4 ms·

> "It's an absolutely trivial area when compared to what is proposed in Manhattan" This is incorrect. The London congestion charge zone covers 21 sq km. The pr

> "It's an absolutely trivial area when compared to what is proposed in Manhattan" This is incorrect. The London congestion charge zone covers 21 sq km. The proposed Manhatten congestion zone includes only the area below 60th street, which is approximately 20 sq km. They are almost exactly the same size. The £12.50 ULEZ (ultra-low emission zone) charge works using similar technology and covers all of Greater London (excluding the M25), an area about 30x larger than the entire island of Manhattan. https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/ulez-where-and-when https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/ule...

timr 2y ago
Edit: you completely changed your comment after I replied, so I'll respond to your new one here: > This is incorrect. The London congestion charge zone covers 21 sq km. The proposed Manhatten congestion zone includes only the area below 60th street, which is approximately 20 sq km. They are almost exactly the same size. That's a completely silly comparison. Manhattan is 23 square miles. London is 610 square miles. In other words, the proposed Manhattan congestion area is 33% of Manhattan's total land area, if we accept your assertion of 20 square km (7.72 square miles). The city of London congestion area is only 1.4% of London's land area. But of course, you can see that on the maps I shared. It's plainly visible. It's difficult to define the equivalent proportion for London, because it would be so absurd -- something like everything within A406 and A205. --- Old commment: OK? It's not the technology I have a dispute with, it's the implementation. The way they were planning to do it here involved numerous exceptions necessitated by the sheer scope of the thing (e.g. the FDR and the west side highway) and arcane rules (e.g. one deck/ramp of the queensboro would have it, but not the other) that were necessary to wedge this kind of a system into Manhattan's street system. Because of these, there was almost certainly going to be a mess at the edges of the zone. But also, it should be fairly obvious that a tax on "ULEZ" probably already excludes most vehicles on the road, thus significantly reducing implementation challenges. It's less of an active fare-gathering scheme, and more of an incentive to get people out of older vehicles. We have a similar system in place at time of registration.
- Reason077 2y ago
  Sorry, I realised I'd replied twice to the same comment, so I merged my replies together. Your original assertion was that London's congestion charge area is trivial (small) compared to NYC's. My main point was that it's not: they're actually about the same size. London's is also not trivial to implement: London's street network is pretty complex, and I'd be very surprised if there aren't many more entry/exit points to the London congestion zone compared to Manhattan's, which has the significant benefit of being on an island! I'm not sure how "proportion of size compared to the rest of the city" is relevant. In both cases they're the most central, busiest parts of their respective cities, with the most commuters and the worst congestion. You're right that London's central zone is geographically tiny compared to the Greater London area. The NYC congestion zone is also tiny compared to the New York metropolitan area, which is enormous.
  - timr 2y ago
    They may be the same absolute size, but they're not even remotely same proportion.

timr 2y ago

Edit: you completely changed your comment after I replied, so I'll respond to your new one here: > This is incorrect. The London congestion charge zone covers 21 sq km. The proposed Manhatten congestion zone includes only the area below 60th street, which is approximately 20 sq km. They are almost exactly the same size. That's a completely silly comparison. Manhattan is 23 square miles. London is 610 square miles. In other words, the proposed Manhattan congestion area is 33% of Manhattan's total land area, if we accept your assertion of 20 square km (7.72 square miles). The city of London congestion area is only 1.4% of London's land area. But of course, you can see that on the maps I shared. It's plainly visible. It's difficult to define the equivalent proportion for London, because it would be so absurd -- something like everything within A406 and A205. --- Old commment: OK? It's not the technology I have a dispute with, it's the implementation. The way they were planning to do it here involved numerous exceptions necessitated by the sheer scope of the thing (e.g. the FDR and the west side highway) and arcane rules (e.g. one deck/ramp of the queensboro would have it, but not the other) that were necessary to wedge this kind of a system into Manhattan's street system. Because of these, there was almost certainly going to be a mess at the edges of the zone. But also, it should be fairly obvious that a tax on "ULEZ" probably already excludes most vehicles on the road, thus significantly reducing implementation challenges. It's less of an active fare-gathering scheme, and more of an incentive to get people out of older vehicles. We have a similar system in place at time of registration.

Reason077 2y ago
Sorry, I realised I'd replied twice to the same comment, so I merged my replies together. Your original assertion was that London's congestion charge area is trivial (small) compared to NYC's. My main point was that it's not: they're actually about the same size. London's is also not trivial to implement: London's street network is pretty complex, and I'd be very surprised if there aren't many more entry/exit points to the London congestion zone compared to Manhattan's, which has the significant benefit of being on an island! I'm not sure how "proportion of size compared to the rest of the city" is relevant. In both cases they're the most central, busiest parts of their respective cities, with the most commuters and the worst congestion. You're right that London's central zone is geographically tiny compared to the Greater London area. The NYC congestion zone is also tiny compared to the New York metropolitan area, which is enormous.
- timr 2y ago
  They may be the same absolute size, but they're not even remotely same proportion.