This is great. Fewer cars fighting for the same space. More people (rightly) taking mass transit. Money going to MTA for improvements.

visit : http://www.gerson2009.com/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=cmpContent&htmlKey=issues&s=gerson

vote for Mr.Gerson!!!

www.gerson2009.com

Hope all you green-weenies enjoy the higher prices you are forcing on us for EVERYTHING that is delivered into Manhattan.

It's not just the $21/vehicle, its the extra bookkeeping as well.

Maybe you like paying more for bread now that your precious/useless ethanol is forcing up the price of grains.

And good luck seeing ANY of the extra fed money (STILL OUR MONEY) getting used right by the MTA - they have already been exposed as almost cooking the books.

Does anyone with dreams of a pedestrian nirvana consider the impact on the city's economy? How much business is done on foot? This is a CITY, not a damn national park!

@jenchungsbra: sounds like a dream come true!

BTW, I live in Manhattan and don't look forward to having delivery trucks cruising the streets all night long to avoid the $21 fee. The noise they create during weekdays is bad enough, but if they're going to be tooling around in the evenings it's going to create a lot more noise later in the day when people are home trying to relax and/or sleep.

How about this: Ban ALL private vehicles from the zone during CP hours. Ban taxis from cruising without passengers and create numerous taxi stands in every neighborhood. Jack up the fees for the black Lincoln Town Car services. Make all taxis be dual-stage hybrids no larger than a Toyota Camry. Eliminate those double-decker tour buses. Eliminate those skinny billboard trucks that do nothing but drive around aimlessly advertising stupid crap. Make the north-south avenues at least one lane narrower and give that space back to pedestrians or bikes. ------- TADA! Pedestrian nirvana!

Why should it be cost the same for both NYC and NJ drivers to come into Manhattan. I already pay NY taxes, do they? I'm one of those people who can afford to pay the tunnel toll and already-insane parking lot prices each month to drive in. Although this idea sounds good as an idea, in practice it will just be one more revenue stream for politicians and MTA to mismanage for eternity. I'd rather deal with congestion than letting politicians milk us drier. They've been consistent in their waste, why do the sheep always think *this time* will be different?

"It's not a price control for public spaces. You are more than welcome to walk across the street for free anytime you wish in the congestion pricing zone. You are not your car."

Yeah, I'm welcome to walk across the street any time I wish, just so long as Donald Trump's speeding limousine isn't in my way.

It is ABSOLUTELY a price control in the way public spaces are used, designed to get a certain class of people to stop driving. To call it anything else is a blatant lie. It would be better to just ban cars altogether than to create even further social stratification in the place that already has the highest income stratification in the entire country.

And if, as IvoryJive says, only a small percentage of cars will be deterred then let's at least stop calling it a congestion scheme and call it what it really is, a revenue scheme.

WTF

for those of you who are bringing up the fact that this will not deter wealthy people from driving their car (usually an oversized suv) into the CBD because money is no object to them - that's precisely the point. we're getting extra money out of these folks for their trips which would then fund mass transit!

and i thank you, ivoryjive, for reminding people of the elements of the proposal which people are overlooking. one of the main pieces is to reduce congestion during PEAK hours, when congestion is a huge problem. and the purpose of this is not only to impact single-occupant vehicles, but also shipping goods on trucks -- many of them are clogging/polluting our roads during peak hours to make deliveries. now firms can decide whether they still need to make that delivery and have more trucks sitting in traffic, as opposed to making that delivery in offpeak hours and avoiding the charge.

it's all about making people rethink both their mode and time of travel. yes, i understand that not everyone has this liberty, but for those that do, the idea is that this will change their behavior...and if it doesn't, at least they'll be paying a charge to offset the externalities of their travel choices.

[50] - thanks for setting me straight on the effective times. I thought that was the original plan, but with my friends' complaining and whining about it, I assumed that they must have amended the plan to include later or earlier hours. It will still affect the friend who works 11 pm - 7 am, but maybe the others were jumping on that bandwagon.

I think a lot of people here are being overly judgmental to the ones who drive into the city. You can't possibly know everyone's situation. Maybe try not to needlessly vilify an entire group of people.

There are certain neighborhoods near Path and Metro North (and probably LIRR) stations that are already inundated with commuter parking. Wonder what will happen to those neighborhoods once this goes into effect?

why do I get the feeling the people who are against this plan are the people who voted for bloomberg twice? now who is lapping what?

That's right JenChungsBra, most people will still be bringing their smog-producing cars with them, but not freely. Now they will have to pay a fee. The point is that driving a car on public space is not a civil liberty. You still have the right to enter public space, but you can't freely do it with an automobile. You sound just like the groups of people who were OUTRAGED when cities first introduced parking meters. But it seems like that good idea caught on.

And anyway, how many people do you think can afford to buy a car ($500 - $30,000+) and maintain it, pay car insurance ($250/month), pay for gas on their daily commute ($4-20/day), possibly paying for parking in the zone ($20-40/day), and can't afford $40/week to commute in between 6am and 6pm on weekdays? Probably the few people who fit into that category would qualify for the low-income deduction.

The small percentage of vehicles that will be deterred won't be those who can't afford it, but those that maybe didn't really have to drive through the zone anyway - they were just doing it because it's free.

The number of people naive enough to think this is reducing any traffic is terrifying.

For all you dummys who really think this money is going into some safe labeled MTA please look up "General Fund". That's where all this money will go.

My God, people will lap up anything anyone tells them if it fulfills some pet peeve.

I predict:

No noticeable change in anything.

No change in current traffic levels from 6am to 6pm. People who drive in the city during business hours do so because they need to. Most of it is commercial traffic, and they will simply pass costs on to consumers. Most individuals who can take public transportation already do, because the pain of driving in the city, costs of car ownership, parking, traffic tickets, etc. are huge disincentives that already exist.

Small increased prices in goods (probably not so noticeable) as offsets for higher costs of delivery are passed on.

Increased congestion along the boundaries of the zone-- just need a few confused motorists (not regular drivers, but tourists who will drive in and accept the cost as the expense of a casual visit) to make a mess for everyone.

Service on MTA lines no better than it has been.

Within a year or two, they will increase the congestion pricing because they want more money and will claim they aren't making enough to maintain the system. Just like they do now with the bridges and tunnels.

It's funny/scary to me that people are so naive as to buy into a tax, believing it won't effect them, based on nothing but empty promises made by known liars. Cleaner environment and better MTA? lol. They should do air quality testing on the subway platforms-- all that peeling paint, mold and buildup of filth is probably a lot worse for your health than the air on the street.

JenChungsBra wrote:

I'M the idealist who thinks it's morally unfair to use price control for public spaces.

It's not a price control for public spaces. You are more than welcome to walk across the street for free anytime you wish in the congestion pricing zone. You are not your car.

As if the real goal of this plan is to reduce traffic. I drive enough in the city. There really isn't a congestion problem. Seriously. Most of the times the traffic jams are either accident or road repair related (or crane related). Eliminate a few taxis and you will have your 6% decrease, easily. A few thoughts.

-If parking in the congestion zone improves, will more people living in those areas buy cars?

-How will this affect the rental car business, especially zipcar?

yes, I didn't vote for the guy.

he'll be shoving all his policies before he leaves office. and giving them sweetheart deals to his buddies. the poor will get the shaft.

"And finally, this is not a tax on your right to enter public space. You can still enter the congestion zone freely. You just can't bring your smog-producing car with you."

Not true. Quite a few people will still be bringing their smog-producing cars with them. Those are people for whom $40/week is meaningless. And now they'll have an even greater incentive to do so because people who can't afford the charge will have been weeded out. Isn't that great?

Couldn't there can be an increase in taxis if the ones that normally work the outer boroughs and airports start working Manhattan?

MFer wrote:

I predict:

(snip)

-increase of taxis offset the potential drop in traffic

(snip)There can only be an increase in taxis if the city decides to issue more medallions, which certainly would seem contradictory to the stated goal of reducing car traffic.