Congestion Pricing Countdown

Monday, March 24, 2008

Josh Robin, a reporter for NY1, kicks off our daily series leading up to the April 7th congestion pricing deadline with a run down of where the legislation stands right now.

A Brian Lehrer poll: Do You Favor Congestion Pricing?
Yes (why?)
No (why not?
Yes if… (if what?)
Leave your response in the comments!


Josh Robin

Comments [143]

Glenn Reed from Brooklyn

Here is yet another opinion on the congestion pricing plan

What will happen to the PVB ticket agents? Do they get laid off, do they get reassigned or is there going to be an ostensive need for more patrol. Or will the congesting pricing plan and NYC going to have an additional revenue-generating device? I am opposed to the plan because I do not want the PVB to be collecting even more illegal revenue. To me it seems the city will be imposing a double burden.

I believe most New Yorker will agree that the PVB is predicated primarily on collecting revenue not enforcing parking regulations.

By far most of the tickets I have received are the result of an unintentional violations and plain illegal tickets. I would hate to see that expanded.

There is a congestion problem all over the city and in many suburbs as well, not just lower Manhattan

I think a gas tax is a better solution.


Apr. 03 2008 11:34 AM
Marguerite Yaghjian from Chelsea

No, congestion pricing will not solve the problem. Mayor Bloomberg and Dan Doctorov created the major part of the problem by promoting unrestricted development. The city is being destroyed by over-building. There must be an immediate building moratorium, height and density restriction, and then rigorous traffic control.

Mar. 26 2008 10:51 AM
adamtrust from nyc

smart, reduce traffic in midtown for the price of a pack of cigarettes, this is not major surgery/

Mar. 26 2008 10:28 AM
MICHELE SMITH from Chelsea, Manhattan

1) If residents living in Manhattan are exempt.
We have been subjected to a 3 times increase in parking in the past 5 years due to the building boom. There have been no requirements to maintain the same number of parking garages/lots that have been replaced with residential buildings. And we need to allow resident parking on the streets. Many spaces become available if angled parking were allowed on one side of the street.
2) If all non-Manhattan residents are subject to the same increase in cost (including NJ)
3) If all money collected was earmarked for public transportation.

Why not allow commercial deliveries to occur only at night and construction vehicles not during rush hours.

Mar. 24 2008 11:30 PM
Ellen from Washington Heights

I support congestion pricing. I just got back from London, and its a changed city. No trucks, very few private cars. Its linked to a transit system that works, better now that the cars are off the road. Also theres bike/bus/taxi lanes everywhere. Things move and quietly.

However, given the latest letdown by the bloated corrupt MTA, the agency needs a total overhaul because otherwise, all financial gains going to the agency will be just eaten up, but the bloat, and we won't see any benefit. Riding your bike is your only defense against congestion and the MTA!

Mar. 24 2008 10:21 PM
Florence from Brooklyn


Very few New Yorkers drive to Manhattan. Those who do inconvenience the rest of us: their emissions increase childhood asthma rates and contribute to global warming. Their vehicles block the crosswalks and make the city more dangerous for those of us on foot. Their honking hurts the quality of life in our neighborhoods.

The charge is not huge, but it would help encourage some drivers to take transit, and it would raise desperately needed funds for the MTA.

Mar. 24 2008 08:26 PM
D. from Manhattan

No -- because of the "spillover" congestion on the inadequate public transportation facilities. How many more riderscan be accommodated on buses and subways?

Mar. 24 2008 06:12 PM
Judith Ebert from Brooklyn

No: Use other sources of uncollected revenue such as more equitable taxes on undervalued commercial real estate in Manhattan and elsewhere. JE

Mar. 24 2008 04:06 PM
Judith Ebert from Brooklyn

No: Use other sources of uncollected revenue such as more equitable taxes on undervalued commercial real estate. JE

Mar. 24 2008 04:01 PM
katharina from Brooklyn

YES !!!!
let's work out the details later and get this plan on the road. this is a chance to make Manhattan more biker/pedestrian friendly like some other European cities i.e. Amsterdam, Berlin, Copenhagen. If we don't do anything we'll end up like Bangkok and other Asian metropoles with their traffic and air pollution problems and really reduce the quality of life in New York City.

Mar. 24 2008 03:06 PM

I own a business in Staten Island and live on East 16th street in Manhattan. The only way for me to get to my Store is to drive. It is a two-and -a-half hour commute each way by public transportation. (subway,ferry,SIRT,bus) This is unacceptable. With congestion pricing it will cost me an additional $121.00 a month to get to work. If my home address was 50 blocks north, there would be no increase because I could leave Manhattan via the triboro or GWB. There must be an allowance for residents who live within the zone. At 10:00 AM when I leave via the Holland Tunnel I rarely hit any traffic in my drive crosstown.

Mar. 24 2008 02:52 PM
Rob Levine from NY, NY

Yes. There are too many cars in the city. Living and working in Manhattan would be so much nicer without all of the cars, all the exhaust, and all of the honking.

Mar. 24 2008 02:16 PM
mooshka from NJ

No- raising prices will not affect the #cars coming into the city....not only can I NOT live in the city that i want to live in, but now it will be harder to come in to enjoy it.

betcha that the NJ commuters WILL see an increase in their costs....NY will figure out how to do it.

2- will be accessible by the rich only.
3-The collected dollars will not do anything about the poor decision-msking....

Mar. 24 2008 01:38 PM
john bender from 67th Street, bet. CPW and Columbus Ave.

YES. Time to do something about pollution and congestion.

Mar. 24 2008 01:20 PM
NH from Sunnyside, Queens

YES. Why should drivers get a free pass. Outer borough transit riders have to pay to enter Manhattan.

Mar. 24 2008 12:02 PM
Jackie from Brooklyn

Yes. Get the ball rolling and fix the problems over time. And yes, I live in an outer borough and own a car.

Mar. 24 2008 11:59 AM
Linda from Queens

No way! I live in Sunnyside, one of the Queens neighborhoods closes to Manhattan. You know what that means. We already have such a parking problem when residents try to park, we simply cannot accomodate the cars of suburbanites and residents of Eastern Queens. Additionally, the 7 line running through Queens is so incredibly cramped, it is often impossible to board the first through third trains that pull into any of the local subway stops. This congestion pricing plan is totally unfair to the residents of Western Queens and other boroughs. We will suffer more traffic, more people, and more pollution.

Mar. 24 2008 11:54 AM
Phil from Brooklyn

This plan is just pure bull. Outer boroughs in places near subways will be overrun with cars looking for parking spaces. We already have unbelievable congestion. For example you can't drive through Park Slope or downtown Brooklyn. Neighborhoods like Windsor Terrace, Kensington and Sunset Park are getting hammered with excessive traffic already. Does anyone think it will be better with congestion pricing for lower Manhattan? The only reason I ever go into Manhattan is to take the Holland Tunnel or the Lincoln Tunnel out of this city. Now I'll have to pay just to do that. You can believe the bull about a better environment. They'll just transfer the pollution to those of us living in outer boroughs.As soon as I can do it, I'm moving out of this city even though I've lived her over 60 years.

Mar. 24 2008 11:50 AM
Peter from Rockland County

NO (Mixed-- in theory yes in practice no)
2 points:

1. the port authority and MTA seem very opaque and flawed fiefdoms where any gains from congestion pricing will be swallowed up with out real accountability. That the PANYNJ just raised tolls to $8 seems an outrageous attempt to game the congestion pricing proposal. Given that they seen to be above public review or real accountability what's to stop the PANYNJ, the MTA, the Triboro Authority and other pockets of dark book keeping and low accountability from siphoning away any gains for mass transit.

2. I'm an freelance filmmaker - moved from brooklyn to rockland county NY to be able to afford a house and family. There is no easy mass transit from rockland that is compatible with an erratic freelance schedule. Train travel requires 3-4 transfers and a variety of waits for transfer easily 1 hour or more time than driving. When I work I drive to lower Manhattan.

I would love to ride via improved mass transit, I just don't think this will provide it. I don't trust the parties involved to deliver.

Perhaps improved parking/ferry service in NY could sway me. I can't back this without a clear (and transparent) vision for where the money will actually go.

Mar. 24 2008 11:49 AM
ejs from greenwich village

against--nothing this mayor does is followed-up on, not cell phone use, engine idling, etc. He'll just leave us a mess. It's not fair and it really needs to be thought out carefully, which has not been done. We are a series of islands, not like London. The MTA is another entity you can't trust (what happened to the million$ contract to improve communication in the subways???)

Mar. 24 2008 11:46 AM
Gene from Westchester

I’m for congestion pricing with one suggestion. I think we in Westchester and others outside The City would feel less burdened by Congestion Pricing if we were given, what I call a "Grandmother’s Clause”, as dispensation. The Grandmother’s Clause might be thus: The City could allow for 2 round trips into The City. Giving this compensation to everyone would be a drop in the bucket in collections from the habitual visitors while giving us in the outer regions a less burdensome way to bring the kids to into The City when Metro North doesn’t quite fill the bill with either luggage capacity or timetables.

Mar. 24 2008 11:44 AM
Tom from brooklyn

People who can afford to drive will do so. Delivery traffic is not being shifted to early am/ night times. Mass transit cannot support an increase in ridership. This is evident by crowded 4,5,6 lines on the east side, and in Brooklyn The newly reconstructed platforms at Atlantic Ave. are at capacity during rush hours. Remember how much more crowded mass transit was after 9/11? Could you tolerate that for as long as it takes to improve mass transit?

Residential permits will increase traffic. If your residence has more cars than permits you will be forced to drive. This is evident by alternate side parking now. When it snows, parking is suspended (less traffic). When parking is reinstated people dig their cars out and drive them. Reduce alternate side parking to 1 day per side in all neighborhoods and traffic will decrease.

What guarantees are there that funds raised from congestion fees will go to mass transit? Lottery money doesn't go to education. Alternative: raise the gasoline tax and get NJ to do the same (or provide some funding source).

I predict that real estate north of the boundary in Manhattan will become more valuable as businesses choose to locate outside the zone for a competitive advantage.

I am infavor of improving mass transit. The driving public will not commit to it before it is improved. The congestion pricing plan seems to be less about fixing a "problem" (congestion)than substituting federal dollars in the MTA capital budget.

Mar. 24 2008 11:37 AM
Robert Marvin from Prospect-Lefferts Gardens, Brooklyn

Yes, IF residential parking permits are NOT part of the plan.

Congestion pricing would only charge drivers when and if they drive into the covered area. Residential parking permits would seriously burden all drivers in two ways:
1--Residential parking permits would greatly reduce mobility between "outer borough" neighborhoods. Furthermore, our mass transit system is not very useful for travel between neighborhoods and is not designed for travel between boroughs other than Manhattan.

2--Residential parking permits would charge all drivers for parking in their own neighborhoods [and it would eventually be ALL drivers--the pressure for permits in every area would be difficult for politicians to resist]. I'm aware that INITIAL parking fees would be moderate, but it would be naive to imagine that they would not quickly become onerous in an attempt to raise revenue and discourage car ownership.

The potential problem of Manhattan-bound commuters turning neighborhoods into parking lots could be solved by instituting four day a week alternate side parking, which already exists in neighborhoods like mine.

Mar. 24 2008 11:32 AM
Nathan from Brooklyn from Brooklyn

Yes - emphatically yes. Our attitudes towards car use need to be updated, and people who choose to drive into the city cause inordinate expense, which is not properly accounted for.

Mar. 24 2008 11:28 AM
rachel from lower east side nyc

NO taxes is puportedly the republican mantra/ except when people without hedge funds have to pay them

Mar. 24 2008 11:28 AM
kathy from manhattan


with resident parking permits and a *significant* upgrade of public transit in the outer boroughs including bus rapid transit in neighborhoods not served by subways. The city also needs to keep cutting back free parking placards.

Mar. 24 2008 11:20 AM
Mitchel from SoHo

Yes IF residents within the zone can get back home without paying an exorbitant fee, OR if mass transit is greatly improved before congestion pricing goes into effect. I live withing the zone in a neighborhood that used to be quiet. Anything to reduce traffic would be a blessing. I am also a reverse commuter -- I work 17 miles away in New Jersey. It takes 75-90 minutes to get there by mass transit (without traffic) and 30 - 40 minutes by car. I'd love to have an efficient mass transit option and stop driving, but it doesn't esist. And I can't afford another $10 or more per day added to my commuting costs.

Mar. 24 2008 11:17 AM
Eliot Markell from Brooklyn

The biggest attempt to camouflage a tax hike aimed at the middle & working class this city has ever seen!

Has an owner/operator of a very small fine art shipping business based in Brooklyn utilizing a commercial box truck, I view our mayor’s new legacy project as an arrogant, disingenuous political maneuver designed to boost his credibility as a future presidential contender at the expense of working people in NYC.

$21 dollar tolls every for every day I have to go into Manhattan would be a huge chunk out of my bottom line. I already pay $275 a year in NYC road use taxes, I average about 3 trips a week into Manhattan. At $21 a trip that comes out to $3276 a year, almost 12 times more than what I pay now!
One of the Bloomberg rationales for congestion pricing is that time spent waiting in traffic equals lost revenue.
For whom? Perhaps the administration envisions a rapidly flowing stream of profitable vehicular traffic further fattening the plutocratic regime ensconced in city hall.

I for one have more time than money these days, how about allowing for some options that take into account the multitudinous variations of business and private transportation.

Mar. 24 2008 11:15 AM
Michael DuBick from Brooklyn, NY

Yes to congestion pricing. As many others have said more eloquently than I, this is long overdue. Congestion pricing has worked well in other cities like Stockholm, where I lived for two years in the early 1970's while in graduate school, and London, where I've visited many times; so why not here? All the noise about working class people from the outer boroughs, Long Island and N.J. needing to drive into mid-town Manhattan for work is a lot of baloney. What working class jobs exist in mid-town Manhattan or the financial district for that matter? There are plenty of mass transit options available already and a further investment in buses and improved bus lines would help alleviate any problems those who need to drive into Manhattan curently experience.

Mar. 24 2008 11:15 AM
ecs from 11211

yes, but

We need residential parking permits for *all* NYC neighborhoods (get out-of-state cars out of our parking spaces), and we need to make sure the MTA is the beneficiary.

Let's give the streets back to New Yorkers, 80% of whom do not own a car.

Mar. 24 2008 11:14 AM
rachel from lower east side nyc

NO WAY. Lets start by making more room in mass transit. The mayor has spent to much time and effort reducing the availabilty of MTA seats and trips and yet , he now wants to tax the folks who come in to work. Stop building towers of offices, more buses, put in some trilleys.. and we'll all breathe easirt.

Mar. 24 2008 11:14 AM
chestinee from Midtown

I spent a summer at Naropa Institute in Colorado years ago - Susan Sontag and Allen Ginsberg were there. My assigned roommates were at refuge and bottishatva - and I was "so east coast." Completely fascinating mindset, we don't have a western framework - this Rinpoche tried to create one. Wish we had more of it in our culture. It was fun to hear them talking about our Judeo Christian mindset. Among my favorite concepts is that of detachment - and how many places that can take you.

Mar. 24 2008 11:14 AM
Glenn from Manhattan

The city be basing its tax model more and more on tourists to pay our city taxes. Its a politician's easy way out of trying to charge the constituents for services that the constituents use. Less cars in Manhattan will make it more pleasant for tourists and hence more will come. Tourists don't generally go to the outer boroughs.

The MTA which is to receive the money, less all the complexity and data collection and billing which some of the money will pay for, is pretty much self serving and incompetent. If we want to balance the MTA budget there might be some way to cut some of the MTA largesse and make it more accountable to the public.

Mar. 24 2008 11:14 AM
Barbara Sacharow from Manhattan

I would favor it if (1) We could be assured that the extra money would be spent to increase mass transit possibilities--more subway cars more frequently, more buses, trains, etc.), and improve the current system with better notifications of arriving trains or delays and announcements, (2) the MTA stops raising transit fares, (3) neighborhoods on the edges of the pricing plan would not be made worse and non-residents would not be allowed to park there, and (4) there would be a waiver for residents of Manhattan below 60th street.

Mar. 24 2008 11:14 AM
Michael Cairl from Park Slope, Brooklyn

Yes to congestion pricing, provided it is accompanied by immediate mass transit improvements and improved parking management such as residential permit parking and expanded parking on the City's periphery, i.e. by rail stations such as Belmont Park, and subway stations such as Coney Island. I am a trustee of the Park Slope Civic Council.

Mar. 24 2008 11:12 AM
deb samuel from manhattan

The city could have done many things without any legislation action to reduce congestion. There are 142,000 permits handed out NOT the 15-30,000 first alleged. That could have been at least 100,000 cars off the streets. Why not just put tolls on the east river bradges- lots less administrative costs and direct the dough to tranist. That way Jerseyites heading out to Long Island will have to contribute- which now they won't have to.

Also the black cars sit for hours blocking trucks from pulling to the curb for deliveries- forcing double parked trucks. get rid of those black cars for the elite- or make them pay plenty for the privilege. Also no new buildings should be allowed to be constructed without LOADING docks!! let the wealthy business community pay for using the streets as loading docks if they don't want to use the pricey real estate for loading docks. dsammy

Mar. 24 2008 11:11 AM
rachel from lower east side nyc

MO!! this is a huge tax!
Lets not put the cart before the horse. We need to start investing in mass transit rather than cutting seats in the busses, sjortening the trains, butting out night service etc.. all Blimbergisms saddly.
Unfortunatly as usual Blumberg loses his sense of real living costs when the big money $$$ passes his way. This plan is not thought out. The unpleasant part is that the mayor dismisses the efforts of hard working people in the boros and elsewhere and acts like every trip in a car is a pleasure ride, and that people take cabs to zip over to the theater. The reality is that the mass transit system , trolleys, and the EL lines were dismantled and not ever really replaced. In the 1950's and 60's that was considered good for the USA and all that. Now its just atiquated~The transit system already hosts 5million fares a day. That would be a gross of about 10million a day... not chump change!
We dont need a tax on cars!

1 Mass transit? absolutly but I take buses in lower manhattan and there is really no room left for the extra XX% that 'will' be taking this 'unique' form of transport.

/ a dog?

Mar. 24 2008 11:10 AM
Ed from SI

Yes if --
It meant there would be an increase in SI Ferry service.
Incredibly the Mayor vetoed a bill in his first term that would have guaranteed mandatory 1/2 hour service because it would have raised costs a paltry 5 million a year. Then presided over the christening of a 3/4 million dollar fish tank in SI terminal at St George. Currently 1/2 hour service ends as early as 7 pm on the weekends and there has been no mention of increased service in the congestion pricing debate or the 2030 plan.

Mar. 24 2008 11:09 AM
Bob from Brooklyn

The subway and bus system is an inhumane and overstressed method of travel. Yet the mayor claims that it's still the best way to get around.
The Subway and Bus system is under State not local management. If the mayor were held accountable then and if mass transit were a ballott/election issue then no mayor in recent history would have been elected to a second term. Mass transit NEEDS TO BE A VOTER ISSUE!!!! Congestion pricing is niether a remedy for Congestion nor for green house gas emissions.

Mar. 24 2008 11:09 AM
Andreas from New York City


1. If you want to take care of congestion, as this bill asks for, then stop double parking of cars and delivery trucks. Ask any cabbie, and they will tell you THAT is congestion at it worst.

2. Why should the people subsidize a private company - The MTA? They should learn to balance their books like everyone else. And if the city wants a public transportation system, then make it truly public - 100% from city revenue, and no fare. That would get everyone riding.

3. STOP giving city employee's free parking!!!!!!!

4. Just end traffic in midtown completely except for emergency vehicles and place free bicycles everywhere like you see in so many European cities.

In the end, it would be great to have cleaner air, but this is going to hurt those that already struggle the most.

Thank you.

Mar. 24 2008 11:09 AM
Carlo Altomare from Manhattan


I don't think it will work anyway. Who'e going to enforce this? Cops in patrol cars? Motocycle troopers? The free flow of traffic is as American as apple pie. Its just another step towards NYC being for those who can "afford" it. Totally unfair. Stupid idea. What a mess.

Mar. 24 2008 11:08 AM
Rhonda Greggs from work

Multiple car passenger lanes are a conventional way California decreases traffic congestion and improves air quality. I did not understand Joshes comment that they would need more police to monitor this program in addition to the proposed congestion pricing proposal.
The police and toll takers are on the road anyway.I don't understand why they can't also monitor the number of passengers in vehicles also:in addition to picking their noses.It would probably increase surveilance techniques in the process.A stiff ticket can be issued if they used the multiple passenger lane and they are solo. They could also trust people to use the correct lane also (honor code) and maybe decrease toll for those cars with multiple passengers.

The mayor traveled all the way to Paris to look at congestion pricing last year. He could have traveled to CAlifornia Bay area to look at their innnovative techniques to decrease pollution and improve traffic movement congestion.

Mar. 24 2008 11:08 AM
Barry Blank from Millburn, NJ

Yes, if commuter railroads can be induced to add more late trains. We now only drive into the city on weekend (Fri-Sun) evenings for dinner plus. We would rather use the trains but New Jersy Transit has very limited service after roughly 11 PM - and none at all only a bit later. Friends in Westchester & Long Island have voiced similar concerns. If the city wants to reduce congestion and smog, it should not be harming restaurants and theaters by essential telling the residents of nearby suburbs to stay home.

Mar. 24 2008 11:07 AM
Allyn Salomon from East Villag

Yes, if there is an exception for Manhattenites returning from jobs that end at 5PM who would have to wait until 6PM to avoid the toll when returning home.I live here in the East Village and drive to Long Island and am out of the city during the congestion period but head home at 5PM arriving at the bridge at 5:30 as with many others whose day jobs end then. I don't feel I should pay for the congestion that occurs during the day. In fact all congestion pricing should end at 5PM or 5:30 to give Broadway visitors a chance to get to shows on time and not pay for the congestion pricing at say support the City's important tourist trade.

Mar. 24 2008 11:07 AM
Jackie from Brooklyn

No - This mayor is taxing (financially and punitively) citizens with cars unfairly. To charge people $8 per car to enter is absurd - that is a lot of money. Does the mayor realize there is currently no place for people to park there cars in the boroughs during the day, with alternate side parking, and so many other regulations? What are people supposed to do with their cars? It would be necessary for the City to open up parking in neighborhoods so people could leave their cars at home or near public transportation more easily.

I take the bus to work daily. I happen to pass the mouth of the Manhattan bridge every morning. Traffic flows smoothly. Another concern with congestion pricing is that adding toll collection will slow down traffic along Manhattan and Brooklyn bridges, which move amazingly well now during rush hour.



Mar. 24 2008 11:06 AM
LKS from Harlem

YES long overdue and new york should lead the way for all major US cities. there's NO reason to drive on this island (yes that's right i SAID it!). none other than laziness when god knows we as a nation could shed some collective pounds and the impact on the environment (anyone who doesn't raise a hand up here smack yourself in the head please). those who cannot (i am referring specifically to the ederly and disabled) should have free/no fee service from the MTA. and as far as the MTA being the worse? ahem. no no no Philadelphia wears that crown thank you very much with ridiculous pricing, rude employess and no yes that's right NO ticket machines at many of the stations.

Mar. 24 2008 11:05 AM
Bob from Brooklyn

If the mayor was truly concerened in releiving congestion in NYC then why do are there so many 'city choking' construction projects. This mayor never met a construction project he said "no" to. Construction is so 'over the top' that oversight is taking a back seat. Crane collapses, Firemen dying in uninspected projects, building collapses, scaffolding collapses, worker accidents and deaths..... how does charging me more money to travel in my own city help address those tragedies?

Mar. 24 2008 11:05 AM
bg from brooklyn

yes if

MOTORCYCLES and efficient/alternative vehicles are FREE to enter and HAVE designated free parking areas. No lame tolls for motorcycles!

and.. my general comment:
well seems a bit unfair to those of us who can't afford to live in manhattan. Excluding jersey and scarsdale... why does this end up being a poor tax on the outer bouroughs?

I only drive in/thru manhattan in OFF PEAK times. I don't WANT to get stuck in traffic and frankly downtown is empty lots of nights of the week and thats when I do my business.
So why nail me? Its the commuters who think its fine to wait in traffic for 1 hour who need to be targeted.

Mar. 24 2008 11:05 AM
Grace from W.93rd St.

No, they could never get it straight to give out residence cards with the rent paid on the upper west side, for example; there would be a business in selling residence cards and rich people would park in our neighborhoods as they do now, with impugnity, as they come in from the suburbs.

Mar. 24 2008 11:04 AM
Frank Tar from Brooklyn

I do NOT support congestion pricing.

Mar. 24 2008 11:03 AM

no. Because it doesn't address air pollution in the outer borughs.Such as hunt's piont and south jamaica which has the highest rate of asthma in da city.

Mar. 24 2008 11:03 AM
L K from Manhattan

YES to Congestion Pricing!

I moved to New York so I wouldn't have to even own a car. I've been a bicycle commuter for years and it's the most pleasant way to get around the city.

I arrive at work relaxed and get to work out my day on the way home. The Greenway is wonderful and should be expanded.

Ask anyone who has spent time in cities like Copenhagen, London, Amsterdam or Paris. They are calm and full of people walking around. It is so pleasant.

There's no reason to not have some of it here.

Mar. 24 2008 11:02 AM
Ben from New York

No. so many problems. By it's own figures it would have little effect on reducing congestion. It's a huge revenue generating scheme with no earmarks requiring money be spent improving public transportation. It’s hugely regressive against middle and lower class workers, the elderly and disabled, who live in the boroughs and suburbs. These are public roads that are already paid for by tax payers, all this plan will do is let the wealthy drive around faster, a privatization of a public resource. If implemented, subways and buses would be unable to handle the increased ridership - they are already over capacity. I might be in favor of some plan if they created new infrastructure first. What happened to the new dedicated Bus Rapid Transit promised for the M15 line by 2008? If this plan is actually necessary for revenue, then that will backfire, because if the plan works it will have constantly DECREASING levels of revenue as people switch to mass transit. It's not a sustainable source of revenue. The cost of implementing the plan with cameras will eat into the revenue generated by it so much that the plan will be unworkable unless the price is raised to almost $20 (as happened in London.)If the city were truly and actually interested in reducing "congestion" then they should just do more to enforce the "block the box" laws, by adding more police, and cameras. If the MTA instructed bus drivers to never enter an intersection during a red light it’d cut traffic 50% easy.

Mar. 24 2008 11:02 AM
Grace from W.93rd St.

What about resident stickers with our rent payment if we are not rich people but live in Manhattan, on the upper west side?

Mar. 24 2008 11:02 AM
Albert Ahronheim from Upper East Side

Yes, absolutely.

Mar. 24 2008 11:02 AM
Chris Rosen from Putnam County

I don't think Congestion Pricing would ease traffic. Even though I cannot afford it, I would just pay it, as most would. It's a plan to make money, not about traffic planning. The streets are clogged with way too many taxis, that's what causes most of the traffic. People blame those driving in to the city for the traffic, meanwhile, those who live there are using taxis instead of subways to get around. Taxis should be forced to pull over when receiving or discharging passengers. They usually stop in the middle of traffic blocking lanes, this has a huge effect on traffic flow.

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
Luis from Flushing, NY

Just a thought,

Rich ladies driving their Escalades will still drive into Barneys and thank congestion pricing for an easier traffic for them.....

Maybe we should move into a system like this for PRIVATE cars only:

Plates that end with

1 & 2 MON
3 & 4 TUE
5 & 6 WED
7 & 8 THU
9 & 0 FRI

For letters, just separate them in groups.

That is a very democratic way, since everyone one will have to obey, not only the ones that can pay, or can afford

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
Rabiya Watson from New York, NY

NO!!!! If you live in Manhattan, you get a raw deal, and if you want to go to Brooklyn, you have to pay $8.00 to drive down the West Side Highway or the FDR Drive. Everything is more expensive for City Residents, and getting higher. The problem is that city residents are footing the bill for EVERYTHING since they got rid of the commuter tax. 8 million people are paying for 25 million riders. It is completely unfair, and then for New Jersey drivers get a credit for the toll that they pay for crossing the bridges and tunnels - while Manhattan residents get no breaks. Arrgh . . . this is the flip side of having a Billionaire for a Mayor. He has absolutely no consciousness of the middle class and the cost that residents are paying to live here. I have lived in Manhttan for my entire life, and I see it becoming an oasis for the super-wealthy and a complete disregard for the working class.

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
G.F. from W.93rd St.

What do we get, resident cards with our rent checks if we are not really rich people in Manhattan, on the upper west side?

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
Mark Milstein from Manhattan

Dear Speaker Quinn,


Congestion pricing, as it's now structured, discriminates between favored
Manhattan neighborhoods and those not so favored. I live in the far West
Village, your district, in a middle income community of working people and our
families. We can't afford to pay for the privilege of going from our homes to our
jobs. I'm a teacher in upstate New York. I have no other way to get to work,
but to drive.

At the same time, I notice that residential neighborhoods between 60th
Street and 86th Street have miraculously been exempted from the proposed fee.
Even our Mr. Mayor will be exempt, as his mansion(s!) are on 78th Street. Is a
fee too burdensome for the Park Avenue crowd a reasonable fee for teachers?

If congestion pricing is to work, it has to be fair, and not prevent free
access to and from working people's homes. The boundaries need to be
revised, or access permits issued to residents of commercial zones. It's trucks,
taxi's, and commuters who clog mid town, not the few working people.

Please let the new governor know that the current plan discriminates
against working New Yorkers!!

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
Robert C. from Manhattan

I vote no, the odds of the money not going to the general fund over time is 100%. Also, the cost of maintaining the system will eat up the revenue.

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
Dave from Brooklyn


For so many reasons:

It's completely unfair to make the people who live in Brooklyn and Queens pay the for a transit system. You mena he's not making enough money off of the out of control developers to pay for it?

When prices are going up on all kinds of things, you're going to make it more expensive to come into New York?

This is New York City. It's supposed to be messy. Bloomberg never understood this. He can't make it NYC a borg-like society where the poor and working class people mindlessly accept the subway and the Bloombergs keep us all in line. No Olympics, no West Side stadium , no congestion pricing.

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
Harvey Geller

No. If an 18% parking tax doesn't dissuade unnecessary traffic, the congestion pricing plan won't either. It will also involve an extremely expensive administrative organization to enforce. A better fun raiser would be an increase in the gasoline tax.

Mar. 24 2008 11:01 AM
renee feinberg from manhattan

yes, with safer (curbs provided) bike lanes.

Mar. 24 2008 11:00 AM
Jennifer Morton from W.93rd St.

It certainly once again favors rich people who drive in. People from the suburbs will certainly try to park right now in areas in which we live as they do now. I live in Manhattan and have a car only because I need it outside of NY and have a license plate from another state because I have a house there and drive there, not in NYC. I can see a lot of difficulty ahead for me with this and it is plenty difficult already.

How would they stop people from parking in the neighborhood who are coming in from elsewhere? Boston and Cambridge have residence parking. Do we get residence parking with our rent checks?

Mar. 24 2008 11:00 AM
michael winslow from INWOOD

No No No

Slamming the poor that's all this is.

I'm tired of Bloomberg making this HIS city where there are no cars on the street and building out of control so cranes fall on people and kill them.

This is poorly planned and will be pooly executed.

Mar. 24 2008 11:00 AM
Ellen from Greenpoint/Williamsburg

Yes, BUT......
I support the idea of congestion pricing if considerations are made to residents in outer borough neighborhoods which will be affected by commuters driving in and parking and clogging the subways during already maxed out commuting ours. I've lived in this neighborhood for over 11 years and in the last 3 years, w/ gentrification, parking has become a problem. There are no alternatives, such as parking garages, and I've spent many mornings driving around for 1 1/2 hours until alternative side of the street parking ends. ALSO, the Bedford L train and Long Island City E/V trains are beyond maximum capacity. Frequently, I have had to wait for 7 or 8 trains to come before being able to get on board. My understanding is that the MTA already has as many trains on these lines. With the new apartment buildings going up in Williamsburg, Greenpoint, and LIC, I don't know how all of these people will be able to commute efficiently, along with the people commuting in, parking and using the subway to get into the city.

Mar. 24 2008 11:00 AM
Cameron Grant from Rivervale, NJ

Clearly we need less cars in Manhattan.But what can be offered to those of us who live near the Palisades Parkway and commute in, and drive home after our shows at Lincoln Center or Broadway? There is no fast, convenient, public transportation for this segment of commuters, for the hours that we work.

Mar. 24 2008 10:59 AM

No, NYC has enough taxes, take the money out of useless programs. (ps. I dont even drive!)

Mar. 24 2008 10:59 AM
dave from brooklyn

Yes, if the MTA keeps its monthly prices low so that people are more likely to use it. There needs to be a dramatic increase in mass transit.

Mar. 24 2008 10:59 AM
spencer kiser

Yes. I live out in Queens, and I don't understand how you can say this will hurt the middle class. How can one be middle class and even afford a car and all the costs that come with it? Cars should be considered a luxury in this city.

However, I thinking the parking situation in the outer boroughs needs to be addressed. It seems that London has better solutions for that.

Mar. 24 2008 10:59 AM
John from Woodside

When will the media cover Congestion Pricing as it really is: another utopian social experiment pushed by the elitist Bloomberg, without any input from the people it would most affect. "Hey, it works in Europe!" is all this Nanny Mayor need here in oprder to ram an impractical Punitive Tax down New Yorkers throats.
After the West Side Stadium, and the Olympics, you'd think the Mayor would have gotten the picture that you CANNOT implement radical changes that dramatically impact your constituents WITHOUT ANY INPUT from their elected representatives!
Bloomberg's phony "deadlines" won't work this time either!
Let's be clear: this is not a proposal designed first to cut pollution, it's a plan designed by a Manhattan-centric Mayor designed to reduce the number of cars in that borough,that may also have the benefit of cutting smog. The goal, however is to reduce the number of people from driving into Manhattan first- an inherently elitist proposal.

Mar. 24 2008 10:59 AM
Susan from Kingston, New York

No. With public transportation as bad as it is and the need to commute to areas in New York City that are difficult to get to without a car, it is just another expense on top of the tolls and gas that a commuter pays for. Having been displaced from Brooklyn, because Bloomberg was intent on developing the waterfront property in Greenpoint and Williamsburg, I feel that he is only interested in creating an island for the rich regardless of how it effects working class and middle class people.

Mar. 24 2008 10:59 AM
Brian Brandt from Manhattan


As a long time east village resident with a car that I must leave on the street (can't afford a garage), I want to be certain that I will not be hit with an $8 charge when I have to move the car for alternate side.

Not everyone can afford a garage and I should not be penalized for that.

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
Susannah Stern from Bronx

Yes. Please pass this. It would be a TRAGEDY to loose this opportunity.

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
chestinee from Midtown

what about deliveries? Will this raise food prices?

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
Michael from Brooklyn


During the Republican National Convention, traffic was 1/2 of what it normally is and it was incredibly easy and safe to bike around the city!

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
Nat from Brooklyn

Yes, if commercial vehicles are not charged. As the plan stands now, commercial vehicles will be charged the same or more than other vehicles. The point of congestion pricing is to get commuters off already clogged roads in downtown Manhattan, not punish the commercial deliveries that keep Manhattan businesses going.

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
Elizabeth Zimmer from Chelsea

Yes, but:
I live in Chelsea, and I have a car which I only use to leave the city. Will I pay this tax to drive from West 26th Street to the Lincoln Tunnel? If I drive from the Lincoln Tunnel to my garage on West 26th and Ninth...

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
Dave S from Princeton Junction, NJ

Yes IF...

transit is modernized and expanded! It is already overloaded.

We need innovation in transit, not just the 2nd Ave Subway, but Bus Rapid Transit, More elevated and surface Light Rail.

Also - strategies to reduce traffic at peak hours, incentives for businesses to change working hours. Trucks off the streets during the daytime... lots of ways to solve the traffic problem.

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
isaac from Morningside Heights

YES! I have a car that I use to get out of town on the weekends. For travel in NYC, it's all about walking, cycling, and mass transit. I don't care how limited the version they pass is. If it's anything like Stockholm or London, we just need to get it in effect, then we can expand it.

Mar. 24 2008 10:58 AM
Joey Collins from Jackson Heights, Queens

I left Manhattan because the RICH folks came in and turned it into an island prentending not to be Upper East Siders. The gentrification diluted the island. Still does. Why reward them with congesting pricing costing the rest of us MORE who created the ONCE culturally diverse island of Manhattan. Although I like Mayor Bloomy, this is not, in my novice opinion, going to help our budget on iota!

I say, if you want to own a car in MANHATTAN, you should have to TAX them, not us guys in Queens. If they drive ANYWHERE in the city, they should have to pay the 8 bucks or whatever. NO ONE IN MANHATTAN NEEDS A CAR. NO ONE WHO CAN AFFORD TO LIVE IN MANHATTAN CAN AFFORD THE A HIGHER TAX.

That's fair. Don't tax us little guys more!

thanks, joey collins Jackson Heights, Queens

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
annika from Brooklyn

I appreciate that the mayor feels that he has his finger on the pulse of mass transit because he takes a car to an express train everyday for a few stops but I would like to ask him to ride my commute in the morning. I take the B train from Newkirk Ave in Brooklyn, if I am not on the train before 7am I will not get a seat until 42 Street. I live 4 stops from the end of the line at 7 in the morning I should not need a show horn to get in the car. As far as I know there are no plans right now to help the B line. All the lines that work is suppose to start on (1 and F lines) are lines that are crowded in the city only. And frankly people with more money take.

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
Christopher Deignan from Middle Village, Queens

I have an awkward commute from Middle Village to Weehawken so although in principal I agree with the idea of congestion, I will get hit. It takes me half the time to get to work via car than it does via public transportation but its considerably more expensive of course. The only question I have is, before this plan, what was the formula for federal and state funding before this plan and how come now funding is tied to this plan?

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
Elaine Richard from Manhattan: Upper West Side

Yes. Absolutely. We need fewer cars clogging up Manhattan, increasing pollution levels and worsening traffic snarl-ups. We need better, cheaper (I would actually advocate free, or a nominal charge) public transportation. This is a walking, living, vital, breathing city. Mass transit is the only sensible way to get around (along with feet and the occasional taxi). The Congestion Charge has worked really well in London (a much harder city to regulate).

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
Paul from brooklyn

Yes, it worked in London and it will work here. It will promote the use or carpooling and mass transit, ease traffic and pollution. Maybe even fewer MTA fare hikes in the future.

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
Eric from Manhattan

YES because it's a look towards the future, even at some pain now.... now responses to

1) price: Want to live outside of Manhattan to save money? Fine. The extra price to _drive_ to the city is reasonable because you've already accepted the expense by home location.

2) volume: This is a 'congestion' plan to solve future volume and traffic problems. To those wishing to drive in non-carpool situations, please concede that a single car with a single person will not persist as a possibility.

3) commute time: Again, please try to be reasonable: living in Manhattan, it takes longer for me to get work than friends in Queens. If you need more time to commute, leave earlier or work with your employer for more flexible schedules.

4) budget allocation: This is an unfortunate requirement needed to sustain the behemoth that is the MTA/state/city civil infrastructure of the city. If money doesn't come from here, would you rather loose more of your paycheck to your NYC city tax?

Great job Brian; as a student at CU, I will stream (and contribute to) WNYC for life.

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
Jean from Harlem

No -- Triple taxes for some New Yorkers? We live in Manhattan above the congestion pricing zone and use our car for work. We already pay property tax and income taxes to NYC. Now we also have to pay more taxes to live and work in New York?

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
david from Brooklyn

YES! London has made this work brilliantly. I have lived in NYC for 10 years. During this time, London has doubled the number of buses, created a new train terminal and hugely improved mass transit. NYC has done practically nothing!

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
Eileen from lower east side

James, #6.

NYC has the very BEST subway system in the world. It runs 24/7. It's the most complicated system I've ever seen. It's not new like Shanghai, for example, with air-conditioning on the platforms and such, but considering its age and the complexity of the system, it's wonderful. But it does need improvements, of course.

Mar. 24 2008 10:57 AM
Charl Kroeger from Jersey City

Yes if...

... mass transit actually improves their service. It has to START with mass transit improving service and running more frequently. We should not be expected to pay more and still have lousy infrequent service.

Mar. 24 2008 10:56 AM


Mar. 24 2008 10:56 AM
Joachim from Brooklyn

YES!!! Wake up! Reduce emissions as much as possible. Drivers who refuse to take mass transit and are poisining the air we breathe need to pay. As much as possible. Make us green!

Mar. 24 2008 10:56 AM
Gaby from Maspeth NY

Yes, if more local buses are added to schedule that connect outer boroughs to subway. My bus runs once an hour after 7:45 PM and stops running at 10:45 which forces me to take my car into Manhattan any time I come home late. I do not need more LIRR or Express Bus service, I still have to take a local bus. I will also need a local parking permit so I can continue to park in my neighborhood, Maspeth, Queens. I love how much congestion pricing has improved London.

Mar. 24 2008 10:56 AM
Jonathan from Manhattan

I support congestion pricing - anything to alleviate traffic in midtown. And I don't know of the numbers, but I would venture to guess there are not a huge number of people who commute by car to mid- or downtown.

Mar. 24 2008 10:53 AM
Nora from Hell's Kitchenette

OK, so why not get some of that high-tech face recognition technology that we (supposedly) have in place to pick terrorists out of crowds, and use it to scan the number of faces in cars coming into NYC? Don't be paranoid, we don't want to know who you are, we just want to know how many you are.

Mar. 24 2008 10:53 AM
SuzanneNYC from Upper West Side

Yes. We have to start somewhere to come up with a solution about the traffic in Manhattan and the rest of NYC. It's only going to get worse so we'll have to do something sooner or later. We must focus on expanding and upgrading existing mass transit so it will be an available and affordable alternative to driving a car. Finally, look at the conversation just proposing the idea has generated. That in itself has been a good thing.

Mar. 24 2008 10:53 AM
Suzannah from Manhattan


I favor congestion parking, but only if measures are taken PRIOR to implementing the plan to ensure ample parking for residents and for commuters. The plan needs to account for increased future need for parking and should be coordinated with regional transportation facilities planning throughout the metropolitan region.

Mar. 24 2008 10:53 AM
ks from brooklyn/manhattan

Also, re: commuters cruising for parking spots, this might be a great way to convince the "wealthy" Manhattan people (most of whom already pay for parking off-street, I thought) to get rid of the cars that they "need" so much. Use a car share, or park it out of town. NYers already breathe trashy air, they don't need to be fatter because they drive to the grocery store.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM
Eileen from lower east side

I live within the zone, LES. I would support some form of congestion pricing if it had:
a - provision for residents of the zone to come and go without paying anything
b - provision for non-residents to NOT be allowed to have free street parking within the zone, at all, any time.
c - there were additional bus lines serving crosstown routes
d - the 2nd ave. subway construction didn't favor the rich upper east side
We in-zone residents are already paying premium prices for everything in our lives, everywhere in the zone.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM
Pablo Alto from Riverdale but work in Manhattan...


Congestion pricing would be a fine idea IF the benefits were shared by all of the citizens of New York. As Bronx resident who rarely drives into mid-Manhattan, but commutes by car to Harlem, I know this plan will have a negative effect on me and my borough.

The implementation of this "plan" will be beholden to the interests of wealthy Manhattan residents and the promised increased service in mass transit will never survive the state legislature bureaucracies of the MTA and Port Authority. If time is money, then the time of outer borough residents is being extraordinarily undervalued so the wealthy can have a little more convenience access to taxis. Thanks A LOT!

Once again, people who are not already rich will, be the ones to bear the true burden of the effort.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM
Cory from Manhattan

No. Let's try getting rid of rampant double and triple parking, single and double lane closings for construction that are not even used for anything and all the structural causes of congestion. We should also mandate that all commercial deliveries be made at night. See how that works first.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM
DP from Brooklyn

I don't buy into the "poor commuter" baloney. If you are really that poor, sell your car, between insurance and maintenance, cars in NYC are one of the most expensive things you can own. If money is an issue, use mass transit.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM
bert from brooklyn

remember MBTE, we poisoned the nations groundwater trying to oxygenate fuels when changing technology(fuel injection) made it simply a fuel wasting scheme. Technology is changing as we speak. Why can paying money grant unlimited access. Rationing or higher parking fees seem fair. Clean up filthy mass transit.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM
RMCT from Westchester

Yes, if:

1. Adequate parking garages are provided at toll points so that uptown doesn't turn into a competition for parking or a parking lot;

2. Monthly passes are sold, ala Metro North, so that people who need to drive into the City each day -- like my husband, a general contractor who needs to drive his van in for work -- will still be able to make a living;

3. All Manhattan residents get free passes.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM
Neil from Astoria, Queens


Without a doubt. Public transport desperately needs money, and this seems the best way to get it.

Mar. 24 2008 10:52 AM

No, because it is too expensive. The city or state should be giving money to the MTA. This will only contribute to NYC becoming either you are a millionaire or on welfare, no more middle class. Stop squeezing us!

Mar. 24 2008 10:51 AM
Brad from LIC

I work in Long Island City NY and live in NJ and I use public transprotation. The congestion pricing is long overdue and it will make us rethink going into the city on weekends and if so how we do it.

For those New Yorker's complainging that it is not fair because there will be a net zero increase for commuters coming in from NJ, are they willing to credit us back the higher tolls we have been paying up until this goes through and then start even? Put up or shut up NY.

Mar. 24 2008 10:51 AM
chestinee from Midtown

or how about serious bike lanes and rollerblade lanes?

Mar. 24 2008 10:51 AM
Anthony R. Smith from 2211 Broadway

IF: NY transit has IN PLACE sufficient mass transit (which in this case means more buses, possibly new routes, from the outer boroughs AND shorter head-ways on many of the subways at rush hour. London had this figured out and the entire operation was placed under the management control of the London mass transit system.
NYC would need a czar with authority to compel both City and State agencies to meet their responsibilities.

Mar. 24 2008 10:51 AM
inquisigal from Brooklyn

Yes, I support congestion pricing...BUT more needs to be discussed. I definitely support resident parking permits - we had them when I lived in Boston, and it worked fine. How many people from NJ need to drive their SUV's into the city during the day to go shopping? Take the PATH! Also, more attention needs to be paid to creating secure bike lanes.

Mar. 24 2008 10:51 AM
Evelyn Miller from Washington Heights

I was in London for a week recently. The traffic congestion was far worse than the worst traffic jams I have expereinced in NY. My British acquaintences said peop[e have just accepted the cost and use their cars anyway.
In addition, I would be hard pressed to have dinner out before an evening performance at the theatre if I had to adde a fee to my meal.
It may have a profound effect on threatre district restaurants.

Mar. 24 2008 10:50 AM
chestinee from Midtown


weren't they going to just try this out in the first place to find out what should qualify this

Mar. 24 2008 10:50 AM
lowice from manhattan

Yes, yes, yes. Let's begin, and make adjustments if necessary.

Mar. 24 2008 10:49 AM
Steve Chang from UWS

No. The city is being disingenuous regarding why they are instituting congestion pricing. They claim it will reduce congestion (maybe it will, maybe it won't). It will certainly raise money, though, by penalizing many people. If the city really wanted to reduce congestion, there are better ways to do it including: a) truly penalizing double parking, b) preventing trucks from driving the city streets during rush hours, c) having designated taxi stands so that cabs aren't swerving around and wreaking traffic havoc, d) improving traffic flow (this would also reduce gasoline consumption so that people aren't wasting fuel while idling), e) increasing awareness of and promoting alternative modes of transportation including bicycles, etc., etc., etc. This is a blatant tax and true traffic planning isn't even being promoted.

Mar. 24 2008 10:49 AM
Phyllis from Park Slope

Although the notion seems like a good thing, the ORDER is completely wrong.

FIRST improve mass transit. Despite all of the fare hikes, the stations are abysmal, the cars filthy, and service interruptions are frequent and maddening. First take care of those critical problems so more people can embrace taking mass transit and then introduce this program. MONEY is all they ever talk about, but once the officials get it, we don't know how it will be allocated. Most of us just don't trust it.

Mar. 24 2008 10:49 AM
ks from brooklyn/manhattan

YES! As both an asthmatic and a teacher, I COMPLETELY support anything that keeps the roads and air clearer, and that keeps some of the insane drivers away from the intersections where students are trying to cross. Too many kids in this city suffer from asthma and ADD, and pollutants don't improve their lives.

Mar. 24 2008 10:49 AM
antonio from bococa

Yes! We could finally get that money that we lost in the abolition of the commuter tax.
Funny thing though, I find the folks that would most benefit; that don't have any current options are so opposed.. i.e. fresh meadows, and their ilk...

Mar. 24 2008 10:49 AM
Pat from Greenwich Village

We oppose this plan because as reverse commuters we must drive to work in Jersey and Westchester. We greatly resent the prospect of having to pay a fee designed to discourage suburban traffic when we have no choice. No provision that I am aware of is being made for those of us who use cars and live in the zone.
(FYI--We only own a car because one of us has not been able to get full-time employment in the city and must therefore patch together several part-time jobs outside the city.)

Mar. 24 2008 10:49 AM
CTS from Brooklyn

Yes. We have to start the program in whatever form sooner than later, and if there are details to be worked out, they can evolve as the program does in coming years. The idea is great, and it needs to be tried, especially before the proposal is chopped up and reduced to the point of no chance for success.

Mar. 24 2008 10:48 AM
DP from Brooklyn

I favor congestion pricing BUT certain elements to Bloomberg's plan must be changed:
see generally:
Set zone as entire island of manhattan (makes sense as a practical matter); no exemptions (fairness); more disincentive for large trucks; more dedicated bike / walk thoroughfares.

Mar. 24 2008 10:48 AM
David from Brooklyn

Yes, IF...

...the city institutes zoned parking permits like they have in Washington, DC. Otherwise, what's to keep long-distance commuters from driving to Brooklyn, Queens, or the Bronx, parking, and riding a train from there?

Mar. 24 2008 10:47 AM
Jay C. Shames from Brooklyn, NY and Barryville NY

While in theory, I agree with the concept, it is clear that politically it will work out protecting the people who live and Manhattan and pricy brownstone Brooklyn but parking will spill over into less affluent neighborhoods. We all know that the promised improvements to mass transit will not happen.

Mar. 24 2008 10:46 AM
Laura from NJ

Yes if…

They improve/increase mass transit options from New Jersey to NYC. If everyone stops driving i don't know how I'm going to be able to commute because already I never get a seat on the bus as it is. The public transporation from NJ to NYC is ridiculous, and they need to prove that they will spend the money earned from conjestion pricing to help interstate transportation and not just mass transit in NY.

Mar. 24 2008 10:46 AM
Luis from Flushing, NY

Yes, if they keep the FDR drive free and no charge for taxi & livery cars since they have to go in and out all the time.

Mar. 24 2008 10:46 AM
Jay from Manhattan

Yes -- but only if Manhattan residents with Manhattan registered cars get a break like we do on taxes for monthly garage parking.

Mar. 24 2008 10:46 AM

I do favor congestion pricing, but with two caveats. If the mayor is truly serious about reducing traffic on our roads then congestion pricing must be done concurrently with a residential permit parking scheme. I would also like to see a reduction in the pricing policy for NYC residents.

Mar. 24 2008 10:46 AM
David from Brooklyn

Yes, I heartily support the congestion pricing proposal. This would be a win for us all: it would mean increased revenue for our public transportation system (at a time when traditional revenue sources like taxes upon Wall Street profits are dwindling); it would mean that we'd breathe healthier air; and it would mean safer streets -- particularly for people like me who have to try to get around mid-town Manhattan for work.

Mar. 24 2008 10:46 AM
Naseem from Brooklyn

Yes, IF the capacity and efficiency of the subway system is increased to bear the number of people who will stop driving and start taking the train.

Mar. 24 2008 10:45 AM
peter from manhattan

I support the plan, but I think it's backwards. Cars should pay MORE than commercial vehicles.

Mar. 24 2008 10:44 AM
bert beiderman from brooklyn

Brooklyn and Queens are on Long Island. Congestion pricing effectively puts daytime tolls on the East River Bridges. Therefore a trip to the mainland USA would no longer be possible without A toll. Nice trick. Trust the MTA and the Mayor with mass transit. They supported a 2nd Ave subway doesn't go to the Bronx, a Monorail to nowhere? Mass transit first, then close other options. Taxis and trucks are the real problem anyway.

Mar. 24 2008 10:44 AM
Steve from Manhattan

Yes - anything that reduces traffic, saves energy, and reduces pollution in the city. And Raine - many Manhattanites are barely hanging on.

Mar. 24 2008 10:44 AM
Leo from NYC

YES! Even if it is flawed, we have to start working on this -- and in a city this size, someone will always get the short end of the stick.

Mar. 24 2008 10:44 AM
P from Brooklyn


Less pollution, please.

Mar. 24 2008 10:44 AM
Harlan Crystal from Morningside Heights / Inwood, Manhattan


Mar. 24 2008 10:43 AM
Peter from Brooklyn

Yes - this is a change for me. I used to feel that Cogestion pricing would be little more then a regressive tax placed on outter borough drivers, but i support the effort to reduce manhattan street traffic, especially if the costs fund public transit. I would like the pricing to have a greater inpact on New Jersey drivers but it looks like they would be excluded form a large part of the fee because of Port Authority bridsge/tunnle tolls.

Mar. 24 2008 10:31 AM
shc from Manhattan

Congestion pricing for the sake of taking cars off the road is definitely a good thing. However, THIS city's congestion pricing plan has not proposed anything realistic in terms of accomplishing that. Once you read between the lines, it's clear that logistics have not been thought out! New yorkers are smart people, and the latest proposals that I've heard (possibly outdated, as of early 2008) have too many loop holes.

Mar. 24 2008 10:29 AM
James from new york

YES. Every time I walk by the Gov't buildings in Downtown Brooklyn and see all the Prius' I think we've wasted the past 20 years getting to "green". American cars should be the go-to green car. But the Japanese got in early and dominated.

Congestion pricing represents a long overdue change in attitude. Green = green. Don't get left behind America, don't be afraid of the future.

And what can be said about the MTA. It is the worst subway in the world. It's a total joke. Worthless subway run by worthless incompetent people. Hopefully more money can fix it, but I'm not holding my breath.

Mar. 24 2008 10:25 AM
MCH from Brooklyn

I have not taken a hard position either way. I support the idea of fewer cars in Manhattan, but at the same time I live at the end of a subway line and don't want to see my neighborhood turned into a cruising zone and parking lot. I also don't know for sure if they intend to charge for the "resident permits" that have been touted. I don't trust that the funds will truly be used to improve mass transit out where I am and I think this might just put the air polution in some of the most challenged neighborhoods such as the South Bronx, which already has some of the highest asthma rates in the nation.

Mar. 24 2008 10:20 AM
Raine from Queens

Robert: The drivers who drive a few blocks to the store will still be doing so in my neighborhood. And they'll be joined by commuters cruising for parking spots. Why not look for solutions that get cars off the roads everywhere?

Mar. 24 2008 10:13 AM
Russell Bartels from Manhattan

Yes, but this campaign was poorly staged. The outer borough transit riders need concrete benefits as offsets to opposition who will be paying more for driving. The outer borough residents are unimpressed by slogans about cleaner air and less vehicle congestion in Manhattan. Outer borough suggestions: GPS on buses so we can call a number to determine when a specific bus is estimated to arrive at a specific stop. Cameras on buses to record and fine vehicles blocking bus lanes. Sensors and cameras to record speeding vehicles. Free access to Manhattan for health visits (How could they miss this one?)

Mar. 24 2008 10:10 AM
Robert from NYC

Yes because anything that takes more cars off the streets is fine by me. True I'm being selfish, and I don't care, and true I've never driven in my life nor ever had a license (guess where I'm from!) but so too are those drivers who just drive everywhere including a few blocks to pick up a few things at the store.

Mar. 24 2008 10:02 AM
Raine from Queens

No--the mayor's plan is just another way to make things easier for wealthy Manhattanites without regard to quality of life in the outer boroughs.

Mar. 24 2008 09:50 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.