7 ms·
Congestion Pricing: N.Y. Embraced It. Will Other Clogged Cities Follow?
- ars 8y agoVery long article that basically says nothing. "In New York, many details of a congestion pricing plan — including how much drivers will be charged — are still being worked out." So saying "implements" seems rather premature. My personal prediction is that this will lead people to move out of cities. I guess we'll see.
- switzer 8y agoLondon did this a while ago and traveling around the city is much more pleasant. There is a case to be made that a congestion charge makes a city more habitable.
- Yetanfou 8y agoThe way London does it does create some asymmetries which would be good to avoid. You pay when crossing the border between the outside and the congestion charge zone while driving inside the zone is not charged. This means that those who live inside the zone and drive inside the zone don't pay while those who come from the outside do. London real estate being priced as it is, those who live inside the zone could easily afford to pay for the privilege of driving private vehicles in that area - but they don't. Those who can not afford to live inside the zone but need to drive there for their work do end up paying. It would make more sense to tax the actual use of the roads inside the area instead of the mere fact that a vehicle crossed some imaginary border between the untaxed and taxed zones.
- alanpetrel 8y agoLondon introduced a charge of £10 a day for cars if you drive into the congestion zone. If you live inside it you get a 90% discount though. Considering the price of properties in congested areas, the fee is negligible.
- jdavis703 8y agoIt certainly will cause people to leave. There’s a really high demand for walkability (that’s one reason cities like SF, NYC and Seattle are so pricey). As such, I have a feeling many more people will move in — especially as the city becomes less hostile for those on foot, on bike or transit.
- dcosson 8y agoYou don’t spend much time with people that live in cities do you? I’d be less likely to move away if my city implemented congestion pricing, got rid of most street parking, and used that space and money for things like protected bike lanes, improving walkability and public transit. Significant improvement in day to day life, and relatively minor inconvenience occasionally when I do need to drive (picking up something heavy, out of city weekend activity, etc).
- 0815test 8y agoThey have committed to doing it though, and this is a huge political change. Congestion charging used to be the kind of thing that social scientists would point out as the obviously right thing to do and that never got any traction. Then we saw a few very prominent experiments with it (including the London City area) which were quite successful, and now it's coming to Manhattan, NYC. Amazing.
- mikeash 8y agoI’ve known a few people who lived in New York. I don’t think any of them ever owned a car there. It’s outrageously expensive and impractical in Manhattan. I don’t see it affecting the residents negatively.
- jowiar 8y agoI'm not sure who drives into Manhattan-below-60th, but AFAIK it's very Uber/Lyft/Taxi-heavy, so this will probably get rolled into fares. It will be interesting to see how that ends up being priced. If it prices more trips onto transit while funding transit improvements, it will be a nice quality of life improvement.
- vidro3 8y agopeople with free (placards) or reimbursed parking
- moorhosj 8y agoWhy would people move out of cities? Wouldn’t the majority of people entering a city (and being taxed) be coming from outside the city?
- megablast 8y agoI hope cars move out of cities, the people can stay. And since cities are much more pleasant without cars, without constant risk, without the huge number of deaths and pollution they cause, more people may move in.
- almost_usual 8y agoWow, this could have a big impact on ride sharing companies.
- omarchowdhury 8y ago$2.75 + $0.75 per passenger for rideshares.
- EGreg 8y agoAs usual, this is going to be a tax on the working class. Those who are well off will simply pay it as 0.1% of their wealth and not even feel it. See the rioters in France.
- ptruesdell 8y agoI wonder if the pricing structure will be the same for taxis and ride sharing cars. I'd hope so, but something tells me the taxi lobbyists probably worked out a better deal.
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoThe current deal from Feb 2 is $2.50 for taxis, $2.75 + $0.75 per passenger for rideshares. I'd expect it to remain given the lack of popular revolt. The real question is how will bridge and tunnel tolls be credited given the multiple independent tolltakers that won't welcome any encroachment on their fiefdoms that threatens revenue.
- jessriedel 8y agoThe congestion price depends on the number of passengers? Ugh. That makes no sense.
- vidro3 8y agono, that is a different fee unrelated to the congestion charge which wont begin until 2021. previous proposals have had taxis and delivery vehicles only paying once per day
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoThis is a preliminary congestion charge that was instituted now because NYC already had the hooks to extract these fees. https://abc7ny.com/traffic/nyc-congestion-pricing-brings-higher-fares-for-taxis-ubers-/5117860/ https://abc7ny.com/traffic/nyc-congestion-pricing-brings-hig...
- jessriedel 8y agoAll the news sources I can find call it a congestion tax. https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/02/01/for-hire-congestion-pricing/ https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/02/01/for-hire-congestion-...
- ummonk 8y agoI hope other cities don’t actually follow suit. I don’t know about Seattle but SF’s public transport is rather poor. If it were as good as that in Manhattan, congestion pricing would be perfectly fine, but they shouldn’t be heavily taxing vehicles when the only reasonable mode of transport is vehicles.
- jessriedel 8y agoCongestion pricing isn't (supposed to be) punishment for driving a car when transit is available, it's designed to internalize the actual costs that driving a car imposes on others (i.e., takes up room on the road, among other things). So what you're suggesting is that cars should be subsidized in cities where transit is bad. But this doesn't make sense. If you are worried about a negative shock to the poor-ish, you should just give them cash.
- mikepurvis 8y agoIf there's less congestion, doesn't that a) help with clearing the streets so that buses run faster, b) broaden ridership so it's not just "those people" on transit, and c) help get a larger body of the population lobbying for no-brainer improvements like dedicated lanes, shorter headways, etc?
- ummonk 8y agoA congestion tax doesn't meaningfully improve congestion if there aren't good alternative modes of transport available (and buses are not going to run very fast as long as pedestrians are able to cross the street). It would just result in people paying more in taxes, unless they're price sensitive (read: poor and forced to take the hit to travel time).
- shereadsthenews 8y agoSFMTA service is terrible because you’re on a bus stuck behind ubers in the bus lane and an intersection blocked by people trying to get on the Bay Bridge because they live in Manteca. Driving in SF is characterized by total lawlessness. The number one most effective thing you can do for transportation in SF would be to drag box-blockers from their vehicles and beat them to death on the spot. The next best thing is to toll the roads.
- cletus 8y agoWell, nothing being implemented. The details haven't been worked out. The only thing that's changed is the Governor has signed on (previous attempts were derailed as requiring state government approval). That's good but we're not there yet. This is what I want to see: - Similar to London, charge people for owning a car in areas served by public transport. This would include anywhere in Manhattan below 125th street (maybe higher). - Stop giving free long term parking on the street. Have a parking limit. If necessary give resident parking permits. These should be expensive. Comparative to parking in a garage. You get the idea? I'm not a big fan of what NYC has done to ride-sharing services. Ride-sharing (IMHO) should be encouraged. These cars are in constant use, not collecting dust in free street parking. What used to be a $9-10 Uber ride is now $19-20. What I can walk in 10 minutes now costs $11. That's... ridiculous. My guess is congestion pricing will further drive up ride-sharing and taxi services for no good reason. It already costs $70 to go to the airport (JFK). Let's target private vehicle owners in Manhattan. Those people basically have no excuse for this level of subsidy.
- maxtaco 8y agoGreat point. The fact that street parking is roughly free in NYC both encourages drivers to drive and causes unnecessary bottlenecks on congested major thoroughfares. Take, for instance, 86th Street. One lane taken up by parked cars, plus just one double-parked truck means most crosstown traffic along that latitude and in that direction (including packed busses) must single-flight. That the city chooses to keep commuters stuck in traffic to accommodate disused cars is a pessimal allocation of precious street area.
- T-hawk 8y ago> What used to be a $9-10 Uber ride is now $19-20. What I can walk in 10 minutes now costs $11. That's... ridiculous. That's... the market clearing price. It's pricing a scarce resource (road space) to demand. If you're not willing to pay that $19 or $11 but someone else is, they should get that ride while you walk. The city should be looking to price transportation options to shift usage patterns toward matching available supply. Road space for cars is the scarcest, followed by space on subways and buses, then pedestrian space as the most plentiful.
- 8y ago
- YeahSureWhyNot 8y agoI really hope this decreases number of ridesharing vehicles on the road. ridesharing is a cheaper and more convenient alternative to taxis but they didn't improve traffic. they made it worse because its almost always a car with TLC plates that has doubleparked, full stop in the lane to pickup/dropoff or engaging in some other kind of outrageous behavior in traffic. I don't blame them either, those drivers put up with so much shit that after a while they become immune to honking or people calling them assholes. they just do anything to make more money because uber pays for most of their tickets
- ptd 8y agoUber pays for its drivers’ tickets? Including things like speeding? Or just parking tickets? I wonder how much that costs them...
- YeahSureWhyNot 8y agoparking and other tlc related violations, not red light or speeding tickets. I actually never see uber drivers speeding, on the contrary, you will see them going 50mph in middle lane while everyone is passing them going 75 on 50 because thats what new york drivers do when they see room on the highway
- ipnon 8y agoI'm surprised people are afraid this will decrease quality of life. In New York, cars are the greatest public nuisance. They create exhaust, they shore up traffic, you have to watch out for them when you cross the street. Semis drive through the middle of the city, engine braking and honking. Manhattan can be unbearable at vehicle choke points like Canal Street. Any effort to lessen the amount of cars is going to dramatically improve the quality of life in the city.
- ars 8y agoBecause those cars also bring money into the city. With less cars in the city there will be fewer people going there, which means less economic activity. Can New York thrive with less money? I guess we'll see.
- hannasanarion 8y agoNo they don't. Less than 45% of New Yorkers own a car, and less than 20% commute by car. They are a small minority in the city economy, and there is no reason the rest of us need to subsidize their convenience with free parking and exclusive access to 90% of street width.
- Spooky23 8y agoGive me a break. The fee is going to drive people away from Manhattan. More big brother surveillance, absurd costs and more boondoggle money to the unions. I wonder what the reduced traffic flow will do to MTA Bridges and Tunnels? It’s going to cost like $80 to take the GWB to lower Manhattan and back. More than a few folks will choose to stay in NJ.
- hannasanarion 8y agoWhy do you need to drive from the GWB to lower Manhattan? The subways and busses are $3.50 each, it's already cheaper than the tolls, and often faster. I already choose to stay in NJ as often as possible because of how auto traffic in the Lincoln tunnel clogs up space for busses and it sucks to stand on a bus in a tunnel for 50 minutes while all the single-occupant cars squeeze by, and because walking and cycling in midtown is slow and dangerous because the cars get 5 lanes of 5th, 6th, and 8th avenues and we have to squish on 5 feet of sidewalk in places. Man up and stop hiding in your enormous solitary metal box, we don't have cooties.
- jakelarkin 8y agoThe financial & car industries have been immensely successful at making cars accessible to all consumers. Anyone with an income, a bit of credit history and a pulse can roll out of dealership with a car. Roads on the other hand are publicly funded and physical constrained. It's inevitable that car owning will have to become much more expensive via taxes in the decades ahead. The mayors listed are not however making their cities particularly more accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists. They generally sandbag those improvements on the slightest complaints about loss of parking or access. DiBlasio drives to a gym in Brooklyn everyday and has the NYPD run a war on ebikes/bikes, Durkan just canceled a long-planned bike lane on an important arterial, Portland's doing a massive freeway expansion. Most of these cities are failing on Vision Zero efforts. The reason congestion pricing is catching on is that the wealthy & politically connected older generations finally settled on it as the way to reclaim their privilege to drive straight into the downtown from their suburbs. Congestion pricing is now just another way to maintain a vehicular status quo.
- rayiner 8y agoIs optimizing for bikes worth the disruption to traffic? It seems like a handful of bicyclists hold up a lot of people in cars. (Also, the anti-suburb sentiment is quite ... problematic. Hint: There is a reason most of the good ethnic food in New York is in actually in Westchester and Long Island.)
- mannykannot 8y agoThe Bronx is not Westchester.
- rrdharan 8y agoAnd Queens is not Long Island.
- joemaller1 8y agowell, technically...
- the_fonz 8y agoLet's see: America generally has terrible public transportation and purposely laid-out most modern cities to require private car use, yet the "solution" is to ban cars. In reality, the unintended consequences are the creation of an economic apartheid because the rich won't be as affected as a proportion of income and further, it will disproportionately tax on already struggling poor people. Layout cities and do public transportation better, policy-makers shouldn't just tax what's vital to live and work just because they think it will go away... it's BandAid, panacea mentality.
- megaremote 8y agoThis is for New York, which has awesome public transport. And how do you get better public transport in cities? By getting cars out of them. And we should actually start getting drivers to pay for what they use, instead of subsidising them billions.
- ars 8y agoI think you should do the opposite: Make public transport free. Transportation is a basic service cities should provide for free, that includes both roads and public transport.
- sethhochberg 8y ago"Free" isn't free - road use in private cars vs shared transportation in buses or rail have dramatically different costs and returns per person in terms of pollution, percentages of public space used for vehicle storage, peak throughput for a given corridor over time, fuel cost, etc. Congestion pricing is about adjusting the incentives between road use and transit use to encourage more efficiency with the lowest overall cost to society.
- hannasanarion 8y ago>purposely laid-out most modern cities to require private car use This is only true of LA, Phoenix, and Tucson, cities established or seeing their principal growth after the invention of air conditioning. Pretty much every other American city got its street plan decades or centuries before automobiles. New York's streets were drawn in 1810. San Francisco got its streets in 1840. The assertion that America is "designed for cars" is totally bunk. Cars are invaders in cities designed for walking and horse riding.
- closeparen 8y agoBus trips in SF are easily 3X longer than car trips on the same routes. Traffic affects cars just as much - it can’t be the reason buses are so slow. Talking about the time people are wasting sitting in traffic is silly - now they will be wasting even more time standing on buses. How about some parking protected bike lanes and encouragement for e-bikes, which can actually deliver reasonable door to door times?
- itamarst 8y agoDedicated bus lanes fix that.
- claytoneast 8y agoSlow traffic is created non-linearly, i.e. if a road has a capacity of 100, it will be totally fine 0-90, but traffic will rise sharply after that point. If you could reduce the amount of cars by 10%, you could massively reduce the traffic that everyone is experiencing. So in that example, 90% of commuters will still be driving and paying tolls, but with far less traffic, and the other 10% may be on public transit/bike/walk/wfh and also experiencing far less traffic.
- btrettel 8y ago> How about some parking protected bike lanes and encouragement for e-bikes, which can actually deliver reasonable door to door times? I'm a daily transportation cyclist and I usually find parking protected bike lanes to be worse than no bike lane at all. In my experience, they greatly increase the risks at intersections due to turning drivers either not checking the bike lane for traffic or not being able to check it due to cars blocking the view.
- joecool1029 8y agoNot to be a pedant, but can the headline be changed to what it actually is? I clicked it hoping to see how they were carrying it out. Implements as a verb means they actually carried it out: threw in tollbooths, bill-by-plate, or EZ-Pass. Not done yet. "Congestion Pricing: N.Y. Embraced It. Will Other Clogged Cities Follow?" < real headline
- goerz 8y agoHow is this supposed to work? How would they charge people driving into certain parts of the city? Something like EZ-Pass at every traffic light?
- deagle50 8y agoHigher fuel taxes would aid congestion without additional toll infrastructure and reduce the money sent to dictatorships at the same time. That revenue could be used to fix/expand public transport. Right now urban residents subsidize suburban commuters. Until the true cost of driving is reflected at the pump we'll keep going in circles.
- merricksb 8y agoExtensive discussion last week (81 points, 110 comments): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19487815 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19487815
- magoon 8y agoCould this just replace poorer drivers on the streets with richer drivers? It could also increase costs for all goods and services, as the cost to get them into the shops and restaurants will increase. Edit: Drivers in NYC can be from any surrounding area, as can rich drivers coming in. e.g., Some people in NJ who aren’t regular commuters don’t have useful train/bus access.