Gothamist: Most New Yorkers Doubt Congestion Pricing Will Help MTA

starrygordon

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:35:19 -0500

While I agree with the abstract theory of congestion pricing, I'd like to point out that traffic congestion is, itself, a traffic-calming element. I say this as one who most often uses a bicycle to get around. I've been hit twice on Flatbush Avenue and once on Staten Island by cars traveling too fast for conditions, but able to do so because of light traffic. I've never been hit on a congested street; the vehicles are traveling too slowly. One thing the city can and should do is build more traffic obstructions. The recently-build islands on lower Broadway are a good start. It would also be helpful if the police started giving enough tickets to motor vehicles parking, standing and driving in bicycle lanes to actually discourage the practice. Finally, inbound lanes on the bridges could be further reduced. Automotive traffic, especially by means of private cars and limousines, needs to be obstructed rather than facilitated, as is now generally the case. I think the matter of pollution needs to be handled differently, on a per-vehicle basis. The levels of emissions per vehicle are already measured (for the State inspection) and vehicles could be taxed accordingly. Simply demanding $8 doesn't really get at the problem. A tax like this might also reach all the politicians, bureaucrats, cops, etc., who will surely be exempt from the entry toll.

iwilker

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:11:38 -0500

If you can't see that congestion pricing will improve the quality of the New York street experience, you're short-sighted in the extreme. CP will, over time, shift the entire region toward better mass transit, less traffic, will make the city more bike- and pedestrian friendly, will make the air a hell of a lot cleaner. It's just a no-brainer. And the tax argument is bull. Our air and public space have value -- and the current free-for-all is impoverishing quality of life in New York (and the world over, via global warming). We are all paying a heavy price so that drivers can converge in impossible numbers on the city each day. Why shouldn't those who're levying that price on the commons pay for it? Stop whining, deal with the reality that current situation is simply not sustainable and must change, and help New York move toward a cleaner and all-round better future. (Rich Kassel's NRDC blog and StreetsBlog are the places to read about congestion pricing, far as I'm concerned.)

petebfd

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:32:03 -0500

@bottomless chips we don't pay a "transportation tax" we pay nyc taxes which are earmarked for many different things, including transportation

Jerky

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 00:03:16 -0500

> There are other solutions to the traffic and environmental >problems of NYC that don't involve paying a toll to enter midtown >with a car. Like.....?????

Toby von Meistersinger

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:08:42 -0500

The only way it is going to happen is some sort of back room Albany deal that will have something like half of the money going to highway improvements to some godforsaken part of upstate.

nivek

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:36:58 -0500

This is America. Nothing gets done. Forget about it.

theloofyourlife

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:47:11 -0500

so much for executing an advertising campaign for congestion pricing on the gothamist eh?

eyekantspel

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:07:50 -0500

how to sell a tax increase: 1. Call it "Congestion Pricing" instead of "tax increase." After all, no one likes congestion. 2. Pitch the environmental aspect. People like to care about the environment. 3. Argue that congestion means increased emissions and pollution. If we tax those nasty cars, congestion will disappear, and we all can take leisurely strolls on peaceful tree-lined city streets. Breathe that fresh air. Ahhh. 4. Ignore the fact that there is already a big disincentive for people to drive in NYC 9-5. What is this wonderous thing called you ask? Congestion pricing? no, just Congestion. No parking and slow traffic = reasons people already don't drive in the city. Congestion pricing won't accompish anything except raising prices on goods, as fees are passed on from delivery vehicles to consumers in the form of higher prices. We're told the $ will go to make public transportation better. You know, the same way we get better transportation with the billions each year we pay the MTA and Port Authority. We're told don't worry, no need to worry about tollbooths and blocked traffic at border areas. Magic EZpass cameras will ease the way. The same EZpass that makes our bridges and tunnels such a breeze. lol. I love when people complain about cars in the city. From my viewpoint, the city planners and politicians have spend the past several decades paving the way for private automobiles to inhabit our public streets. Those efforts have accomplished the gridlock and inefficient system we now have. whines bikecycle. That's the city. If you don't like it, try living in Battery Park, or Amsterdam or the rainforest. I love congestion. I hope they give congestion landmark status.

Steven

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:00:33 -0500

NYC, Long Island, and five counties in the Hudson Valley pay an MTA tax. Where is this money going? In some general fund for other things. This what congestion pricing will do as well.

Bottomless Chips

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:25:41 -0500

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the city to charge for street use, especially land as highly in demand and as difficult to maintain and keep in order as Manhattan streets. Look at your pay stub: We already pay a transportation tax.

bxbrian

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:24:43 -0500

OH MY GOD! IT IS CONSIDERED RUDE AND OBNOXIOUS WHEN YOU WRITE IN ALL CAPS!!!! YOU WILL NOT BE APPRECIATED OR READ BY PEOPLE! But, I did read your errors. It's spelled "dollars," not "dallars" "Vs" does not mean "against" "It is 'Who is registered', not 'who is register'" Point #4 is totally incomprehensible It is "regulations," not "regulation's" -- not every word ending with "s" is given an apostrophe Really sorry to be a prick, but Jesus dude learn some etiquette and use a spell-checker.

brooklyn and i

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:04:39 -0500

CALL THE BABY BY ITS REAL NAME TAX TAX TAX WIT THE NEW TAX PLAN IT IS A TAX MILLIONS OF DALLARS BUT NOT FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD 1) THE TAX FROM LOCAL RESIDENT FOR THE PRIVILEGE TO PARK IN THE FRONT OF YOUR HOSE 2) THE TAX FOR ALL SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS TO PAY A PLUS TAX FOR DOING BUSINESS 3) TICKETING EVERYBODY WHO WILL PARK VS THE LAW( EVERY CAR WHO IS REGISTER IN NYC HAVE PAID A MINIMUM OF 100 DOLLARS IN PARKING TICKETS EVERY YEAR) 4) THE FEDERAL BIG MONEY FOR THE CITY -"NOT ANY PAY BACK FOR THE LOCAL RESIDENT WHO WILL SUFFER FROM THE PARK AND RIDE AND ALL OUTER NEW REGULATION'S (CALL IT TAX SCAMS) 5) ALL NEW GARAGE SYSTEMS BUSINESS WHO WILL COME UP IN NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE WIILIAMSBURG TO PROVIDE THE PARK IN RIDE FOR OUTSIDERS AND THAT TAX WILL NOT GO TO THE LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS TAX TAX TAX MILLIONS OF DOLLARS BUT NOT FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVERY BROOKLYN POLITICIAN WHO WILL SUPPORT A NEW TAX WILL PAY THE FULL PRICE OF IT !!!

Bottomless Chips

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:58:11 -0500

You're all crazy if you think it will go toward mass transit. Just like the lottery money is supposed to go to schools, this money will go for paying off the socialized medicine and welfare costs incurred by the city and state.

starrygordon

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:54:30 -0500

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the city to charge for street use, especially land as highly in demand and as difficult to maintain and keep in order as Manhattan streets. No one necessarily has a right to bring a two- or three- thousand pound metal object into a public space and run it about at high speeds. However, I doubt that congestion pricing would do anything about congestion for two reasons. First, the money would not particularly go to mass transportation; even if it were earmarked, the city government could simply withdraw other funding from mass transportation and use it elsewhere. Second, a very large number of people would almost certainly be exempt from charges: certainly police, firemen, and important poiticians and bureaucrats; probably, everyone who works for the city or is connected to an important corporation, union, profession, political party or religious organization, plus their relatives. Those categories probably account for most of the traffic we now see on the streets today. Given the way government is usually conducted, I am certain they will all receive free passes. I already believe in the logic and virtue to congestion pricing, but in order to believe in its effectiveness I would need to be convinced that my apprehensions were groundless. That is unlikely given my experiences.

BikeCycle

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:54:24 -0500

@ Slappy Care to elaborate on these "other solutions to the traffic and environmental problems of NYC"? From my viewpoint, the city planners and politicians have spend the past several decades paving the way for private automobiles to inhabit our public streets. Those efforts have accomplished the gridlock and inefficient system we now have. Clearly the current system is not working. I'd love to hear your ideas for a system that would work.

dr zippy

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:43:52 -0500

Other than hand waving, how is congestin pricing a "fake "green" idea"? Care to name any of those other plans you think so highly about, slappy?

IceCreamNewYork

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:20:56 -0500

My sister called me from the hearing at 2:30, and said all the long winded speeches were from the city council, and the public had not yet had a chance to speak.

slappy

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:16:24 -0500

The whole concept of congestion pricing is another example of ciy planners and politicians without a clue and with no intention of addressing real problems, presenting a fake "green" idea for people to discuss. Its yet another way for them to duck their responsibility and put the blame on us. Thieves. "Congestion pricing" is probably the most un-american idea I have ever heard. There are other solutions to the traffic and environmental problems of NYC that don't involve paying a toll to enter midtown with a car. Awful repressive stupid idea.

SimonLok

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:02:18 -0500

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/mta-postpones-subway-and-bus-service-upgrades/ it looks like the last promise that the fare increase would go to service has already been broken. Congestion pricing is nothing but a bad joke.

classicrocker913

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:47:15 -0500

The Second Avenue Subway was first purposed in 1920. Thats all I have to say.

petebfd

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:44:17 -0500

but techincally the title of the post should probably read "most new york state residents doubt congestion prices will help mta".

petebfd

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:42:09 -0500

not that i'm vouching for the credibility of our elected officials or anything

petebfd

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:41:47 -0500

on the otherhand, if you read the poll, 51% of responders in nyc answered that they thought it was either "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that the money would reach mass transit.

HowBoutDemCowboys

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:41:38 -0500

The people don't trust the government? Shocking!