep the subway fare from going up and ended up costing employers thousands every year to save .25 on a subway fair.
And where does that money go - to the MTA. One of the worlds least efficient agencies.
So what happens when you drive into NYC through the Lincoln Tunnel - I guess they don't have to pay. But, if you go across the GWB you will. So guess what, the Lincoln Tunnel is going to be a parking lot.
3
I am impressed at how quickly Congestion Pricing has gone from being a vague idea to being implemented. It is a great development. It will show the way to other North American cities.
8
Everyone who drives/lives/works/shops in the "congestion pricing zone" will suffer this tax, not only drivers and taxi riders. When delivery truck owners pass on these new charges to businesses, the business owners will in turn pass that tax to their customers by raising prices.
Those who ride the subway should pay for its repairs and upgrades by means of a fare increase. Those who drive should be left alone. There are more than a few taxes on drivers (gas taxes, bridge/tunnel tolls, insurance fees, state registration fees, vehicle inspection fees, taxes on parking garages, parking meters, etc.) Enough already! Leave drivers alone.
3
@Pat Sorry, if you don't like paying it, ride a bicycle or take the subway. Also, the bus service from NJ is excellent. Why should we pedestrians be forced to breathe your car smog? We're sick of it. If I had my way, I'd remove one lane from each avenue and dedicate it for pedestrians and bicycles. Let's hope the era of the car is coming to an end.
22
@Pat Trucks will be able to make their deliveries faster, which would reduce costs.
6
@Cal Page
"..Let's hope the era of the car is coming to an end.."
Sure.
Just be prepared for what that entails - less tax revenue from the sales of gasoline, less revenue from vehicle registrations, inspections etc. As less cars enter the city, less revenue from congestion pricing.
1
While I am a strong proponent of a congestion charge, I also wish that the charges for trucks (and taxi/livery cars) would take the levels of noise and particulate emissions into account. That has had a positive effect in London, which has several levels of charges for trucks depdending on their emission ratings. Such a graded charge for commercial vehicles would also give owners and operators an incentive ( reward) for operating a clean and quiet vehicle or fleet.
12
So let me get this straight...the people who now can afford to drive into the city and pay $50/day to park are complaining about paying a congestion tax? Those that live in the congestion zones are complaining of not being able to drive in those areas during a few hours per day when they can take public transportation or taxis? They aren’t being charged for driving out of the zone.
And those who are constantly complaining about the state of our subways, streets and bridges are not willing to contribute to improving the infrastructure they use on a daily basis? Especially those who live outside of NYC?
This has nothing to do with taxing the poor. They are not paying to park in NYC. Many people work hours outside those affected by congestion parking. There are those who are able to work staggered hours. Many can and will come up with creative solutions.
The New Yorkers I know have always all pulled together to solve their problems rather than complaining endlessly. Congestive pricing has been an idea that has been discussed and refined over a long time. Let’s give it a chance. It can always be further refined as time goes by.
11
As someone living out here in the sticks could someone tell me what it would cost in tolls, congestion prices & parking to drive a car into NYC 5 days a week to go to work?
My second question is "will this drive businesses out of the city and/or deter new businesses from opening in the city? Will there be a loss of employment although it looks like there is too much employment already.
I would imagine that the "time cost" is already a deterrent to people going to or working in the city. What about tourists?
3
@Bob in Pennsyltucky Tourist friendly doesn't mean car friendly, but rather the exact opposite. Pedestrian malls in NYC that now ban cars are busting with tourists. Merchants love it.
7
@Bob in Pennsyltucky
Tolls: $12 x 5 = 60
Parking: $50 x 5 = 250
Congestion fee: $10 x 5 = 50
Just a rough estimate--a lot of people who drive either get free parking from their employer or exploit their political connections to park illegally. A $10 charge should change that calculation.
I think the goal of transportation policy should be to maximize free movement of people and goods while minimizing pollution, safety hazards, cost and inequity.
In a dense area like Manhattan, car and truck transport fails miserably on all counts.
Just try to imagine a city where most of the real estate devoted to the needs of the automobile was instead used for walking, biking, transit, and greenspace. Imagine not having the roar of a thousand engines at all hours. Imagine walking without the nagging fear of being mowed down by an inattentive motorist. Imagine not having a car payment, gas, parking, and insurance costs.
I think the congestion pricing plan is a good step in the right direction. Just as the Highway Trust Fund collected billions in gas taxes over decades to build a massive auto infrastructure, allocating resources to transit could do wonders. The people will have to be vigilant to ensure the money is well spent to achieve the desired goals. But the potential long term outcome could be truly liberating.
6
Biggest losers here are NJ commuters who will not benefit from money spent on the Subway. A more equitable solution would be for any revenue made from vehicles with NJ plates to be sent to NJ Transit, which is in urgent need of upgrades, not the NY Subway. As it stands, NJ car commuters who are forced onto NJ Transit by this congestion fee are going to overload a system already stretched to breaking point. There is no additional capacity to be had: although it's a good idea long term to use taxes like this to promote use of mass transit, the existing infrastructure is just not ready for that yet.
3
@East77
When I lived in Hell's Kitchen, I would see a conga line of NJ vehicles waiting to enter the Lincoln Tunnel--with one passenger in each car. Waiting for the bus on Ninth Avenue was a horror, with backed up traffic and the smell of exhaust that you could choke on in the summer months. These drivers clog our roads and pollute our air, and NJ residents don't even owe local taxes to NYC. Enough is enough.
5
@East77 NJ can add their own entry/exit tolls if they wish.
3
This idea is for revenue generation. If they could find a way to collect from Martians and Vulcans, never mind people from NJ, they would. No one is getting any money back.
2
Sorry, car owners. Your hegemony in at least one U.S. city is coming to an end. It was a good run but automobiles are of the 20th century. Time to figure out a mode of transportation better suited to the 21st.
29
@Mike "car owners" is a very broad term here. I live in a working class neighborhood in south BK and I have a wife and toddler. Our subway access is terrible. It is a far walk to the station, often doesn't go where we need it to go, it is not on time, it is not clean, and most stations do not have elevators. I don't know what your situation is but try putting yourself in other people's shoes. I would be happy to give up my car but the city and state have not kept up with our needs and gives people like me little choice, unless we want to spend our lives on bad public transit or all our money on car services. I'm so happy for you that you live in an area with great amenities and great subway access, but that is not the case for many New Yorkers.
17
A better idea is a parking space tax on all parking spaces in all five boroughs of the city, including private garage space = $1 per day per space.
A driveway space would cost $365/yr. Four cars parking at a private house would generate $1,460/yr. A 200 space garage = $73,000/yr. Also all residential streets would be metered/permitted @ $1/space/day minimum; 24/7.
Add the millions of parking spaces that would be taxed to the ordinary meters in commercial districts plus parking fines and the revenue becomes significant: $900 million/yr from meters & fines + almost $2 billion/yr space tax + $1 billion in congestion fees = there would be adequate funds for transit.
A parking space tax would provide incentive to remove curb cuts and ad-hoc parking lots, also convert auto storage into buildings for people or new parks. Charging 'rent' for a public good - street space now given over to private car storage - is also fair. Many/most folks in NYC would give up their cars altogether due to cost.
The only reason the entire automobile-dependent model of development is viable is the massive subsidies to manufacturers and economic rents they capture. That these subsidies are extended in one of the few places in the US where cars are unnecessary is absurd.
6
@steve from virginia Wait...what? A person buys a "private house" and is already paying property tax for that and now you want to charge them to park in their own driveway? Yeah. Good luck with that.
4
@steve from virginia, you do realize that there is already a considerable amount of taxes levied on parking in Manhattan?
@steve from virginia '...A driveway space would cost $365/yr... The city can't charge anyone for parking on their own private property.
2
As I take the bus into the city, I wonder if there will be an exemption granted for buses taking riders into the city? My bus enters via the Holland or Lincoln tunnel and drops people off at various places within the city, mostly below 60th St.
5
As long as there are off-peak exceptions and for those who are sick, disabled, etc., and the tax has an expiry date so we have a chance to study it and renew it or not renew it, then I think we should try it.
2
@Lmca
Good luck with that. Once it's implemented it's in. The money they make will be squandered in the usual MTA
way. Worst of all, how do you know someone is going to a Dr.'s appointment. I can't see how they figure out the exceptions. And as they said, in London the fee doubled,
that's what will happen here when they realize they aren't making enough money.
2
@runner6460. Yes, but the congestion in London was also reduced, and the main threat to London's economy is not the congestion charge, but Brexit.
6
@runner6460 Amen. My thoughts re: the medical appointments exactly. Expect to see thousands of people "going to the Dr." in NYC.
2
residents who live in the zone need to protest now, and often. a tax of $25/day any time a resident in the zone needs to use their car - not for daily commuting but for any other life purpose - is discriminatory. unlike other cities, NY's zone is heavily residential.
so call this what it is: just a car tax. then apply the same $25 to every single resident of the 5 boroughs who ever needs to go somewhere by car. put the collection device at the ignition of every vehicle. start your engine, incur an instant tax of $25. see how that goes over.
there is no reason a resident on the upper east side, or the mayor's wife at gracie manson, or the lovely people living in queens or brooklyn or staten island should be able to drive to Costco "for free" (no $25 congestion tax) to load up the trunk with family groceries, while a resident who now lives inside the zone will have to pay $25 to run the same errand.
(this point has nothing to do with unnecessary commuting to work by car. the issue is location-based discrimination for basic life necessities that can't be done by subway.)
45
@Aubrey. If the tax is charged when entering the zone, residents there would only pay if they leave and then re-enter the zone during the hours the charge is in effect. I agree that charging a daily fee for simply having the car is unreasonable.
4
@Aubrey Absolutely agree with you. I live in the zone and never drive my car in the city. I use it to go back and forth from a business out of the city not accessible by public transport. The only part of the zone I travel is the west side highway to my garage. Manhattan is an island, unlike London where those wishing to avoid the fee can go around the zone. There should be an exemption for those living in the zone.
Anyone know of a group of zone residents opposed to this aspect of the tax? I'd join!
8
Some of us have mixed feelings about the congestion pricing when entering Manhattan from Brooklyn, even when fully understanding the reasons and need to cut the evils of congestion (payable in wasted time and car idling and, as important, health problems). For those of us who drive kids to or from school at or below Houston street, may feel abused of an additional charge. Curious about other's grief.
4
@manfred marcus It's simply amazing how 90% of New Yorkers have been able to survive without owning a car at all. We all feel your pain of not being able to drive to Costco!
Car hegemony is over. I would support no fee during off peak times - but the use of a valuable public space for free by 2 ton private carbon spewing machines that spend much of their time sitting in traffic is no longer viable.
How about we shop the old fashioned way - like our local grocery store a block away? In small batches? Or online if the idea of walking is just too much.
For the huge percentage of us who use public transit - I am very excited about a system with modern signals, clean and well-lit stations, ADA accessible and a world-class surface system to supplement it.
PS - I own a car in Manhattan and believe in paying my fair share for this privilege. Can't wait to pay (if I need the convenience or whatever of driving below 60th St during peak hours). Because I understand it is the right thing to do.
11
@manfred marcus Brooklyn needs their own congestion taxes. Last time I tried to drive through, it took one and a half hours of congestion and gridlock.
2
45%, not 10%, of NYC households own a car.
2
The most practical thing to do is not to allow double parking on Lexington Park Madison Fifth Sixth and Seventh between 7-9 am and 5-7 pm. There are side streets which are empty. Try it for a month and see how traffic keeps moving. Madison and Fifth for example have two bus lanes and double parked limos, ubers and trucks on the other. it went from four lanes to one. Most people can walk a few more steps and for those that can't accomodations can be made.
1
@prism not going to fix mass transit - which is the reason for this entire endeavor. A world-class city deserves a world class system - not the messy hodgepodge of antiquated parts that we pray will get us from A to B in a reasonable amount of time that we have now. When you think about it - movement is the lifeblood of any system. By making our mass transit WORLD CLASS - our entire city will benefit. We will yield the gains of moving millions of people around quickly - with a small carbon footprint - for decades to come.
3
@Steven Kopstein.. Beautifully said!
So an inefficient system is not working, then the solution is a $60 a week tax on something unrelated.
This tax will do for businesses in the area what $4 a gallon gas did for the economy.
10
@mrmeat
You're flat out wrong about subways, they're mightily efficient and to that extent NYC without them could not exist - there simply isn't enough surface roadway to move people and goods around.
Most of the world taxes gasoline much higher than the US and it encourages people to use more efficient and less polluting mass transportation.
I understand that in Florida, mass transportation has never been popular or even practical because of its sprawling development. So it's understandable you have nothing useful to say about NYC's particular situation.
Florida's future, for the parts that remain above sea level will be electric and/or self driving vehicles.
Have a nice day.
6
@mrmeat Exactly - as it ruined London, Stockholm and Singapore. Better to stay in Florida - a model of public transit state.
3
First of all, I'm in favor of congestion pricing or something similar to defeat gridlock and improve subways. This is a no brainer.
I have a couple of unintended consequence concerns.
1. If congestion pricing is successful and results in less autos, won't many of their drivers turn to using the already overburdened subway? I'd be interested hear what planners think about this.
2. Won't this, as others have pointed out, to some extent move the congestion, or at least a significant of it to above the zone? Any thoughts by planners on this?
12
@John L Great questions. People will find the path of least resistance to get from their home to work and to third places. Some drivers--particularly city residents and regional commuters--will probably take the train. Others may bike. Many will probably carpool. One instructive incident is the I-35 Bridge Collapse in Minneapolis--a central chokepoint for both commuters and freight traffic there--after which average commute times only increased marginally during reconstruction. Although it's hard to say how individual actions affect change at a regional scale, people find ways to make it work.
2. Congestion may increase above 60th st, and I would guess that finding parking around 60th will be a nightmare. Ultimately, this question depends on how MTA charges commuters who enter the zone from inside Manhattan, e.g. will every avenue have some kind of monitoring system along 60th St. to capture drivers headed downtown?
If so, there might be higher levels of congestion at existing chokepoints/bottlenecks, but I doubt it would get significantly worse than it already is. That's because there are far fewer commuters going to jobs above 60th (proportionally that is... there are still more jobs above 60th than in some states), and far fewer ways to enter/exit Manhattan.
1
@John L good questions.
1. The subway is crowded, but what looks like a lot of traffic is not a lot of people once distributed onto trains (a person in a car takes up a MASSIVE amount of space relative to a person on a train).
2. Many people have asked this question, but congestion pricing will actually DECREASE congestion outside the zone, since fewer people will be driving to the zone.
1
CP will dramatically raise the cost of goods being delivered into or from the congestion zone. Every supermarket, restaurant, clothing store, etc. is going to have to pass on those costs to consumers.
16
@NYC Taxpayer Will goods cost more? Yes. Will those goods cost significantly more? No.
Right now, a semi can carry 80,000 lbs. of goods. A $25 charge on a fully-loaded truck comes out to $0.0003/lb. Every 100 fully loaded trucks would increase the per-pound weight of goods by 3 pennies. Or, to put it another way, a business will have to pay 3 cents more on the 8,000,000th pound of a product it sells/purchases.
If anything a congestion tax incentivizes shipping companies to reduce the total number of trips taken by maximizing load size.
2
@kp Most delivery trucks uses in NYC are the smaller van type of truck operated by local small businesses. The CP will massively increase their delivery costs.
4
@NYC Taxpayer a charge of $10-25 will be nothing compared to the time they will save. Think about it--a driver being paid $20/hr to sit in traffic now will be able to make more deliveries in less time. This will be a massive savings for businesses.
3
MTA does not have a funding problem.
Repeat after me: MTA does not have a funding problem.
It has a problem with grossly inefficient spending.
How did we spend 5 billion on 5 subway stops in one of the most affluent neighborhoods in the world over 50 years?
MTA Capital Construction is a giant money pit. The lack of audits by Governor Cuomo and his predecessors is a travesty that allows giant amounts of money to be spent on few items of little value (compared to what could be built with that money).
I'd be surprised if these tolls actually cut down traffic in any significant way. London's congestion charge did not.
It worked in the short term but no in the long term.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/congestion-charge-has-cost-drivers-26bn-in-decade-but-failed-to-cut-traffic-jams-8496627.html
Given that it's a more affluent populace who drives, and given that hundreds of thousands of people are moving to the city over fairly short time periods, this isn't going to make a difference to congestion.
But it will take money out of New Yorkers pockets.
Look forward to your food trucks' lunch prices going up.
41
This is just a flat-out, money grabbing tax on hard working outer borough and suburban New Yorkers and businesses already struggling to survive in New York. All the politicians are in support of a vast new revenue stream to further stoke what is already acknowledged to be the most wasteful quasi-municipal taxing agency in the country. The MTA is already taxing - directly or indirectly - every worker in it's "Transportation District" with its Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Mobility Tax, now it wants the relatively few drivers to bail out the subways rather than ask subway users for a modest fare increase with appropriate discounts for those with demonstrated needs. A fairer apportionment which would ask subway users to help pay for subway improvements, not just drivers, would seem only just. As one who drives in midtown regularly for business, I can tell you that gridlock is being greatly exaggerated simply to justify tax collection. While traffic exists, it is better now than historically, and it is already the case that one must routinely check and reduce speed in midtown to comply with the lowered 25 mph speed limit not just on avenues but frequently on the streets, and that is midday, business days. Any Uber increase in traffic was directly caused by public policy and could be as easily controlled (to suffering taxi owners delight). It's just another tax.
17
How are UPS and Fedex etc. going to wiggle out of paying?
Actually we could raise more money by applying a 5 cent tax on all packages delivered into the zone.
There has to be better ways to deal with congestion. Perhaps a yearly pass for eligible cars plus a very high entry price for others.
1
They will simply add the fee to every package delivered to the taxed area.
1
@Michael Blazin
That's right. It will raise some of the money we need.
1
@mikek they're probably eager to pay given that they'll be able to reduce the number of trucks on the road. In recent years they've had to increase the number of trucks out there to make the same number of deliveries, just because each truck cannot make as many stops as traffic congestion has increased. CP will save delivery companies (and consumers) serious money!
Should consideration for first responders reporting for work, police and firefighters particularly, receiving an exemption entering the congestion zones?
1
@james They can take public transport, just like everyone else.
2
Because in New Hampshire, you all have wonderful public transportation, right?
Probably NYC should just slap tolls on all bridges and tunnels and perhaps Wall Street. In parts of Brooklyn, there are no local grocery stores. Unless, of course, you want milk that's gone sour. A car is not necessarily a luxury.
The bottom line is that people don't need to drive to work. And if they do, they can afford the toll.
What makes me laugh is the image of someone looking for a parking space and going in and out of the "zone" and getting charged five times for all the circles and figure 8s performed for that parking spot.
If the Mayor would finance enough traffic police and strictly enforce the gridlock 'do not block the box' and pedestrian crossing laws then the traffic would flow.
2
@Clive Kandel
Let the traffic cops enforce the "do not block the box" against the buses!
1
I live in Harlem and I wonder what this is going to do to traffic and parking here as people cop to the fact they can still drive into Manhattan but enter north of this zone and just try and park up here.
What's curious about this is the plan also excludes the UES and I wonder if there's an adverse effect there and on the UWS if you'll see the zone get moved up.
6
@Hern I'd love to have the zone expand uptown, but even being outside the zone we should see benefits as fewer people drive through our neighborhoods to get downtown.
It IS a tax. Period. Just another way to charge you for something that you may not be paying for today. And wow, raising the speed of traffic less than 2 miles per hour? Be still my heart.
And the administrative cost of trying to collect this money when it is not subtracted from an E-Z Pass disc?
And cleaner air by 12 percent? What is it to begin with that it will now be expected to be 12% lower? Small numbers lowered by 12% are still small numbers. Liars use statistics.
And if someone drives in and out of a "zone"? Say a cab? Do they keep paying with each crossing? Delivery trucks.
Charging New Yorkers for something never discourages them from using it. They just figure it in and pay it. Have you priced a Knicks ticket for a terrible team lately?
There is NEVER a revenue projection that doesn't fall short. Video poker at Aqueduct anyone?
It IS a tax.
11
@JohnD
So it's a tax, you say it like it's self evident this is some sort of calamity. There's a significant set of problems NYC needs to address, railing against "nudge taxes", isn't helpful.
4
Doubtless, the congestion fees would also be reflected in cab fares when applicable. A new incentive for my somewhat extravagant spouse to stop taking taxis to work.
2
It’s noteworthy just how many cities around the world have moved towards a fee to drive in their cities. None of them regret their decision.
152
so..you've done an exhaustive survey?
14
@Peter Jacobsen
Some of those cities are not as densely populated as NYC is, so for some of them, this is apples and oranges.
12
Traffic in Midtown Manhattan now crawls at an average 4.7 miles per hour-That is the caption below the photo of a traffic jam. You can also see in the photo that that two lanes are now set aside for buses 24/7. This has caused a huge increase in traffic jams in all over Manhattan wherever these new bus only lanes have been implemented. Eliminating those bus only lanes on busy streets like 34th street would go a long way to eliminating traffic congestion along with congestion pricing.
49
@James
Let's not forget the bike lanes that aren't even used much even when the weather outside happens to be good as they are seen as a waste of space most of the time and has been known to cause traffic in places that didn't used to have them on a regular basis.
59
For drivers who complain about the unfairness of congestion parking when they don't have subway access near their homes, let them drive to a station in Queens or Brooklyn, park and take the subway to midtown.
85
Some sort of congestion pricing based upon times of travel in Manhattan seems reasonable. But there has to be an exception for those of us who live in the proposed travel zone.
I'm not rich. My income in other areas would be considered middle class. I have a 23 year old car that I keep in order to get to my elderly mother who lives outside of the city in an area not easily accessible by mass transit. So I will have to pay an extra $10 every time I use my car (on top of tolls)?
For those of you who live in the suburbs, imagine if you had to pay $10 every time you took your car out of the driveway.
There has to be an exception for Manhattan residents!
228
Why have hard working people from Manhattan (below 96th Street) to pay additional 2.75 per ride in order to get money for the MTA disaster? There are also mega congestion in Queens and Brooklyn. Charge them 2.75 too! This is a pure discrimination against hard working people from Manhattan!!! Manhattan politicians, stand up for your people!!!
59
Uber and Lyft bear a lot of the blame for nyc's horrible traffic. There are 18,000 yellow cabs and 80,000 Uber, Lyft and other ride hailing app drivers. 80,000!!! and more sign up every day! We should start regulating the number of ride hailing drivers--you know, like we regulated yellow cabs until uber came along and ignored those regulations with wall street money at their back... Uber's and lyft's congestion pricing tax should be much more!
198
Where are all these middle and lower class workers parking their cars when they drive them into the city? The parking fees are outrageous, aren’t they? Wldn’t it be cheaper to park just outside Manhattan and subway it in? I am a nyer living in London now and the congestion charge def makes me think twice about whether I use my car or mass transit....
27
I'd encourage New Yorkers to be generally positive about congestion charging.
After several failed legal challenges, London introduced the CCharge - one of the largest in the world - in 2003. The initial effect was a 25% reduction on traffic volumes and striking improvements in air quality (NOx, particulates and CO2). The scheme is confined to central London - the commercial, financial and leisure areas - and operates 07:00 to 18:00, weekdays only. Only about 150,000 of London's 9 million population actually reside within the zone. Subsequent tweaks allow additional charges to be levied on vehicles categorised as 'excessively' polluting, improved license plate camera coverage identifies vehicles moving within (as well as entering) the CZone and payment methods (and payment enforcements) have been made easier.
Does it work? Well, traffic in London would be FAR worse without the scheme. Goods and services in the city didn't increase significantly in price. But, despite the congestion charge increasing over time from about $6 US to $13/day currently (with additional charges for polluting vehicles), traffic volumes have returned to 2003 levels and air quality improvement has not been maintained.
The benefit to me - as one of the residents within the zone - is the remarkable improvement in other modes of transport; priority lanes for a decent electric hybrid bus network and, most particularly, the validation and facilitation of the bicycle as a means of travel.
41
so what you are saying is that no, the ccharge has not worked for it's intended purpose...to reduce congestion (what else can someone take away from traffic levels returning to the levels as before the ccharge? once it become chock a block, it can't get worse... unless you close a lane on the GW.....
9
Yeah but in American fashion the government will use it as a new way to buy themselves sports stadiums and the like.
24
Seriously, what will it take to place this idea in the coffin already? Even with the recent blue wave up in Albany along with city's possibly most progressive mayor, congestion pricing is still highly opposed despite what is being mentioned here. No matter how many times the idea gets renamed or amended, it will still be seen as nothing more than a regressive tax on the lower classes and a punishment to those who have little to viable alternatives to getting around by driving. In other words, this is nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig, because no matter how much you try to dress it up, it's still a pig in the end and nothing more. If this was really about the MTA, then I say do a more thorough audit and find where their revenues are really going to because I doubt this idea will change any of that as long as they stay the same and this one will just end up being misused as well. Also, there needs to be a better job done at stopping the fare beaters, because every time they don't pay, it forces those that do to pay more hence the constant fare hikes. All I can say is for congestion pricing is this, "Don't amend this idea, end this idea." What is it going to take to finally release that this idea is a lost cause? One other thing, this idea is more about revenue rather than clean air or reducing congestion, because if it got people to stop driving, then no revenue can be made off of it hence no cash cow from this.
44
Where to start. First this is not congestion pricing. The goal of congestion pricing is to rid the streets of traffic not to raise money for capital projects. London did not institute congestion pricing to raise money to pay for another utility. Second, the traffic model being utilized to determine the monetary benefit of NY's congestion pricing has always been Mr. Komanoff's, a congestion pricing advocate. His model is based on spread sheets, is static and cannot handle dynamic pricing and is likely influenced by his liberal bias. In addition academia has not validated it and does not have a way to deal with revenue leakage. With floating car data and fuzzy logic why MTA is using a spread sheet to model state of the art congestion pricing bogels the mind. I guess MTA is still reaching for the '90's. God bless.
34
Since the Medallion system was enacted in the '30s in response to the number of taxis on the street and as a limit on that number, it seems to me that yellow cabs should be exempted, or the requirement of a medallion should be eliminated. Yellow cabs are already at a competitive disadvantage.
89
The purpose of congestion pricing is supposed to be to reduce congestion, not to fund some other plan or service. Just what on earth do its proponents think is going to happen to the price of virtually everything? All those companies and corporations whose vehicles have to make deliveries or provide services in Manhattan will just pass along the cost to the consumer. I'm sick of being taxed at every turn.
I've said it in this space before and I'll say it again: What really ties up traffic is pedestrians. Turning cars must wait till they cross, which can take up the entire time that cars have a green light. This backs up and gridlocks traffic so that it takes 20 minutes for a car to get down one block. Only one car per light can get through an intersection. Cars should go first to get them out of the way, then pedestrians, who under the current setup walk anywhere anytime they want. Once they start moving, it's a wave that never stops. Europeans are more accustomed to waiting patiently and courteously for the light to change and their turn to go. If a green arrow allowed cars to turn and pedestrians had to wait, traffic would move far more smoothly. But Giuliani tried herding pedestrians to the corners, and look how that worked out. Just try telling New Yorkers they can't cross wherever and whenever they want. I quote Ratso Rizzo: "I'm walkin' here!"
53
@Perfect Gentleman
"All those companies and corporations whose vehicles have to make deliveries or provide services in Manhattan will just pass along the cost to the consumer. I'm sick of being taxed at every turn."
We had similar apocalyptic predictions when the London congestion charge scheme was introduced in 2003. It's now one of the largest CCharge zones in the world.
In fact, the impact on businesses and customers has appeared negligible. There's little evidence that service companies have passed the charge onto their clients and better organisation of deliveries has minimised to insignificance the end user cost.
18
and has it changed traffic patterns at all? I doubt it made as big an impact as the charge was designed to do.... it just raises another revenue stream politicians cannot be trusted with...
4
@nolongeradoc - Perhaps the English are a bit more interested in fair play than American corporations. Here, everyone uses every excuse, every means at their disposal, to raise prices, justified or not. Landlords triple and quadruple rents overnight, driving companies out of business after decades as pillars of their communities. No one's going to just swallow this out of the goodness of their hearts.
10
tolls on all east river crossing - with an ezpass and toll cameras it would be very doable
dedicated lanes for accordion buses or light rail on all major cross streets and avenues
important for congestion pricing make sure all cops and firemen pay - do not give them exemptions - i can see that happening
8
@j
The original purpose for the tolls was that they were supposed to be used to help pay off the bonds for whatever they were placed and be removed once they were paid off. That was the case for many of the earlier bridges and highways and why they don't have them now. However crossings and highways built around WWII kept their tolls because some politicians saw them as a revenue source that can be used for other things besides where it's supposed to go to. This is the very reason to why there are such constant hikes, and the same thing would happen if congestion pricing gets passed. In reality, many see tolling as a form of double tipping where they are forced to pay something on the spot even though their taxes for infrastructure are already paying for them. BTW, those so called free crossings are being paid for via taxes for infrastructure, but just indirectly.
7
Congestion pricing is an absolute necessity. I haven't heard a remotely persuasive argument against it. However, I'm wondering what happened to the idea of combining it with a reduced toll on the bridges, such as the Verrazzano and the Whitestone, that connect places that are away from the core and where there aren't great mass transit alternatives. Sam Schwarz was pushing that idea fairly recently.
17
Mention a millionaires tax and Andrew Cuomo gets the vapors. He's always ready to serve as some plutocrat's flunky, whether it be NYC's real estate and financial goniffs or more recently Jeff Bezos. Chicken Little, he'll yell that the millionaires are all fleeing, without ever presenting a shred of evidence, or even just reading the Gilded Age real estate listings in this paper.
Congestion pricing is just another tax on the middle class. The same people who can no longer afford to live in Manhattan but still must work there must now pay for that privilege. Alright, impose congestion pricing, but demand equal revenue from a pied-a-terre tax on all those Russian oligarchs, Chinese embezzlers and Saudi princes who maintain palatial holdings here but not as primary residences.
134
Don't do it! It's a regressive tax that won't reduce congestion. The divide between rich and not-rich grows every year, and this is just another brick laid on the heads of the not-rich.
53
We could have had congestion pricing years ago if silly people hadn't hated the idea because it would have adversely affected impoverished outer-borough New Yorkers who drive to Manhattan to go to work.
When I told a friend, who considers himself progressive, how ridiculous that sounded to me, and why can't poor people take a subway the way I and other middle-class people do, he sneered.
It didn't matter to him that my commute from Brooklyn was an hour and twenty minutes one way (at 6:20AM) and often longer going home.
Of course, Mike Bloomberg proposed congestion pricing and was despised for doing so.
Bloomberg remains concerned about and has put his own money towards the environment, gun control, historic preservation, and job training for black men; he advocates for the availability of abortion and the necessity of young sexually active girls' using birth control. His push for real estate development both improved the city's tax base and created affordable housing.
Whereas Bill de Blasio's cozying up to the real estate crowd is meant to line his coffers for when he runs for president -- and cushion his fall when he fails. After all, his salary has always been paid by us city dwellers.
8
@B.
It would have most likely ended up the same way it did an London after 2 years. The real reason why the congestion zone was expanded and the fee itself was doubled wasn't because it was succeeding, but because it was failing. This is what I fear will happen here if that's that case. In other words, the claim that we can always get rid of the idea if it fails is easier said than done as those who support the idea will claim it should be kept despite the results by possibly either using good faith or fudged data as their claims.
7
“Congestion pricing has practically become a household term. Transit advocates, business leaders and others have rallied around it, saying it is the best option for raising money to fix New York City’s broken subways.”
Still ignoring the Pataki and Giuliani cuts to the subways and whole MTA I see. Still ignoring the end of the commuter tax I see.
Congestion pricing discriminates against middle class workers, whose work day begins around 3PM and lasts to around mid-night. So restaurant managers, stage hands, hotel managers, waiters, and bartenders.
Commuter buses and trains are terrible at 1AM. And parking in suburban lots is NOT free.
It is arrogant of Cuomo to continue to push for congestion pricing.
Then the NY Times barely mentions the massive delays in vehicular travel within Manhattan caused by huge construction projects. Albeit this reporting is outlier in acknowledging the construction obstructions; usually the NYT just skips this obvious to all fact about Manhattan.
Speaker Johnson (of the NY City Council) is very foolish to push for Cuomo’s delusional plan.
17
We need congestion pricing for the planet.
9
Perfect!!!
Now Rich Manhatten dwellers can scrub their own toilets, shop and cook their own food, wash their own clothes, raise their own children FINALLY.
Because the working poor won't be able to get to those jobs.
33
@howard
It's clear the Times favors congestion pricing as self-evident, never even giving a millionaires tax the dignity of mention, primarily because it would impinge on one of their main sources of revenue, grotesque real estate listings, and it would affect too many of the editor's friends. Make the poor schmo in Flatlands pay to get to work, while the glass tower set in Manhattan ubers to their favorite overpriced eatery a few blocks away.
31
As soon as the Democrats see how much money they have piling up from this tax, they will use it for other things.
And then they will raise the tax.
And use it for other things.
22
@Larry Thiel
This is exactly why the misuse of existing revenues needs to be done first before even passing this one, but the anti-car fanatics probably know that this might actually make congestion pricing feel both obsolete and unnecessary if that is to be done.
7
You have to laugh at the fact that when Bloomberg tried to pass it, Albany fought and won against it. Then to prove them even more wrong, Bloomberg and his DOT chief put bike lanes everywhere to create even more congestion. Now beside congestion pricing, maybe build large parking structures near the closest Path Train, Metronorth, LIRR, etc. Finally let's get street fairs during the summer. I know, am in LA, but I lived in NY for 15 years.
6
Call congestion pricing what it is. A manhattan toll. It will not reduce congestion. Even the congestion doesn't reduce the congestion. And rising tolls at bridge and tunnels over the years hasn't made any difference.
22
@D.S.
As long as there are those who don't viable alternatives to getting around without driving, that's going to be what happens even if congestion pricing gets passed, though some might just end up parking outside the zone or wait until it lifts to avoid having to pay the fee.
5
the way to make this fair is to give all drivers a yearly/monthly/weekend credit attached to their ez-pass account. this way, the poor and rich a like are able to get some basic allocation, and be especially helpful for drivers who occasionally visit the city. once you use of the credit, it's charged like normal. this concept is taken from proposals on how to get people in drought/desert areas (Nevada, California) to properly price water without putting undue burden on the poor.
8
There are other way to raise taxes and smarter ways to deal with congestion. When your only tool is a hammer everything starts looking like a nail.
14
Congestion pricing is absolutely necessary and with modern tolling technology, the actual pricing can be tweaked continuously to fairly accommodate every constituency. There will however need to be robust oversight by the press and commuter watchdog groups to ensure that the revenues generated flow toward the intended improvement of rails, bridges, tunnels and roads.
71
@Kevin Callahan:
No better public transit comes first.
You're ignoring a huge cost to people who make about $60,000-$140,000 per year and have to drive into Manhattan since the bus/train home at midnight is expensive and highly inconvenient.
9
@Yaj How is the bus/train home at midnight expensive? MetroCard price is the same no matter what time of day (and the more you use, the cheaper the ride if you have unlimited). After 8pm is offpeak on MetroNorth and LIRR, so actually far cheaper for suburban commuters to travel home late at night.
15
@Eric:
Because the prices of say NJTransit have vastly increased over the last 10 years. And parking at the station is not free.
You also have to get yourself to Penn Station in Manhattan. You "forgot" about that extra hassle late at night.
Do you really not understand the difference between the NYC subway lines and various commuter trains and buses?
Your MetroCard is useless on the LIRR, the NJT system, and MetroNorth trains.
"After 8pm is offpeak on MetroNorth and LIRR, so actually far cheaper for suburban commuters to travel home late at night."
"cheaper than" what?
You still have to pay for parking in suburbia? You still have to get yourself to Penn Station or Grand Central. The trains don't run anywhere near as frequently.
You don't seem to know much about NYC subways, commuter lines, or commuter train and bus schedules.
Do you think that a 40 minute wait for a train at midnight is acceptable if you have to work the next day at 3PM back in NYC?
People drive into Manhattan for work for very real reasons. And not all of them make more than $175,000 per year.
An interesting commuter (short distance but real mid-town Manhattan) example:
30 years ago, the price of a single subway token was $1, and the price of a trip on the PATH train to Hoboken was 25 cents.
So assuming you didn't need to drive in Hoboken that was a cheap commute at any time of the day. Now the now that PATH train costs the same as the subway, still cheap, big % change though.
6
Well, the streets, subways, and buses are getting very crowded, with all the tourists and shoppers. Maybe we should apply a congestion charge to pedestrians as well.
10
@Jonathan:
Creepy. You're advocating fees for being in public.
3
@Yaj - Well, I share my Christian name with a well-know 18th-century writer who produced a similar effect.....
2
@Jonathan:
But your post above doesn't read as satire.
I've seen some delusions about where non-profits, like say Harvard University, get their money that read as satire in comments on the NYTimes website. Only the posts were dead serious--also largely fact free.
And I remind you that the term "turnpike" means "private road".
Then of course Glenn Beck got caught up advocating for a la carte firefighting. Don't pay the fee, and the fire "department" won't put out your house fire. Beck is so stupid that he forgot that one house burning on a block can mean the whole block goes up. Yes, stupid. Not satirical.
1
We already have congestion pricing in the form of new and huge taxes on for-hire vehicles, rental car taxes, and a recent subway fare hike. Please stop.
24
There should be exemptions for Manhattan residents who live in the "congestion zone" and also for holders of disability permits who rely on vehicles for transportation.
12
London introduced a Congestion Charge 15 years ago, hoping to reduce traffic congestion. This charge applies between 7.00 AM and 6:00 PM, Monday to Friday, excluding Bank Holidays. The Congestion Charge costs between $14 and $19 a day, depending on whether you pay in advance or by midnight the following day for cars entering the city during peak hours.
Many years later, there are more cars than ever entering London, in spite of the congestion charge.
Hopefully New York will NOT make a similar mistake in telling folks this program will help lesson the amount of cars that go in/out of New York. It's simply another avenue for revenue. At the very least, a report should be totally transparent and published every March listing the amount of revenue generated by the Congestion Pricing Program and how and where that money was spent. Every tax payer and individual who paid into this program should have an honest accounting of the money.
13
The new congestion tax for Ubers/Taxis and this proposed tax will just force more people into using the already overcrowded subways. How do the Governor and legislature intend to handle the increased use of the subways BEFORE they have raised the money to fix them? NYers shouldn't be penalized because the state and local governments have ignored the transit system for decades.
41
@Tenaflyboy
You significantly underestimate the efficiency of subways and the inefficiency of cars.
A totally gridlocked street barely contains any people.
The average sedan is about 15' long. 352 cars bumper to bumper would stretch a mile, roughly Times Square to Madison Square.
Assume two people per car on average, which is probably a bit generous. That's 704 people.
A subway car can hold 200 people standing.
Everybody driving would fit in just four subway cars with room to spare.
To put it another way, a single lane of bumper to bumper traffic twenty blocks long wouldn't come close to filling a single subway train.
That's precisely why the city needs to move away from cars and towards biking/walking.
A city with so little public space can't use so much of it to support an inefficient means of transportation. Reduce car usage and reallocate that saved public space in ways that make other means of traveling safer (truly protected bike lanes and wider sidewalks).
I hope they can pass a congestion pricing bill soon. Then they can tackle on-street parking.
200
If all goes according to plan I will have already moved to Florida by that time joining many ex-New Yorkers. So, have fun. Keep chasing away the people by making it to expensive to live in NYC, tax everything, give out parking tickets, give out speeding tickets ( even if they are not speeding) all of that for very little services provided in return and watch what happens.
30
@Lonnie
Thank you for sharing. Florida's gain will also be NYC's gain.
33
@Lonnie. Funny how all these years during which all your negatives have allegedly occurred the population of the city grew & grew. So, if you’re not happy hurry up & move to Florida. I’m sure someone could use your apartment!
14
We will have fun, dear. Enjoy the hurricanes.
10
I used to live on Long Island many years ago before moving to the city. My choice for commuting was the Long Island Expressway or the LIRR. I switched back and forth based upon whether or not I could get private parking at the train station. I was not a resident of the various park districts that controlled the lots near the stations.
I agree that congestion pricing is the way to reduce auto emissions and traffic. My suggestion is to use some of the money to reduce the fares on the LIRR/Metro North which are so high that many commuters choose the car. At the same time, add more parking at the stations that is available to any commuter.
45
What about residents? I live south of 60th St and don’t want to have to pay to drive to my home of 30+ years. We already don’t have any sort of preferred parking for residents and we have to vie for spots with all of the tourists who drive in and park in residential neighborhoods.
23
@ERJ The bill really should focus on taxing non-residents with this congestion tax plan. I agree with your point about residential street parking, people coming to visit their NYC relatives or rent out Airbnbs should not be taking NYers spaces.
10
@ERJ
Block after block of the most valuable public space in the world is dedicated for car owners to store their personal vehicles, usually for free, while most people in Manhattan don't even own cars.
That space could be wider sidewalks. It could be benches under trees. It could be community gardens. It could be front yards. It could be anything for everyone. The possibilities are endless.
But nope, it's storage for cars in a city where nobody drives. And the few people who do drive will still find reasons to complain about it rather than appreciate that they're receiving an enormous gift at everyone else's expense.
176
@AGuyInBrooklyn
Nice rant, but many people in NYC own autos. Many people, particularly in the boros drive a lot both locally and out of town. For many New Yorkers, not the rich ones, a private auto gives them access to nearby beaches and Hudson Valley parks - a sort of poor man's country house. For many New Yorkers an auto is necessary for work. And many car owning New Yorkers are contributing to our city's productivity.
Demonizing autos per se is foolish talk. And congestion pricing doesn't seek to punish people for owning autos, it seeks to charge people for how these autos are used.
Honk honk.
26
Sure congestion pricing makes sense, but I wish some other taxes could be lowered to compensate. New York City and State have enough revenue in my opinion and too much waste and fraud. If congestion pricing is introduced to reduce congestion and not to milk more money out of people I'd love to see it. I know my wishes are outlandish in New York where the politicians are only good at spending other people's money...
14
@Peter. Please elucidate on the “waste & fraud.” Give concrete examples.
Otherwise, please remain silent & use public transportation instead of a cab or Uber
6