5 ms·

City planning produces traffic. Blaming drivers is a lazy evasion of responsibility. Large sections of Robert Caro's Power Broker pretty much explains exactly w

by boh 3y ago

City planning produces traffic. Blaming drivers is a lazy evasion of responsibility. Large sections of Robert Caro's Power Broker pretty much explains exactly why there's traffic in the city and how it was baked in by the mid 20th century. If anyone is driving in or driving through Manhattan it's because they have to, not because they prefer it over pretty much any other alternative. It's a cash grab, pure and simple with absolutely no reasonable expectation for traffic reduction following this initiative. The residents "dealing with the costs" also need things delivered or a ride to the places mass transit doesn't support and you better believe that the extra $15 dollars will be something that will find its way in the already inflated costs of living in NYC.

diebeforei485 3y ago
If someone really needs to drive into Manhattan most days perhaps they should move to a place that's close to a PATH, LIRR, Metro-North, subway, ferry, or other transit system. > The residents "dealing with the costs" also need things delivered This generally works in favor of people within the congestion zone, because time is money and delivery drivers can do far more deliveries per hour. > or a ride to the places mass transit doesn't support Residents of Manhattan below 59th can easily take one of the above-mentioned transit options to get to Jersey City, Queens, Brooklyn, or Harlem, and get in an Uber or Zipcar from there. But if someone needs to do this most days, perhaps they shouldn't be living in Manhattan.
- ectospheno 3y ago
  I love the “just move bro” responses to things like this.
  - cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
    Almost as good as the “let’s just do nothing” responses.
    - ectospheno 3y ago
      Guess which one is actually possible for the average person.
      - batch12 3y ago
        Both really. One is just easier than the other.
  - thedrbrian 3y ago
    just liek stop being poor or sOmEThing....
- NovemberWhiskey 3y ago
  >If someone really needs to drive into Manhattan most days perhaps they should move to a place that's close to a PATH, LIRR, Metro-North, subway, ferry, or other transit system. So "not in Queens", then? Jesus Christ.
  - busterarm 3y ago
    Shame to see you so downvoted. The spoiled rich fucks on this board have absolutely no idea just how inaccessible or poorly accessible most of the outer boroughs are and think that a 2-3hr commute (oh those perfectly-running subway lines!) is a perfectly reasonable alternative to paying $5000/mo for a studio. They're also tripping over themselves to kick every rent stabilized (and statistically-insignificant rent controlled) renter to the invisible corners of the city where their less career-blessed asses belong.
    - hparadiz 3y ago
      Honestly NYC is a shit show and I don't know why people live there. SI to Manhattan takes like 2 hours at best. You don't even really get any benefit from living in NYC in the outer boroughs.
    - persolb 3y ago
      I think the main response would be ‘then dont live there’. I live in a city cheaper than NYC, but I moved to a cheaper area further out due to cost. Land is unfortunately limited. Someone else is willing to pay more for the space than I am. I understand moving sucks and prices in areas change, but this is still an area where a functioning market is better on whole.
      - busterarm 3y ago
        > ‘then dont live there’ I hear you but for most people that translates to "don't be born there". Most of the same people who would tell you if you can't afford it move out are the same people who think NYC should be a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants because they were born in unfortunate circumstances and desire a better life. I've moved in and out of NYC several times and each of those moves ended up costing between 5k and 10k in expenses. Broke people can't afford that shit.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- lancesells 3y ago
  I live in Brooklyn and have a rarely used car. I'm 100% onboard with taking the train, walking, or biking. There should be so many more open streets as well. The only issue I have with any of this is when I want to LEAVE the city. I pay tolls on the way out and on the way in currently that get me close to $30. Now it's closer to $45 if I enter the zone.
  - SauciestGNU 3y ago
    Ok but New Jersey charges people to leave, and leaving Jersey is a hot commodity! I have to admit that's an expensive trip to leave and return to the city now. Might be nice if there were a discount for verified residents of Manhattan, but given existing issues with placard abuse throughout the NYPD I bet any exceptions would get abused to hell and back.
nicoburns 3y ago
Of course a $15 charge is city planning. I'm not familiar with NYC, but a similar charge in London has worked wonders.
- moate 3y ago
  >>I'm not familiar with NYC… All I needed to read
- perryizgr8 3y ago
  > Of course a $15 charge is city planning. In the same way returning a 429 is handling high usage of your service.
  - hombre_fatal 3y ago
    But the closer analogy is right there: Charging more for API access to relieve congestion for higher value traffic is a completely valid solution. Though analogy is going to obfuscate things here due to externalities that vehicle traffic has.
paulgb 3y ago
A congestion tax isn’t “blaming drivers”, it’s just creating an incentive for them not to drive. Most of the cost of delivery is labor. If a congestion tax successfully decreases congestion, overall delivery costs may actually go down. A lot of last-mile deliveries are done by bike (not subject to the charge) anyway because they’re more efficient.
- bko 3y ago
  Making something more expensive will actually lower costs? That only works sometimes if you make something prohibitively expensive that new methods have to be developed. For instance, if you banned horses in cities pre car, that may spur innovation of cars. Don't see how that applies here. NYC is very mismanaged in terms of cars and parking. Double parking is the norm and the way the city deals with it is to use tickets as a form of rent. Every single delivery truck gets multiple tickets a day and I think they have some deal worked out that they prepay some amount of their tickets. So instead of solving the problem regarding delivery vehicles the city just lets them break the law and fines them. None of this stuff is meant to be preventative . It's all about money.
  - orbisvicis 3y ago
    I've seen quadruple parking in the Bronx, near some green areas. I think it was during a local soccer game.
  - asoneth 3y ago
    > Making something more expensive will actually lower costs? Yes, this isn't uncommon. Besides the example you gave of developing new methods, if costs are high due to supply shortages causing production delays, then increasing the price of those supplies can lower overall costs if it results in higher and more predictable supply. In the case of the supply shortage of NYC roadway space I do not know if $15 is high enough to lower travel times, but if it is then I can absolutely see it lowering delivery costs. As a thought experiment, if someone built private tunnels throughout lower Manhattan that allowed drivers to bypass most traffic and charged $15 per day for access, what fraction of delivery drivers would choose to pay that versus sit in traffic and make fewer deliveries?

by boh 3y ago

diebeforei485 3y ago

If someone really needs to drive into Manhattan most days perhaps they should move to a place that's close to a PATH, LIRR, Metro-North, subway, ferry, or other transit system. > The residents "dealing with the costs" also need things delivered This generally works in favor of people within the congestion zone, because time is money and delivery drivers can do far more deliveries per hour. > or a ride to the places mass transit doesn't support Residents of Manhattan below 59th can easily take one of the above-mentioned transit options to get to Jersey City, Queens, Brooklyn, or Harlem, and get in an Uber or Zipcar from there. But if someone needs to do this most days, perhaps they shouldn't be living in Manhattan.

ectospheno 3y ago
I love the “just move bro” responses to things like this.
- cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
  Almost as good as the “let’s just do nothing” responses.
  - ectospheno 3y ago
    Guess which one is actually possible for the average person.
    - batch12 3y ago
      Both really. One is just easier than the other.
- thedrbrian 3y ago
  just liek stop being poor or sOmEThing....
NovemberWhiskey 3y ago
>If someone really needs to drive into Manhattan most days perhaps they should move to a place that's close to a PATH, LIRR, Metro-North, subway, ferry, or other transit system. So "not in Queens", then? Jesus Christ.
- busterarm 3y ago
  Shame to see you so downvoted. The spoiled rich fucks on this board have absolutely no idea just how inaccessible or poorly accessible most of the outer boroughs are and think that a 2-3hr commute (oh those perfectly-running subway lines!) is a perfectly reasonable alternative to paying $5000/mo for a studio. They're also tripping over themselves to kick every rent stabilized (and statistically-insignificant rent controlled) renter to the invisible corners of the city where their less career-blessed asses belong.
  - hparadiz 3y ago
    Honestly NYC is a shit show and I don't know why people live there. SI to Manhattan takes like 2 hours at best. You don't even really get any benefit from living in NYC in the outer boroughs.
  - persolb 3y ago
    I think the main response would be ‘then dont live there’. I live in a city cheaper than NYC, but I moved to a cheaper area further out due to cost. Land is unfortunately limited. Someone else is willing to pay more for the space than I am. I understand moving sucks and prices in areas change, but this is still an area where a functioning market is better on whole.
    - busterarm 3y ago
      > ‘then dont live there’ I hear you but for most people that translates to "don't be born there". Most of the same people who would tell you if you can't afford it move out are the same people who think NYC should be a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants because they were born in unfortunate circumstances and desire a better life. I've moved in and out of NYC several times and each of those moves ended up costing between 5k and 10k in expenses. Broke people can't afford that shit.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
lancesells 3y ago
I live in Brooklyn and have a rarely used car. I'm 100% onboard with taking the train, walking, or biking. There should be so many more open streets as well. The only issue I have with any of this is when I want to LEAVE the city. I pay tolls on the way out and on the way in currently that get me close to $30. Now it's closer to $45 if I enter the zone.
- SauciestGNU 3y ago
  Ok but New Jersey charges people to leave, and leaving Jersey is a hot commodity! I have to admit that's an expensive trip to leave and return to the city now. Might be nice if there were a discount for verified residents of Manhattan, but given existing issues with placard abuse throughout the NYPD I bet any exceptions would get abused to hell and back.

nicoburns 3y ago

Of course a $15 charge is city planning. I'm not familiar with NYC, but a similar charge in London has worked wonders.

moate 3y ago
>>I'm not familiar with NYC… All I needed to read
perryizgr8 3y ago
> Of course a $15 charge is city planning. In the same way returning a 429 is handling high usage of your service.
- hombre_fatal 3y ago
  But the closer analogy is right there: Charging more for API access to relieve congestion for higher value traffic is a completely valid solution. Though analogy is going to obfuscate things here due to externalities that vehicle traffic has.

paulgb 3y ago

A congestion tax isn’t “blaming drivers”, it’s just creating an incentive for them not to drive. Most of the cost of delivery is labor. If a congestion tax successfully decreases congestion, overall delivery costs may actually go down. A lot of last-mile deliveries are done by bike (not subject to the charge) anyway because they’re more efficient.

bko 3y ago
Making something more expensive will actually lower costs? That only works sometimes if you make something prohibitively expensive that new methods have to be developed. For instance, if you banned horses in cities pre car, that may spur innovation of cars. Don't see how that applies here. NYC is very mismanaged in terms of cars and parking. Double parking is the norm and the way the city deals with it is to use tickets as a form of rent. Every single delivery truck gets multiple tickets a day and I think they have some deal worked out that they prepay some amount of their tickets. So instead of solving the problem regarding delivery vehicles the city just lets them break the law and fines them. None of this stuff is meant to be preventative . It's all about money.
- orbisvicis 3y ago
  I've seen quadruple parking in the Bronx, near some green areas. I think it was during a local soccer game.
- asoneth 3y ago
  > Making something more expensive will actually lower costs? Yes, this isn't uncommon. Besides the example you gave of developing new methods, if costs are high due to supply shortages causing production delays, then increasing the price of those supplies can lower overall costs if it results in higher and more predictable supply. In the case of the supply shortage of NYC roadway space I do not know if $15 is high enough to lower travel times, but if it is then I can absolutely see it lowering delivery costs. As a thought experiment, if someone built private tunnels throughout lower Manhattan that allowed drivers to bypass most traffic and charged $15 per day for access, what fraction of delivery drivers would choose to pay that versus sit in traffic and make fewer deliveries?