You must log in or register to comment.

lbrtsn t1_j9uvsno wrote

This is like the dumbest way to make policy. They passed it as a bill so they should implement it. If people don’t like it they can go to the legislature to try and repeal it, but to have it caught and killed by bureaucratic morass is the worst of all scenarios. Huge waste of time and taxpayer money endlessly studying things.


Ame_No_Uzume t1_j9vqm2p wrote

The money is being pocketed by the 3rd parties claiming to do the study. So I am not surprised there.


TeamMisha t1_j9w6u90 wrote

WSP completed and released it's tolling study, what do you mean by "claiming"?


Ame_No_Uzume t1_j9whui0 wrote

What do studies have to do with financing and sociopolitical influence? Ah yes, keep believing that the major outlets aren’t reflections of their financial backers and I will have FOX News and Rupert Murdoch to sell y’a.


TeamMisha t1_j9wisgb wrote

I am confused by what you mean, the study was released? You can read it here:

There's over 1,000 pages... so I ask again what do you mean by claiming to do the study? It has been done. What's happening now is the MTA is waiting for the FHWA to complete its in house review. If they respond to comments with disapproval or conditional approval it means the study will need to be modified, but it's already been done and submitted in draft form last year. Sorry but no idea what you are trying to say about FOX news and influence?


KosherSloth t1_j9xk1x9 wrote

Why did this need to happen in the first place?


TeamMisha t1_j9yz8oj wrote

The scope of Congestion Pricing was decided to fall under NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the government eventually decided that an EA was necessary. With NEPA, you must perform a study to create what is called an Environmental Assessment (EA) or, in the most stringent cases, an Environmental Impact Statement. These studies qualify and quantify what impacts, if any, your project has on various aspects of the environment and population. You submit your study and then await a decision, the end goal being a FONSI, or "finding of no significant impact" which will allow you to proceed with your project. They can be quite extensive and costly to perform, often at thousands of pages in length with up to 20 appendices. EAs and EIS are quite common for major projects and developments, NYC has its own processes related to NEPA, called CEQR: City Environmental Quality Review, as well as a state version called SEQR (State Environmental Quality Review).

You can read more about NEPA here:
CEQR process:


KosherSloth t1_ja0578v wrote

Seems pretty silly to spend millions of dollars to do an environmental assessment on reducing driving. Why do we need to do this in the first place?


Ame_No_Uzume t1_j9wjcac wrote

You missed the point of the statement and it’s follow up, but keep the tangential reference to the subjective interpretation of the word ‘claim’ as the basis of your inquiry.


TeamMisha t1_j9wkqr5 wrote

> The money is being pocketed by the 3rd parties claiming to do the study

3rd parties claiming to do the study, per your post, is WSP Engineering. The study was completed. What am I missing about your post?


jm14ed t1_j9wjrt8 wrote

I don’t think you know what the point of your statement was either.


George4Mayor86 t1_j9uc0z7 wrote

Oh for fuck’s sake.

The status-quo bias in the review process is killing us. It’s not rocket science - internalizing the costs of driving on drivers works. Get it done.


[deleted] t1_j9uvt0a wrote



jm14ed t1_j9uw235 wrote

The working class rides the subway and bus to work.


lu7z t1_j9uxpbn wrote

Not at all. I work in the city but I work nights when there are no NJT busses or trains from where I live. I already have to pay tolls and parking.


jm14ed t1_j9uz8i3 wrote

Sure, not all, but the vast majority.

If you work overnight, then the proposed congestion tolls seem to be very modest.


lu7z t1_j9v0c08 wrote

Shouldn't be a "congestion" toll overnight. I get from the Lincoln tunnel to my spot near times square in 5 minutes or less. From the GWB I can get to the same spot in 15ish minutes. Never any traffic. If I could take transportation I would, like I do during any daytime shifts I have. It's too many expenses for a regular working person. Daily it would be 11.50 for the overnight toll, 30$ for parking, and now an extra 9$ just because I took my only means of getting there.


AceContinuum t1_j9v1lsr wrote

I have good news for you. You're still coming out ahead, even with congestion pricing, because you're not paying NY City income tax due to living in Jersey. You're also saving bigly on COL generally by living in a part of Jersey that's so off the beaten path there are "no NJT busses or trains." (Actually, where exactly is this? The NJT bus and rail network is quite extensive everywhere within an hour or so of Manhattan.)

As for transportation alternatives, I'm sure there's someplace in Jersey where you could park and switch to a 24/7 transit line, like the PATH or one of the many 24/7 bus lines that run into Port Authority.

Obviously, that's less convenient for you than driving into Manhattan proper - but that is exactly what congestion pricing is intended to target. The precise rationale is to reduce people's incentive to drive into Manhattan.


meantnothingatall t1_j9v7k5u wrote

I don't live in Jersey but I worked nights and evenings, including weekends, for many years in health care. Transit completely sucks. Walking on the streets at that time of night sucks. Sometimes my commute back to Brooklyn would be TWO HOURS working evenings/weekends. If I drove, it would've been thirty minutes or less.

I still work evenings and they screwed with my train line so my commute home requires multiple train transfers, which is not an issue during the day. However, if one of those trains is messed up, there goes the entire ride home.

It's a totally different animal during the day. You have tons of buses, trains, express buses, etc. I feel like working evenings/nights, especially in a "twenty-four hour city" at places that need you to be there to keep patients alive, is something that should be considered. Staffing at many of these places already sucks, and adding the additional cost when you're already picking up "off shifts" will probably have people looking elsewhere.


AceContinuum t1_j9v9zls wrote

If you're going to/from Manhattan, express bus service actually runs great overnight - faster and more reliable than during the day, due to much lighter traffic. I always prefer subways during the day and express buses at night.

If you're going between outer boroughs, then I agree transit sucks (although it also sucks during the day as well), but that wouldn't really be relevant to the congestion pricing discussion because that would only apply to Manhattan below 96th.


meantnothingatall t1_j9vay13 wrote

There is no express bus that close to me and the closest one stops at around 7 PM. Therefore, it's useless to anyone who works off-shift. I've never lived anywhere that had overnight express buses.

I am talking about going from the outer boroughs to the city and back, which is my experience as someone who has commuted like this for years. Off-shift is a joke. Between the outer boroughs completely sucks but that is not what I was speaking to in my first comment.


AceContinuum t1_j9vfxoa wrote

My closest express bus line also runs during peak hours only. I've never taken it because, from the MTA's timetables, it would be slower (due to traffic) than taking the subway.

However, overnight, I take a 24/7 express bus from Manhattan to S.I. and then transfer to the SIR to finish my trip. Overnight, the express bus makes it from FiDi to Old Town in 20 minutes flat. Shaves a ton of time off of waiting for the S.I. Ferry (which often goes to 1-hour headways overnight) or, worse, crawling down the Fourth Avenue line in Brooklyn on the R (which is godawful overnight).

I don't know which part of the city you're in, but I'm pretty sure there are 24/7 express bus lines to every outer borough. Perhaps you might look into taking an express bus to a subway line convenient to where you live. Even though you'd still be taking the subway for the "last mile," that could still help you save a lot of time.


arthurnewt t1_j9v69ae wrote

New Jersey transit stops running at 1am


jm14ed t1_j9v85t5 wrote

There are no trains from Secaucus between 2:30 am and 5 am to New York Penn. Otherwise, there are pretty frequent trains.


[deleted] t1_j9v78rj wrote



arthurnewt t1_j9vb6mv wrote

The path train frequencies in the middle of the night leave a lot to be desired> 30 min and on weekends nearly 1 hour runs. The bus terminal lines only go to Jersey city/ Hoboken and Newark. And some other areas. Off peak the service leaves a lot to be desired.


b1argg t1_j9vc3o6 wrote

trains are vary infrequent at night. You are asking this person to make their commute significantly longer.


AceContinuum t1_j9vkojy wrote

I am pointing out that there are alternatives to driving into Times Square and, if this person prefers the convenience of driving into Times Square, then that is exactly the kind of reason congestion pricing is a good thing to have.


jm14ed t1_j9v1urs wrote

In some of the scenarios there would be a credit for paying the tolls on the Hudson River crossings, in the other scenarios it would only be a $5 toll. I don’t think that’s unreasonable when you could park at Secaucus and take NJT to Penn during the majority of the time.


TeamMisha t1_j9wbt6y wrote

Under Toll Scenario A the overnight fee would be $5, not so bad eh? You can see the full toll scenarios here:

Scenario A is the most equitable so I'm personally hoping that's the one that goes through... but we'll see. The $12 tolls are under Scenarios E and F which give exemptions and caps to many many people.


MarbleFox_ t1_j9wldgh wrote

Then take it up with NJT. Why should NJT not providing NJ residents with the transit access they need influence NYC’s policy making?


[deleted] t1_j9uwyaq wrote



fockyou t1_j9uxc0j wrote

No, that's not what OP said and you know it.


[deleted] t1_j9uxxhj wrote



fockyou t1_j9uzgdi wrote

"The working class rides the subway and bus to work." != "Everyone driving to Manhattan are millionaires."


[deleted] t1_j9v09ii wrote



jm14ed t1_j9v25t3 wrote

Stop putting words in my mouth.

The vast majority of people take public transit to work in the congestion zone. Of course, some “working class” people drive, but many of those folks do it because they choose to, not because they have to.


jm14ed t1_j9uxfs8 wrote

If by “disconnected” you mean dealing with facts, then I guess I’m guilty of that.


sagenumen t1_j9vcvq5 wrote

It’ll be a rich people’s playground how? People won’t take the train because of congestion pricing?


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9vgv89 wrote

A small number of people will take the train, but best believe they won’t hang out in Manhattan after hours. Also expect any businesses that are affected by the tolls to offload that cost onto their customers.


sagenumen t1_j9w1inv wrote

You have a source on that first part?


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9wircs wrote

It’s common sense, when you hang out late in Manhattan, the best way to get home is in a car (rideshare/yellow cab), because who wants to take the train late at night?

Ride-share and taxis will be subjected to congestion tolls too. You’ll be better off hanging out in Queens or Brooklyn.


sagenumen t1_j9xvf1o wrote

I take the train home at all hours all the time


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9y927y wrote

And when you get off the train, do you have to catch a bus?


sagenumen t1_j9z2m7w wrote

Not home, but in those cases, I usually take the train as far as I can and get a car to meet me. I do the bus sometimes. Depends on timing.


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9zrjld wrote

See that’s what I’m talking about, if I have to take a bus or catch a ride the rest of the way home and it’s late. Then I rather not travel to Manhattan and deal with the subway system. Easier to stay local and then catch that same ride home.


sagenumen t1_j9zs0ec wrote

There are plenty of places to hang in Queens and Brooklyn. All the parties these days are in brooklyn


HEIMDVLLR t1_ja065eb wrote

That’s my original point, congestion tolls surrounding Manhattan will just magnify what’s already happening. Outer borough residents will stay local more often and the hype about Manhattan will fade.


b1argg t1_j9vaqn0 wrote

if it were actually about congestion, the price would be dynamic based on current congestion levels.


TeamMisha t1_j9wcfhv wrote

It can be more complex and costly to monitor congestion precisely in real time, though is possible. Time of Day based plans were probably chosen for simplicity in the tolling structure and using averages from existing data. It also means it would be much more difficult to analyze and forecast this, unless you again used an assumed average. To first model average congestion, which itself is a tricky metric given the size of the CBD, and then change the toll, and then study how it reduces congestion in real time, the traffic modeling work to do that... I would shoot my brains out that would be insane to study lol. On the bright side, the toll structure has flexibility, they can tweak peak hours and off peak costs for example, that's gonna be much easier to do versus dynamic monitoring.


b1argg t1_j9wr6t5 wrote

There are plenty of highways with tolled Express lanes that dynamically adjust the toll. Every entrance to the tolled area will have gantries anyway so its simple to count entrances and exits.


TeamMisha t1_j9wunyv wrote

HOT lanes are simple in nature compared to tolling an entire portion of the city. Volume at entrance and exit is one dataset, what about everything in between? The grid is massive, is just checking toll gantries sufficient? Some may say no, I'd tend to agree. Volume inbound alone doesn't necessarily paint the whole picture of what "congestion" is happening inside the cordon. Might not work out so well, or maybe it would, it's very hard to tell which is probably why it was not considered due to the complexity. Nothing about measuring congestion in the CBD is simple, trust me on that one, the traffic on the street grid is probably one of the most complex systems in the entire city.


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j9vg5i6 wrote

That’s fine. If people drive less, the city makes up for it with increased city tax. Done deal.


GoHuskies1984 t1_j9u4jsb wrote

Getting incredibly doubtful congestion pricing will ever pass into reality. Why pass significant fixes when being jaded complainers is part of our identity.


iv2892 t1_j9vyt1h wrote

They should focus on going after people who deface plates and the ones that also block bike lanes . That’s much easier to make revenue while we study congestion prices , because paying $16+ to cross from NJ is a big deterrent for many drivers who will otherwise take NJ transit or PATH to go into Manhattan


GettingPhysicl t1_ja2n4wv wrote

> deterrent for many drivers who will otherwise take NJ transit or PATH to go into Manhattan

sounds good


iv2892 t1_ja391bm wrote

That’s what I’m saying is already a big deterrent because those tolls are in place already. Imagine you live in JC, Hoboken, Newark, Fort Lee or anywhere in northern NJ where PATH or NJ buses are readily available and you want to go to midtown or anything below , are you really going to drive by yourself , Pay tolls and even more on parking when getting there ? the same could apply to going from other boros and towns east of Manhattan like Queens , Brooklyn and Suffolk county


Drag0nus1 t1_j9vlks4 wrote

Not with everyone working one should be forced back into the office....ppl do better live better working remote. Why fuck that up. I'm sorry real estate mongols are losing money...I'm so sad for them.


lila-pink t1_j9w1fyb wrote

this is unsurprisingly downvoted because this reddit is icky lmao. let those who can work from home do so


drpvn t1_j9u2k7u wrote

Let’s go for 2090.


sutisuc t1_j9un18a wrote

By then it can be a congestion charge for kayaks since most of Manhattan will be underwater by then


iv2892 t1_j9vyz6f wrote

I know you say this as a joke but They said Manhattan would be underwater by 2013.


BxGeek79 t1_j9uv1x1 wrote

Great news. Keep pushing it back.


CensorshipIsTheDevil t1_j9uz6ux wrote

You know the politicians will realize 2024 is an election year soon enough and push it again. Aint nobody want to be on the receiving end of that blowback right before an election.


TeamMisha t1_j9wapq7 wrote

What's weird is it's already passed legislation though, so why care at this point? The "risk" of doing it should already have happened, it's already been done by NY legislatures, and the FHWA has nothing to lose if they greenlit this because it's not as if passing congestion pricing will cause NYC to flip to republican instantly for the Biden Whitehouse, nor does the FHWA care what one city thinks of it, unless Buttiegieg is going to mount some surprise campaign and fears NYC will hold a grudge?


CensorshipIsTheDevil t1_j9wjp9n wrote

If the tolls kick in and people feel the pain, they’ll go after anyone and everyone who supported it. It will be as bad, or worse, than how crime was portrayed during 2022.


tbutlah t1_j9v55e9 wrote

1950s Chad Robert Moses: "Let's decimate entire neighborhoods with wide highways and ignore public outcry"

2023 Virgin Department of Transportation: "Let's do an eNvIrOnMeNtAl aSsEssMent "


SumyungNam t1_j9ukpeq wrote

But we still getting fare hikes this year


k1lk1 t1_j9u355c wrote

I think I asked this before, where can I read the much-discussed "430 technical questions" the FHWA posed to the MTA?


TeamMisha t1_j9w7sdd wrote

I vaguely remember a SB article mentioning that the MTA did not release the questions, I don't think it is required to until the process moves to the next stage and a new draft EA is released. We only know what they have mentioned and complained about, such as having to do traffic and air quality simulations in suburbs outside of Philadelphia.


AA950 t1_j9vfgl9 wrote

Because the people don’t want it


Reasonable-Wish-6025 t1_j9wpdzi wrote

Who the hell wants congestion prices i live in the Bronx and already pay city tax we already pay tolls to go into other boroughs. Why should we now pay a tax to go below 60th street. I drive in to work everyday and pay the expensive parking downtown because i can’t rely on taking these disgusting trains. But ok just keep killing the working class.


TeamMisha t1_j9wywv9 wrote

> Who the hell wants congestion prices

For one I imagine the folks living in the CBD who deal with the congestion every day where they live. The concept behind this scheme is that it should cost money to go into one of the densest and most transit connected places in the entire country. The system has dual goals of raising money for the MTA while also reducing vehicle volume on the over-capacity streets in the CBD. The working class takes transit, I don't deny some drive, but the volume inbound pales in comparison to the millions entering via transit from the region. Certain opponents love to make this "working class" argument, strangely, when the majority are on transit and this would directly benefit them. Obviously if I was in your position I wouldn't want to pay either, but it is what it is eh?


ketzal7 t1_j9zgsvk wrote

Lol most of the working class takes the train. This will effect them the least. If everyone drove into the city, nobody would be able to get there at a reasonable time.

The congestion pricing might end up making your commute better tbh.


MrBenzNY t1_j9x4eg1 wrote

I agree. Congestion tax is nothing more than a way to for this inept city government to fund its crooked programs. The intentions for these actions is positive but execution is piss poor. Why would government fix its spending when they can keep raising funds? MTA is subsidized everywhere and still is running a deficit. Why would they improve If they keep getting bailed out? Crooked politicians that rather pander to unions than actually make significant changes for everyday New Yorkers.


Various_Thanks1613 t1_ja07l35 wrote

> MTA is subsidized everywhere and still is running a deficit.

So are the highways 😉

Transportation isn’t about profit.


kinovelo t1_j9wylrv wrote

I do. The truly “working class” can’t afford parking in downtown Manhattan and has to take the “disgusting trains.” You’re a privileged elitist, who wants to lower the quality of life for others by jamming up the roads. At bare minimum, you should pay for the inconvenience that you’re causing others.


Mentalpopcorn t1_j9zbwvh wrote

The trains are disgusting, wtf? If not wanting to have all my sense accosted is elitist then call me Mitt fucking Romney because there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to rise above one's circumstances.


Terrible-Pack9518 t1_j9ylsep wrote

Do you actually know TeamMisha to call them a privileged elitist? One can argue that everyone living in Manhattan are privileged elitists trying to keep the working class out. But that would also be an inaccurate generalization.

For the last 40 years, I can remember the MTA always crying poverty while the quality of mass transit has remained roughly the same. Sure new subway cars and new ways to pay fares, but general reliability hasn’t significantly improved.

Relying on mass transit is not always practical and parking rates are exorbitant. Also who gets to decide how much traffic is considered congestion? You and like minded thinkers?

To be truly fair, why not eliminate all vehicles in Manhattan except for commercial vehicles? That includes Manhattan residents to give up their cars as well. But should you decide to keep your car in another borough, maybe you pay an extra storage tax.

Finally, if congestion pricing goes through, then are you willing to pay an additional tax and surcharge on all goods and services that are shipped into your area?

Of course most of this rant is slightly facetious but I hope you get the point. One city one fare used to be a model. To charge premiums to drive into certain neighborhoods is elitist by nature. To those who want to live in a big city, this is the price you pay.


kinovelo t1_j9zbhah wrote

People who own cars are richer on average than your average New Yorker, and if you can afford to pay $600+ per month for parking and $500+ a month in insurance just because you think you’re too good for the “disgusting trains” that millions of New Yorkers take everyday, then you are a privileged elitist.

I’m all for creating financial disincentives for people in Manhattan owning cars too.

If you made it so it was mostly only commercial vehicles in Manhattan, they could make their deliveries quicker because they wouldn’t be stuck in traffic, which would likely more than offset any fees that they’re paying.

Lower Manhattan wasn’t designed for cars. Congestion pricing isn’t about preventing access to the city, but rather about making people who think that they’re better than everybody else taking public transit pay for the true nuisance that they’re causing by blocking up the roads.


Jarreddit15 t1_j9wgyf9 wrote

Next time you're crossing the street and walking through total gridlock, try to count how many cars you see with license plates that don't start with a T

Then you'll realize this won't work and it's just a way to funnel more money into the blackhole that is the MTA's budget


TeamMisha t1_j9wxzop wrote

FHVs are a large source of congestion yes. Not all the toll scenarios will exempt or cap them. When the draft EA was opened to public comment I sent in my support for Scenario A which has NO exemptions and encouraged others to do the same. The system will be tested if we end up with many exemptions, caps, or credits and leaves others to pay more to cover the exemptions.


Souperplex t1_j9v7c6p wrote

Oh for... Just do it!


ike_tyson t1_j9vyqyd wrote

I'm convinced the people behind the constant price increases never ride the subway. They need to take it to work 5 day's a week and experience it in it's glory.


TeamMisha t1_j9wbbet wrote

While I hate the previous delays from the MTA's side and Janno's indifferent sounding comments "oh well we don't need it right now" when just recently the MTA was literally shitting its pants about budget shortfalls... according to this the delay right now is from the federal side with the FHWA. I still think it's ridiculous the federal government needs to approve a tolling system on majority city or state owned roadways. NEPA requirements (what this is following) make sense if let's say NYC wanted to build a coal fired power plant 10 feet from the border and let the pollution go down wind to NJ, but this will improve air quality.. you'd think positive environmental projects wouldn't need this crazy amount of scrutiny and advanced analysis lol


johnatsea12 t1_j9v80w2 wrote

What all the taxi cabs charging for it already


TeamMisha t1_j9wadyb wrote

That's a separate, existing surcharge traveling into the CBD, this is for a new type of toll.


peter-doubt t1_j9vdcdh wrote

Problem they have is where they charge, and what, and mostly HOW. They're unfocused.

To travel between NJ and Brooklyn, you're certain to pay it if you use a bridge.

If you complete your Manhattan traverse in 20 minutes or less ... You pay..... but 20 minutes out of a day isn't congestion. It's über drivers who circle the streets for 10 hours that cause congestion. Find a way to focus on the cause.


sutisuc t1_j9vfwmr wrote

Remember you’re not in traffic, you are traffic.


peter-doubt t1_j9vjc4l wrote

For minutes, being charged the day rate


sutisuc t1_j9vjtd7 wrote

Yeah I don’t think you have much of a background in urban planning.


peter-doubt t1_j9vkj67 wrote

Jane Jacobs would like a word with you


sutisuc t1_j9vkzax wrote

Yeah please tell me what the famously pro car Jane Jacobs would think of a plan that would lessen the amount of cars in lower Manhattan.


peter-doubt t1_j9vln9b wrote

Pro car? From Wikipedia:

>Jacobs organized grassroots efforts to protect neighborhoods from urban renewal and slum clearance – in particular plans by Robert Moses to overhaul her own Greenwich Village neighborhood. She was instrumental in the eventual cancellation of the Lower Manhattan Expressway, which would have passed directly through an area of Manhattan that later became known as SoHo, as well as part of Little Italy and Chinatown.

What planet were you on?


sutisuc t1_j9vm5n9 wrote

Sarcasm bud. Try to keep up. Can you let me know why Jane Jacobs would be opposed to a plan that would lessen car traffic in lower Manhattan?


TeamMisha t1_j9wze4u wrote

> but 20 minutes out of a day isn't congestion

Not quite how it works. Your commute time is irrelevant, if you try to drive down a road that's already at capacity, you are adding to congestion and queues. I will give you props pointing out Uber (aka For-Hire-Vehicles), they have been studied indeed as a major source of congestion because they circle the network looking for fares. Congestion pricing under several proposed scenarios will NOT exempt them, however, which would help address this.


BuyLocalAlbanyNY t1_j9wsxt6 wrote

Waiting for a busier news season so it can get buried easily.

Perhaps a crazy election, or some other human-made BS problem/issue...


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9vjyer wrote

What’s the end goal when the streets are empty and no one is driving into Manhattan?

I see Manhattan looking a lot like downtown Los Angeles and everyone sticking to the outer boroughs.


TeamMisha t1_j9w881j wrote

> streets are empty

In the environmental assessment, they modeled traffic with a goal in 5% reduction in VMT and 10% reduction of vehicles entering the CBD toll zone. The goal is not, nor has it ever been, to evaporate traffic from the CBD, that would be impossible and nonsensical.

Source from the Regional Plan Association commenting on the EA: See, first comment.


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9wjabc wrote

Data looks cool, but I would like to SEE how things actually look in places like London. Especially after they implement their next wave of congestion tolls for ULEZones.


TeamMisha t1_j9wk4md wrote

You can already see how their first implementation went, no? It's been in place since 2003. You can look back further as well, Singapore had a road pricing system circa 1998. Our system would be comparable to London's original implementation. Obviously the streets did not empty. I am not sure what else you would want to see or if you believe our implementation is somehow going to be vastly different?


nychuman t1_j9weasi wrote

I could cycle and walk without fear for my life, for starters.


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9wk72y wrote

Local Los Angeles residents can do that now downtown, but have you seen how desolate it looks? This is also true in a lot of cities with downtowns. People like to hangout in other areas of the city.

The empty streets will be cool at first, but then it will be just like it was during the pandemic, a lot of people will begin to avoid it and stick to areas more populated and lively.


nychuman t1_j9wknj5 wrote

The streets would be filled with people instead dude… we have 400+ subway stations connecting our city and thousands of buses.

This isn’t LA.


HEIMDVLLR t1_j9x9rqm wrote

You think not having an active subway system is what’s keeping people from downtown LA? Everyone drives there and the parking is cheap, yet they choose not to go downtown. The same will happen to Manhattan, just like every other city with a downtown.

You see the empty store fronts, there’s space available signs everywhere right?

Edit: The downvotes don’t mean shit when Manhattan is already suffering from people working from home. It’s gotten so bad, they have to convert empty office buildings into residential housing.


meinnyc22 t1_j9y7oqv wrote

What kills me is that we who live here, without cars, have to pay the congestion fee to take a cab home everyonce in a while when carrying lots of stuff, while all the outta borough people clog up the bus lanes and pay nothing and complain.


llevey23 t1_j9vi5o6 wrote

Disappointing to see a lot of these comments, but not surprising given this sub’s demo.


Red__dead t1_j9v0px1 wrote

Pathetic. In London and other progressive, forward thinking cities, congestion pricing has been a thing for decades now.

This summer London is implementing a ULEZ congestion charge for the most polluting vehicles for the entire Greater London area, more than 600 square miles.

New York cannot even get it together for a fucking tiny area of Manhattan - no wonder this city is considered so non-functional and backwards. Cars being put before making this city a pleasant, healthy place to live for people, as usual.


ldn6 t1_j9vcdmq wrote

If it’s any consolation, the ULEZ expansion has been a political fiasco. Multiple boroughs have said that they will refuse to cooperate and there’s a ton of blowback. It’s the right thing to do but even places like London struggle to get support for policies.


Red__dead t1_j9y6rxy wrote

The expansion has, due to it becoming yet another social media influence battle in the great culture war. Not helped by idiots like Jordan Peterson stoking boomer fears.

But the first congestion charge, the LEZ, the first two ULEZ zones? They went through. And this expansion will too, and it won't take years like in NY.


Grass8989 t1_j9vhuqf wrote

In London, if you live in the congestion zone you don’t have to pay. (Or pay very little) There is no such proposal here.


akmalhot t1_j9v7n2b wrote

In ALL of those congestion zones, you get a variance if you live in the zone or immediately adjacent to it

But nywrs are too fucking selfish...hey to go where I pay to live and pay taxes I gotta pay a fee. Lol


TeamMisha t1_j9x1g3k wrote

I can see the appeal of not adding an exemption for residents. I mean, I have to pay a fee to go home too, on the subway. There's no exemption for traveling on the subway just because you live somewhere specific, is there? Makes sense in some ways to apply that logic to this too


akmalhot t1_j9x2dsp wrote

Uh, now imagine you drive to go get something and driving home costs you money

People who live in the zone are paying a premium to live there, congestion is brought in by people who don't live there.

EVERY single other congestion zone in the world gives variance to residents if the zone and.people.immediately adjacent because it's made.foe a purpose, not a money grab

Y'all are just selfish and haters and think, well as long as it doesn't affect me fick em.. not actually thinking about the point of it

You're riding a system infrastructure ... I pay taxes towards roads already. Also pay to use specialty infrastructe like bridges and tunnels ....


p4177y t1_ja02txv wrote

> EVERY single other congestion zone in the world gives variance to residents if the zone and.people.immediately adjacent because it's made.foe a purpose, not a money grab

Not to mention other variances or discounts to things like, say motorcycles. But I guess according to MTA logic, a motorcycle that takes up 1/6th the space of a car generates the same congestion, so it should therefore pay the same 10-20 dollars as a large car or SUV.

Seems like a total crock of shit, of you ask me...


TeamMisha t1_j9z1m2z wrote

What's selfish is the amount of money and land devoted to car infrastructure that is the least efficient and most polluting mode of transportation on earth lol. It's questionable if what is paid even comes close to the "real cost". 247 people were killed in traffic crashes last year, has that cost been reflected in the tolls and taxes? I'm willing to bet no.

> well as long as it doesn't affect me fick em

That's funny cause that seems to be the attitude of many car drivers in this city, when we propose anything that might inconvenience them.

> congestion is brought in by people who don't live there

No, congestion is caused by too many cars on the road regardless who is driving. Just cause I live somewhere and drive doesn't mean I'm magically not part of the problem.

> People who live in the zone

The zone also literally has the most subway transit in the entire country, am I supposed to feel bad wealthy residents want the subway and a car but feel inconvenienced driving? I would love to live where they live but wow shocker I can't afford it. Let's not be so greedy here, or overestimate the imagined suffering of people able to not only live in some of the most desirable areas in the city but also afford a car. I don't even live in Manhattan and couldn't afford car payments or insurance even if I wanted, sorry but I'm not exactly gonna weep for this "plight"


akmalhot t1_ja11324 wrote

Because YOI never leave my city, all convenient modes of getting somewhere that is not on a train line should be destroyed

Stop mentioning other congestion zones when the plan completely deviates from them

Why shouldn't someone who is paying more for the real estate this more in real estate tax get a benefit when jagofds drive into their home area and creat congestion for them ?

Why should I pay the same as a jagofds who lives on NJ not paying property tax here pays to go in? I have to pay to go home? They have to pay to enjoy amenities?


Red__dead t1_j9y6u6n wrote

Not true for ULEZ.


akmalhot t1_j9y9rzr wrote

That's ab emission pricing which you don't pay to f your car is compliant. Which isn't.unreasomable

Virtually all cars sold after 2006 are compliant, all electric and hybrids are compliant as well.

Okay let's add that, so what. Local residents still get exemptions on the congestion, if they drive an excess polluting vehicle they can pay the fine


movingtobay2019 t1_j9vwsrz wrote

Not the way NYC is trying to implement it. At least be fucking honest.


BATMAN_UTILITY_BELT t1_j9ukkcu wrote

Good. This sub is indistinguishable from /r/fuckcars

Maybe people would use the MTA if it weren’t a raging, corrupt shithole that didn’t take an hour to go between boroughs and didn’t smell like piss all the fucking time.

The MTA is a blackhole of funding. Millions of dollars to replace a fucking staircase, are you fucking kiding me


jumbod666 t1_j9u8cur wrote

This will ultimately have a ripple effect on the prices of food and everything that has to be delivered by truck into NYC.


EatingAssCuresCancer t1_j9uemj8 wrote

Shouldn’t the decrease in traffic improve the efficiency of distribution to the point where congestion pricing is evened out? Besides, an extra $20 on an entire truck probably carrying a hundred times more than that worth of goods probably makes just a dent.


throws_rocks_at_cars t1_j9uisqf wrote

Yes. Making the city more friendly to logistical/delivery vehicles will improve speed of delivery, as well as vastly improve emergency services.


Entry-Level-Cowboy t1_j9umw20 wrote

$20 per day. And that’s if they don’t leave the area. If a driver leaves and has to come back for a customer that opens later, that’s another fee. Logistics isn’t cut and dry usually.


CensorshipIsTheDevil t1_j9uztb8 wrote

It is tiered, so it well more than $20. Come on, you have to be smarter than this. It is a cash grab that will fix nothing. A hidden tax.


[deleted] t1_j9ufiwv wrote



drpvn t1_j9uqjma wrote

Lol if you think congestion pricing is going to eliminate gridlock.


TeamMisha t1_j9w8tyi wrote

Eliminate no, but congestion can sort of be exponential, whereby once you hit a level of service of F, even just a few extra cars can cause massive added delay/queues, so the projected goal of 10% may actually go a long way in at least improving flow around the CBD. There will likely remain troubled areas such as near the Holland Tunnel that just have so much congestion that it would take more than 10% reduction to make a sizeable improvement, but we'll see!


George4Mayor86 t1_j9ubwpp wrote

$20 divided over every tomato in a tractor trailer truck seems pretty reasonable to men


CensorshipIsTheDevil t1_j9v0aus wrote

Come on, at least know what you are talking about. For tractor trailers it will be well more than $20.


TeamMisha t1_j9w9rod wrote

It depends, under toll Scenario A, the one with no exemptions, peak large trucks with E-ZPass rate is $27.60. Under the worst scenario with the most exemptions, the max toll is $82 (with E-ZPass). You can see more on Page 878 of the Environmental Assessment Appendix, Appendix 2E, here:


CensorshipIsTheDevil t1_j9wjv66 wrote

They want it for the money, they’re going for the big one 100%. Don’t be stupid


TeamMisha t1_j9wkm47 wrote

I think you misunderstand. The scenarios all result in the legislated revenue of $1 billion. The MTA does not gain or lose anything based on which scenario they choose, they are all designed around recovering $1b. The end goal is not to maximize revenue, they forecasted and created these toll schemes using three goals: Reduce vehicle miles travelled by 5%, reduce inbound volume to the CBD by 10%, and meet the required revenue stipulated by the legislation. The scenarios will all vary how much the vehicle goals are met, but the end result is based around the required revenue. The biggest toll scenario is not necessarily the best option, that's why they came up with many scenarios.


CensorshipIsTheDevil t1_j9wpue5 wrote

Ok, you obviously don’t know New York politics. Their one and only goal is to extract as much revenue from their constituents as possible. End of story


TeamMisha t1_j9wuaal wrote

I don't think it's the end of the story when that doesn't seem to be the MTA's goal with the study. If that were the case they would have studied more aggressive scenarios. Who is "they" in your proposition exactly?


CensorshipIsTheDevil t1_j9wwyqa wrote

The government. From the MTA to the city council to our senators. It’s across the board, they want more of our money to buy themselves power


huebomont t1_j9um9et wrote

If it means less congestion getting in the way of delivery trucks it will probably make them cheaper.


mojogogo123 t1_j9v2eji wrote

No, delivery charges will be added to each delivery for places like restaurants. Do you really think companies will just eat that cost when they can spin it into a way to generate additional revenue? They will pass it on to their customers (restaurants in this case) and then that will get passed on to everyone that’s eating out. Then people will complain about it


huebomont t1_j9v61rc wrote

Maybe they'll be assholes about it, but that's different than congestion pricing actually costing them more. It will save them money. Whether they pass that along at all has nothing to do with congestion pricing.


mojogogo123 t1_j9v7ydu wrote

It’s a way to expand margins. They will save money with fewer cars on the street, but they will absolutely pass the congestion charges on to customers. My family is in the restaurant business. They’ve already been given notice it will happen from some of their vendors.


ManhattanRailfan t1_j9utzeu wrote

If you think this increases food costs, wait until you hear how much more expensive cars make literally everything from housing to bread.


TeamMisha t1_j9wa8ik wrote

I wouldn't be so sure, under Toll Scenario A, the cost for a tractor trailer paying with E-ZPass would be just $27.60 during peak hours., and about $20 for single unit (box) trucks. That isn't exactly a disaster. I imagine small vendors will pass on that cost to customers, but larger ones potentially not, since companies like Amazon want people ordering more and more and thrive on their free delivery charge for larger orders. It will really depend on the final scenario chosen, Scenario F, for example, the peak large truck cost with E-ZPass would be $82, that's obviously a bit more. More info on Page 878 here:


Entry-Level-Cowboy t1_j9umhuy wrote

I’m gonna share your downvotes and agree. Most of the congestion is taxis/ubers but they are exempt from the fees proposed. Majority of parking is for commercial vehicles making deliveries and repairs in the area. Increasing operating costs will trickle down to consumers.

I really believe that fee should be commuter cars only. They can’t legally park unless it’s a private garage. Forcing them to take public transportation… which is where these fees are going.


jm14ed t1_j9uoqnp wrote

Ubers and taxi rides are tolled in every scenario, so not sure what you are talking about. They have also been tolled for every pick up and drop off below 96th street for several years.


drpvn t1_j9uqtnt wrote

He means that for-hire vehicles will not be hit with a congestion fee for every fare they take into or out of the congestion zone. That is total bullshit and it’s the main reason why this will have little impact on congestion.


Entry-Level-Cowboy t1_j9uowx9 wrote

They’re tolled like any other vehicle right now. Are you talking about tlc fees?


jm14ed t1_j9uqws2 wrote

>> Are you talking about tlc fees?



Entry-Level-Cowboy t1_j9usc5w wrote

Thank you for sharing, I never heard of this. But it’s not exactly a toll. More like a fee..on tlc vehicles.

Also how do you quote something to put in your replies?


jm14ed t1_j9utevv wrote

It is by definition a toll, since it’s a fee to use particular road(s).

The quote something you put ‘>>’ before the text.


zettajon t1_ja3kd8s wrote

You put only one > not two. Two is for nesting quotes. See:

>>An original comment.

>A reply to the original comment

My reply to the reply.

What I typed


drpvn t1_j9usv78 wrote

It’s not remotely comparable. It’s a $2.75 surcharge.