I did the math, and with the current toll increases and proposed rates to drive in midtown Manhattan next year, a commuter from Elizabeth NJ to Midtown would pay approximately $85 in tolls in total to commute both ways. (Using the Optimal Route of I-278/Battery tunnel) With 20 work days a month at least, that's $1700 a month in tolls. That's like paying a 2nd rent! Insane.
Also, I think the plan will end up pushing alot of traffic that normally takes the tunnels up north to the GWB, creating an even worse traffic nightmare than there already is. It may even worsen Staten Island traffic as it will be cheaper than the tunnels + congestion fee combined. Though I wouldn't call $39.38 cheap either.
I live in Brooklyn NYC, and was actually curious if there were forums about these topics.
I know many are not happy with the congestion pricing plan. However, I believe that if there is anywhere in the country where a congestion pricing plan might work, it would be in New York City (and especially Manhattan). I only wish that the funds for the congestion pricing plan would go to maintaining the city's streets, freeways, and parkways, not to prop up the mass transit system.
I agree the money should go toward the roads. The traffic has really become a nightmare in the last few years. Drives in gridlock that used to take maybe 45 min now take a solid 2-3 hours. Never saw so much black and red on Google maps in my life. One thing they never made clear though was how exactly the west side highway and fdr drives would be affected.
I'd like more effort to be put into addressing traffic levels in the NYC metro area....but realistically, I'm not certain there's much that can be done (at least not without horrifically expensive property acquisition that will only boost the ranks of regional NIMBYs) aside from various measures to incent more people to switch to transit.
There isn't much that can be done. The roads are in horrible condition and it's like the number of cars on the road tripled. Traffic jams exist where you've never seen them before. The red and black on the map extends 50+ miles from the city in every direction. The reducing of the BQE by a lane was an absolute disaster. Between Hamilton Ave and Atlantic Ave it can take 40 min, that's an average speed of less than 1 mph. I've sometimes been on my phone at midnight to see that stretch still black.
No one would actually commute from Elizabeth to Midtown paying those tolls, and many people don't in reality either. The NEC runs straight through Elizabeth and drops you at Penn station
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 21, 2023, 01:19:23 PM
I'd like more effort to be put into addressing traffic levels in the NYC metro area....but realistically, I'm not certain there's much that can be done (at least not without horrifically expensive property acquisition that will only boost the ranks of regional NIMBYs) aside from various measures to incent more people to switch to transit.
The rest of the world has it figured out. Tunnels.
i will note, on the record, that you are exaggerating how bad these delays actually are.
peak periods: over an hour, not 2-3 hours.
midnight: not "Black". may be delays but on the order of 15-20 minutes.
number of cars on the road is within 5% of what it was in 2017 right now.
Not from my experience. One time it took me 1 hrs 50 mins to drive from around the Brooklyn Battery tunnel entrance in Brooklyn to the turnpike is Jersey City via I-78. For comparison, one time driving to Maryland from Brooklyn only took an hour + 45 via I-278 and the turnpike. The gridlock is far worse than it used to be. Even in areas where the traffic speeds are the same, say 20 mph, there are more of those areas now. It's hard to find even a 2-3 mile section of road where it's green or even just orange instead of red. "Rush hour" also seems to now be from 1:30 pm to 9:30 pm, even if it is moving smoothly the volume is insane. The BQE I've seen black on Google maps at 1 am.
I've seen roads with traffic jams that were hardly even affected in the past, such I-684, I-84. Long Island traffic extends deep into Suffolk County. Staten Island expressway which used to be a viable alternative to the tunnels is now just as awful. City-caused traffic stretching very deep into CT, like Hartford. Maps often suggest taking surface streets for even 30+ mile trips the expressway traffic is so bad. Bottlenecks that used to be 20-25 mph are now below 10 mph.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 21, 2023, 07:45:20 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 21, 2023, 01:19:23 PM
I'd like more effort to be put into addressing traffic levels in the NYC metro area....but realistically, I'm not certain there's much that can be done (at least not without horrifically expensive property acquisition that will only boost the ranks of regional NIMBYs) aside from various measures to incent more people to switch to transit.
The rest of the world has it figured out. Tunnels.
The city is already swarming with tunnels...for the subways. Traffic tunnels would need to be build even lower to avoid interfering with them.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 21, 2023, 08:53:27 AM
I did the math, and with the current toll increases and proposed rates to drive in midtown Manhattan next year, a commuter from Elizabeth NJ to Midtown would pay approximately $85 in tolls in total to commute both ways. (Using the Optimal Route of I-278/Battery tunnel)
First of all, if you're commuting to Manhattan on a daily basis and you insist on getting there by car instead of by train, you need to seriously reevaluate your choices in life.
Second of all, even if you absolutely must make that trip by car, that is not the optimal route. It would make more sense to take the turnpike north and then go in either the Holland or Lincoln Tunnel (depending on where exactly in Manhattan you're headed).
Third of all, even for your weird route that passes through more tolls than necessary, it wouldn't be $85. The peak toll on the Goethals Bridge is $14.75, eastbound only. The Verrazzanno and Battery Tunnel are both $6.94 each way. Exactly what the congestion fee will end up being is TBD but at most it will be $23. That's $65.51 total.
Yes, it would be more if you don't have a NY E-Zpass, but if you're making trips like this regularly you're a damn fool if you don't. Anyone can get one.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 21, 2023, 11:30:26 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 21, 2023, 07:45:20 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 21, 2023, 01:19:23 PM
I'd like more effort to be put into addressing traffic levels in the NYC metro area....but realistically, I'm not certain there's much that can be done (at least not without horrifically expensive property acquisition that will only boost the ranks of regional NIMBYs) aside from various measures to incent more people to switch to transit.
The rest of the world has it figured out. Tunnels.
The city is already swarming with tunnels...for the subways. Traffic tunnels would need to be build even lower to avoid interfering with them.
It's 2023. I'm not asking for a molecular transporter. I'm pretty sure we could figure it out.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 21, 2023, 10:35:14 PM
Not from my experience. One time it took me 1 hrs 50 mins to drive from around the Brooklyn Battery tunnel entrance in Brooklyn to the turnpike is Jersey City via I-78. For comparison, one time driving to Maryland from Brooklyn only took an hour + 45 via I-278 and the turnpike. The gridlock is far worse than it used to be. Even in areas where the traffic speeds are the same, say 20 mph, there are more of those areas now. It's hard to find even a 2-3 mile section of road where it's green or even just orange instead of red. "Rush hour" also seems to now be from 1:30 pm to 9:30 pm, even if it is moving smoothly the volume is insane. The BQE I've seen black on Google maps at 1 am.
I've seen roads with traffic jams that were hardly even affected in the past, such I-684, I-84. Long Island traffic extends deep into Suffolk County. Staten Island expressway which used to be a viable alternative to the tunnels is now just as awful. City-caused traffic stretching very deep into CT, like Hartford. Maps often suggest taking surface streets for even 30+ mile trips the expressway traffic is so bad. Bottlenecks that used to be 20-25 mph are now below 10 mph.
Anecdotes versus data.
Things like that are happening more frequent than not. Literally every day you check Google maps the red and black roads are extending very far from the city. Sometimes so far it almost looks like the Traffic from Boston/Philadelphia and NYC are about to connect.
Duke yes I know you could probably just take the Lincoln tunnel and the turnpike. But even $65 would still be a good $1,300-$1,400 a month in fees. EZ pass may knock this down to $1,000, but that's still insane per month
The whole point is to make the pricing so unpleasant that you'll find some other way to get there, such as mass transit–or even parking on Staten Island or somewhere in Jersey and taking one of the ferries. Why is that in any way difficult to understand?
Because it's going to worsen traffic in those other areas. Some people have no choice but to drive. NJ Transit and the LIRR /Metro North are still expensive. Now traffic that would have normally been distributed among the Holland/Lincoln tunnels will also head to the GWB to avoid below 60th street. Traffic from Southern NYC will head straight to Staten Island, because that will now be the cheaper than going via Manhattan. I don't getvwhy they are singling out midtown/lower Manhattan. Often the traffic on the avenues there is less than on the existing bridges/tunnels/highway. Might as well put tolls on the Belt Parkway/Long Island Expressway for that purpose.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 22, 2023, 12:28:08 PM
Duke yes I know you could probably just take the Lincoln tunnel and the turnpike. But even $65 would still be a good $1,300-$1,400 a month in fees. EZ pass may knock this down to $1,000, but that's still insane per month
That's exactly the point of congestion pricing. To make it a bad idea .
And if someone works in Manhattan, and commutes by car - they probably pay an arm and a leg for parking, and $1000 a month isn't a deal breaker.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 21, 2023, 07:45:20 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 21, 2023, 01:19:23 PM
I'd like more effort to be put into addressing traffic levels in the NYC metro area....but realistically, I'm not certain there's much that can be done (at least not without horrifically expensive property acquisition that will only boost the ranks of regional NIMBYs) aside from various measures to incent more people to switch to transit.
The rest of the world has it figured out. Tunnels.
With tunnels, you still have the problem of land acquisition for the portals, ventilation, and emergency access structures, not to mention the cost and need to work around other tunnels and infrastructure.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 22, 2023, 02:00:52 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 21, 2023, 07:45:20 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 21, 2023, 01:19:23 PM
I'd like more effort to be put into addressing traffic levels in the NYC metro area....but realistically, I'm not certain there's much that can be done (at least not without horrifically expensive property acquisition that will only boost the ranks of regional NIMBYs) aside from various measures to incent more people to switch to transit.
The rest of the world has it figured out. Tunnels.
With tunnels, you still have the problem of land acquisition for the portals, ventilation, and emergency access structures, not to mention the cost and need to work around other tunnels and infrastructure.
Absolutely. And once again, the rest of the world has figured this out. I don't know why we can't.
Quote from: kalvado on September 22, 2023, 12:55:31 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 22, 2023, 12:28:08 PM
Duke yes I know you could probably just take the Lincoln tunnel and the turnpike. But even $65 would still be a good $1,300-$1,400 a month in fees. EZ pass may knock this down to $1,000, but that's still insane per month
That's exactly the point of congestion pricing. To make it a bad idea .
And if someone works in Manhattan, and commutes by car - they probably pay an arm and a leg for parking, and $1000 a month isn't a deal breaker.
Well part of the reason for that might be the risk of losing a literal arm of leg if someone pushes you onto the subway tracks or shoots you. Even if the NYC MTA wasn't such a mess, what congestion pricing will do is harm small businesses since know one will want to enter the fee zone. Even people just passing through will be punished. It's not like people who live in Manhattan are going to park their cars in Staten Island.
1. You don't go onto the city streets of Manhattan if you're passing through, so you won't be charged.
2. NOT EVERYONE USES CARS, especially in the New York City area.
3. You mention being shot. New York City is one of the safest places in the country.
True, NYC crime rate is at one of the lowest levels overall since the 80s. But, subway crime is through the roof and so is gun crime. Congestion pricing isn't achieving its purpose though if it worsens traffic and pollution in all the areas around it.
I ride the subway all the time and I don't feel unsafe. It's easy to avoid being pushed onto the tracks if you don't stand at the edge of the platform looking down the tunnel to see whether the train is coming.
The point remains: The whole intent behind the program is to make it expensive to drive into the congestion charging zone to discourage people from doing so. It has nothing to do with the surrounding area. The OP is simply being stubborn in refusing to acknowledge that point because it doesn't fit his agenda.
If the purpose is to reduce traffic it is not going to work. It will just make traffic a worse nightmare than it already is in Staten Island and at the GWB. Since the FDR and HH parkways are exempt, those will be flooded with extra traffic as well. Which will in turn, affect the east river bridges and Hudson River crossings. As I said, traffic on random side roads in Manhattan isn't all that bad. This charging zone would literally make more sense on I-278 or the Belt Parkway.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 22, 2023, 02:54:45 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 22, 2023, 12:55:31 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 22, 2023, 12:28:08 PM
Duke yes I know you could probably just take the Lincoln tunnel and the turnpike. But even $65 would still be a good $1,300-$1,400 a month in fees. EZ pass may knock this down to $1,000, but that's still insane per month
That's exactly the point of congestion pricing. To make it a bad idea .
And if someone works in Manhattan, and commutes by car - they probably pay an arm and a leg for parking, and $1000 a month isn't a deal breaker.
Well part of the reason for that might be the risk of losing a literal arm of leg if someone pushes you onto the subway tracks or shoots you. Even if the NYC MTA wasn't such a mess, what congestion pricing will do is harm small businesses since know one will want to enter the fee zone. Even people just passing through will be punished. It's not like people who live in Manhattan are going to park their cars in Staten Island.
Someone who is so afraid of Manhattan shouldn't really push for a job there, hence a need for commute.
And yes, Manhattan is one of those few places in US where one can totally live without a car.
There is another fun part about the plan, though:
QuoteResidents in the congestion zone making less than $60,000 a year will get a tax credit equal to the tolls they paid.
Makes me wonder if $60k is a physically survivable income over there...
Quote from: kalvado on September 22, 2023, 03:14:24 PM
Makes me wonder if $60k is a physically survivable income over there...
$60k per person and not per household? Probably yes.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 22, 2023, 03:07:08 PM
I ride the subway all the time and I don't feel unsafe. It's easy to avoid being pushed onto the tracks if you don't stand at the edge of the platform looking down the tunnel to see whether the train is coming.
The point remains: The whole intent behind the program is to make it expensive to drive into the congestion charging zone to discourage people from doing so. It has nothing to do with the surrounding area. The OP is simply being stubborn in refusing to acknowledge that point because it doesn't fit his agenda.
It's been a while since subway was my daily commute , but I was always pretty comfortable safety-wise. There were some fatal accidents, maybe once a few years with daily ridership in millions
Now it's a 20 mile interstate drive, and serious accidents are pretty common on that stretch, with fatal accidents not being unheard of. Ridership on that stretch is ~100k daily
Long story short, I would estimate that my risk of dying on a highway during commute is probably higher than the risk of dying in subway was. So far, I managed to survive.
With that, subway being a target for terrorist attack (e.g. Tokyo, Moscow) is a totally different story. Being in a major city probably means being more of a target anyway.
I don't see any issue with this plan. Honestly, I wish more cities had something similar encouraging transit use.
Quote from: Ellie on September 22, 2023, 06:58:42 PM
I don't see any issue with this plan. Honestly, I wish more cities had something similar encouraging transit use.
Convenience should be the main encouragement for transit. If that's too high of a bar, then it's not a fair game to begin with.
Transit use is good. Unless transit is at capacity.
In theory, there is no capacity for transit - just keep shoving people in the trains. Just keep boarding buses. But in reality, people don't want to stand for 30 - 75 minutes on NJ Transit. People don't want to be sitting with other people's asses in their face. Sure, it occurs often on a NYC Subway, but the passengers on NJ Transit's rail lines expect something different...especially when they're paying upwards of $16.75/direction for a ride (Trenton - NYC Penn Station. A monthly pass brings the cost down to about $12/direction).
There's also parking limits - some lots at the smaller stations are already sold out of spaces and/or permits. There's probably room currently at the larger stations, such as Trenton, Hamilton & Metropark. Most bus stops don't have any parking, so people will need to walk to get to them.
And when the trains fill, NJ Transit can't simply add more trains to the line. First, they're not all NJ Transit's lines. The main track going into NYC is Amtrak's and they get first priority. There's only so many trains that can travel on the line, and only so many terminals in Penn Station to use.
Buses also have a finite limit. The buses that enter NYC have to stop somewhere to discharge and load passengers. The Port Authority Bus Terminal has had issues with capacity problems in the past, and the terminal is going to be replaced soon which will probably temporarily reduce capacity. The XBL heading into NYC has been bumper-to-bumper for decades. Current bus usage is probably still down due to the Corona, but it's going to go up again as workers continue to return to the office.
Before NJ Transit increased capacity, Amtrak allowed NJ Transit to utilize their trains, especially their 'Clockers' which departed about every hour (these trains don't exist anymore). Amtrak may be willing to assist in that respect again, but there's no guarantee.
So, if the congestion pricing keeps people from driving, and they turn to mass transit instead, how much can the existing mass transit systems absorb? Everyone cries "just use mass transit", but if there's no parking spaces at the stations, and people are standing in the aisles for an hour or more, that's not exactly a winning solution to the problem.
Yep, buses are already crammed like sardines. What next, people riding on the roof? Not to mention the average bus speeds in the city are so slow that I've outpaced MTA buses walking, for up to 2 miles. I'd rather walk a long distance than stand up uncomfortably being jostled around going the same speed.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 23, 2023, 01:33:17 AM
Yep, buses are already crammed like sardines. What next, people riding on the roof? Not to mention the average bus speeds in the city are so slow that I've outpaced MTA buses walking, for up to 2 miles. I'd rather walk a long distance than stand up uncomfortably being jostled around going the same speed.
That's exactly the problem congestion pricing aims at. Less traffic - faster moving buses - more trips per bus - fewer passengers in a bus.
Quote from: kalvado on September 23, 2023, 05:13:04 AM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 23, 2023, 01:33:17 AM
Yep, buses are already crammed like sardines. What next, people riding on the roof? Not to mention the average bus speeds in the city are so slow that I've outpaced MTA buses walking, for up to 2 miles. I'd rather walk a long distance than stand up uncomfortably being jostled around going the same speed.
That's exactly the problem congestion pricing aims at. Less traffic - faster moving buses - more trips per bus - fewer passengers in a bus.
While he's referring to intracity, yes that certainly will help speed up buses.
Intercity (well, inter-state), that's what I was referring to. I'm not sure how the city and region is currently doing regarding bus capacity. There may be room here. I'm also not sure what the goal of the congestion pricing is - are they trying to reduce traffic by 75%? 50%? 25%? Or do they believe most traffic will continue to come in, maximizing their revenue and minimizing faster MTA buses? Do they switch to a variable pricing model, a la 95 and 66 in VA? Every percent increase/decrease will have an impact on other services.
Or will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
A 5% decrease in vehicles per hour is more than a 5% reduction in time lost due to congestion.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 22, 2023, 12:28:08 PM
Duke yes I know you could probably just take the Lincoln tunnel and the turnpike. But even $65 would still be a good $1,300-$1,400 a month in fees. EZ pass may knock this down to $1,000, but that's still insane per month
And an NJ Transit monthly pass from Elizabeth to Penn Station is $210.
This is why any sane person commuting to Manhattan takes the train.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 22, 2023, 02:54:45 PM
Well part of the reason for that might be the risk of losing a literal arm of leg if someone pushes you onto the subway tracks or shoots you.
If you're concerned about your safety, the train is the better option. You're more likely to die in a car crash.
QuoteIt's not like people who live in Manhattan are going to park their cars in Staten Island.
78% of Manhattan households own zero cars. Sit down.
How much traffic do they really think they are going to reduce with this plan? What about commuting points trains do not serve?
With the current gridlock in NYC you aren't more likely to die in a car crash. There just isn't enough room to build up any speed for that to happen.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 23, 2023, 12:10:18 PM
How much traffic do they really think they are going to reduce with this plan? What about commuting points trains do not serve?
With the current gridlock in NYC you aren't more likely to die in a car crash. There just isn't enough room to build up any speed for that to happen.
So is there any solution you would support?
Yes, big cities have downtowns running well over capacity they were planned for. There are couple of layers of solutions already implemented, but it's never enough.
Pure whining isn't helping. I certainly understand your frustration, but the only personal advice available is to move elsewhere if things are so unbearable.
That's why I went looking for a forum on these topics, to see what other people thought the solutions would be. Highways in the city need to be widened signifantly to accommodate the volume.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 23, 2023, 02:07:24 PM
That's why I went looking for a forum on these topics, to see what other people thought the solutions would be. Highways in the city need to be widened significantly to accommodate the volume.
Well, given the price of land and real estate in NYC that is highly unlikely. Modern trend is to prioritize walking, biking, and public transportation as the way to move around for daily life. Which isn't
That doesn't mean thoroughfares are not needed, especially since Long Island has minimal access options other than through NYC proper, often through Manhattan or Staten island.
But reducing car access to lower Manhattan doesn't seem as a very bad idea given all existing constrains. Even if more highways would go to that area, street grid and parking would still limit things.
For example, if they do put I-278 in a tunnel, the existing highway should remain there to increase capacity. Maybe an expressway across Brooklyn would help, but there isn't even enough room for many surface streets, let alone new highways. It's amazing how they managed to squeeze the highways they did in here, like the Jackie-Robinson parkway or the FDR.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 23, 2023, 02:53:33 PM
For example, if they do put I-278 in a tunnel, the existing highway should remain there to increase capacity. Maybe an expressway across Brooklyn would help, but there isn't even enough room for many surface streets, let alone new highways. It's amazing how they managed to squeeze the highways they did in here, like the Jackie-Robinson parkway or the FDR.
Well, you certainly understand the situation.
So, may I repeat - if it is so unbearable for you, consider moving out of NYC area...
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 23, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
But this also means that office vacancy skyrockets, local businesses that depend on office workers shut down, which means a lot more vacant storefronts, which means unemployment for people not working in offices goes up. It's a Catch-22.
And for every good employee that works at home, often putting in more time than if they did in the office, there's other employees that if you called them (and they actually answered) you'll hear seagulls in the background or the intercom system requesting a cleanup on aisle 7. They're the ones that ruin it for the rest of us that truly work at home.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 08:18:14 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 23, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
But this also means that office vacancy skyrockets, local businesses that depend on office workers shut down, which means a lot more vacant storefronts, which means unemployment for people not working in offices goes up. It's a Catch-22.
And for every good employee that works at home, often putting in more time than if they did in the office, there's other employees that if you called them (and they actually answered) you'll hear seagulls in the background or the intercom system requesting a cleanup on aisle 7. They're the ones that ruin it for the rest of us that truly work at home.
WFH is a huge can of worms yet to be sorted. I would not bet on how things would settle in a decade or so
I'm confused as to how the 60th street perimeter is going to work. Is it that anyone who enters Manhattan from a bridge/tunnel which lands them below 60th street has to pay? Or will someone who is already in Manhattan that goes from 70th to 50th street has to pay? I find it ridiculous that someone who makes a wrong turn or misses a turn near 60th street may get hit with a $10 or $20 fee. I haven't been able to find clarification online about this.
Also how much traffic will this really reduce if drivers who don't enter/exit the zone don't have to pay anything? People who already live within the toll zone and only drive around within it can do so for free. This is only charging drivers for passing through.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 23, 2023, 09:36:53 PM
I'm confused as to how the 60th street perimeter is going to work. Is it that anyone who enters Manhattan from a bridge/tunnel which lands them below 60th street has to pay? Or will someone who is already in Manhattan that goes from 70th to 50th street has to pay? I find it ridiculous that someone who makes a wrong turn or misses a turn near 60th street may get hit with a $10 or $20 fee. I haven't been able to find clarification online about this.
You cross the line, you pay.
I really hope we see a post in this thread that announces a reversal on this stupid project.
Quote from: Rothman on September 23, 2023, 10:08:15 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 23, 2023, 09:36:53 PM
I'm confused as to how the 60th street perimeter is going to work. Is it that anyone who enters Manhattan from a bridge/tunnel which lands them below 60th street has to pay? Or will someone who is already in Manhattan that goes from 70th to 50th street has to pay? I find it ridiculous that someone who makes a wrong turn or misses a turn near 60th street may get hit with a $10 or $20 fee. I haven't been able to find clarification online about this.
You cross the line, you pay.
59th would probably be a better northern boundary given it is a fairly significant cross-island street and the southern boundary of Central Park, but of course one more block north will get everyone driving across the Queensboro Bridge...
Quote from: US 89 on September 24, 2023, 12:42:22 AM
59th would probably be a better northern boundary given it is a fairly significant cross-island street and the southern boundary of Central Park, but of course one more block north will get everyone driving across the Queensboro Bridge...
The funny thing is it actually doesn't. The Manhattan-Bound upper roadway touches down between 61st and 62nd, and if you look at the proposed gantry locations there won't be one there. So it will still be possible to shunpike the Triboro toll from Queens by using the Queensboro Bridge, but only westbound and only using the upper level.
Will congestion pricing be all of Manhattan south of 60th street? Down to battery park? Or is there a southern limit too? I read online the FDR and West Side Parkway will be exempt, but how will this affect entering those roads? I'm from Brooklyn, so if I cross the Brooklyn Bridge and immediately get on the FDR entrance ramp, will there be cameras immediately after the bridge? In that case you'd still get hit with the toll even for the FDR.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 24, 2023, 06:55:59 PM
Will congestion pricing be all of Manhattan south of 60th street? Down to battery park? Or is there a southern limit too? I read online the FDR and West Side Parkway will be exempt, but how will this affect entering those roads? I'm from Brooklyn, so if I cross the Brooklyn Bridge and immediately get on the FDR entrance ramp, will there be cameras immediately after the bridge? In that case you'd still get hit with the toll even for the FDR.
Yes, if you cross the Brooklyn Bridge you will get hit with the congestion fee, even if you use the FDR ramps.
The way things are planned out, you will not be hit with the congestion fee if you enter the West Side Highway or FDR Drive north of 60 St and then exit to the Battery Tunnel, or vice versa (you will, of course, still get hit with the Battery Tunnel toll). Any other entrance or exit will get you hit with the fee.
Yes, this does mean it will become impossible to get to Brooklyn/Queens/Long Island from the mainland by car without paying a toll. Though, as described above, one specific toll-free route to the mainland from Brooklyn/Queens/Long Island will remain.
Quote from: Duke87 on September 24, 2023, 08:38:29 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 24, 2023, 06:55:59 PM
Will congestion pricing be all of Manhattan south of 60th street? Down to battery park? Or is there a southern limit too? I read online the FDR and West Side Parkway will be exempt, but how will this affect entering those roads? I'm from Brooklyn, so if I cross the Brooklyn Bridge and immediately get on the FDR entrance ramp, will there be cameras immediately after the bridge? In that case you'd still get hit with the toll even for the FDR.
Yes, if you cross the Brooklyn Bridge you will get hit with the congestion fee, even if you use the FDR ramps.
The way things are planned out, you will not be hit with the congestion fee if you enter the West Side Highway or FDR Drive north of 60 St and then exit to the Battery Tunnel, or vice versa (you will, of course, still get hit with the Battery Tunnel toll). Any other entrance or exit will get you hit with the fee.
Yes, this does mean it will become impossible to get to Brooklyn/Queens/Long Island from the mainland by car without paying a toll. Though, as described above, one specific toll-free route to the mainland from Brooklyn/Queens/Long Island will remain.
I think it's complete bullshit that Queensboro Bridge isn't maintained as a free route. But that way the MTA makes more money off you using another of their bridges.
If the FDR is exempt but the ramps and streets leading to it aren't, then it's not going to really matter. Even if one gets on the FDR at 96th street and drives down toward the Williamsburg bridge, they will still have to take side streets to get to the bridge. If the cameras will be placed at the Manhattan side of all East River bridges/Hudson River Crossings, you already got charged before getting to any ramps. So it's moot. They might as well just make the Lincoln tunnel $40 as that's essentially what it will be.
Pages 14 - 24 of https://new.mta.info/document/110771 shows the approximate locations of the proposed tolling points.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 22, 2023, 03:07:08 PM
I ride the subway all the time and I don't feel unsafe. It's easy to avoid being pushed onto the tracks if you don't stand at the edge of the platform looking down the tunnel to see whether the train is coming.
If I recall, one of the more recent survivors of such an attack was fairly close to the middle of the platform.
Whenever I took the subway, I always kept in mind the possibility that I would encounter some of these destitute and disturbed people who hear voices from God telling them to push random commuters onto the tracks. Now it's happening way too often.
And yes, congestion pricing will only force even more congestion on everything outside of Lower Manhattan and Midtown Manhattan.
The old proposals of Robert Moses just keep looking better and better.
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 24, 2023, 10:51:34 PM
The old proposals of Robert Moses just keep looking better and better.
Robert Moses built overpasses purposefully low so buses full of Black people couldn't get to the beaches as easily.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on September 24, 2023, 11:29:19 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 24, 2023, 10:51:34 PM
The old proposals of Robert Moses just keep looking better and better.
Robert Moses built overpasses purposefully low so buses full of Black people couldn't get to the beaches as easily.
It's well known he was racist. That doesn't make him a bad city planner regarding moving cars better than NYC currently does.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on September 24, 2023, 11:29:19 PM
Robert Moses built overpasses purposefully low so buses full of Black people couldn't get to the beaches as easily.
See the funny thing of that is, there IS a bus to Jones Beach (https://www.nicebus.com/Tools/Maps-and-Schedules/Line?route=n88X), which uses the Moses-planned Meadowbrook Parkway. No, the overpasses in that area have not been raised from their original construction. No, it does not use special low-clearance buses.
And, well, this makes sense because if you look at a map you'll realize there is no access to Jones Beach without using one of the parkways.
Trucks need to be able to get there to deliver stuff, so the overpasses on the parkways leading there were built high enough to accommodate them in at least one lane, and by virtue of this can also accommodate buses.
Nonetheless, in general parkways were intended solely for use by private automobiles, and as such effort was not made to enusre larger vehicles could fit under the bridges except in specific cases like this where it had to be.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 08:18:14 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 23, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
But this also means that office vacancy skyrockets, local businesses that depend on office workers shut down, which means a lot more vacant storefronts, which means unemployment for people not working in offices goes up. It's a Catch-22.
And for every good employee that works at home, often putting in more time than if they did in the office, there's other employees that if you called them (and they actually answered) you'll hear seagulls in the background or the intercom system requesting a cleanup on aisle 7. They're the ones that ruin it for the rest of us that truly work at home.
The mistake a lot of managers make with WFH is getting past the idea of "putting in time". A manager should want their employees to put in work, not time.
Say you assign Bill a project that is going to take 6 months to do, and you pay him $500/week, so you've budgeted $13,000 for this project. Now, Bill is a clever guy, so he knows how to write a fancy Excel macro that will automatically do the entire project in five minutes. He could spend a week writing this macro, radically increase the efficiency of the company, and get paid $500. Or he could pretend he doesn't know how to do that and get paid $13,000. Or, more likely, he writes the macro, gets the project done, and dorks around for the other 25 weeks not turning it in and pretending to work on the project and then turns it in, oh, say, three days before the deadline so he still looks like he did a good job. Ahead of schedule and under budget, yay!
With WFH we had a golden opportunity to restructure the workplace to be task-oriented rather than time-oriented. (If Bill gets his tasks done by knocking them out faster who cares if he uses the rest of the day to go to the beach?) But instead we've largely squandered it because somebody with 47 Lamborghinis in their Lamborghini account lies awake at night paralyzed with fear that a low level employee at the company they lord over might dare to be happy at some point...
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 25, 2023, 02:21:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 08:18:14 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 23, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
But this also means that office vacancy skyrockets, local businesses that depend on office workers shut down, which means a lot more vacant storefronts, which means unemployment for people not working in offices goes up. It's a Catch-22.
And for every good employee that works at home, often putting in more time than if they did in the office, there's other employees that if you called them (and they actually answered) you'll hear seagulls in the background or the intercom system requesting a cleanup on aisle 7. They're the ones that ruin it for the rest of us that truly work at home.
The mistake a lot of managers make with WFH is getting past the idea of "putting in time". A manager should want their employees to put in work, not time.
Say you assign Bill a project that is going to take 6 months to do, and you pay him $500/week, so you've budgeted $13,000 for this project. Now, Bill is a clever guy, so he knows how to write a fancy Excel macro that will automatically do the entire project in five minutes. He could spend a week writing this macro, radically increase the efficiency of the company, and get paid $500. Or he could pretend he doesn't know how to do that and get paid $13,000. Or, more likely, he writes the macro, gets the project done, and dorks around for the other 25 weeks not turning it in and pretending to work on the project and then turns it in, oh, say, three days before the deadline so he still looks like he did a good job. Ahead of schedule and under budget, yay!
With WFH we had a golden opportunity to restructure the workplace to be task-oriented rather than time-oriented. (If Bill gets his tasks done by knocking them out faster who cares if he uses the rest of the day to go to the beach?) But instead we've largely squandered it because somebody with 47 Lamborghinis in their Lamborghini account lies awake at night paralyzed with fear that a low level employee at the company they lord over might dare to be happy at some point...
So...piecework. Back in the day, piecework pay in factories was common. It wasn't so great for the laborers...
Quote from: Duke87 on September 25, 2023, 12:19:31 AM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on September 24, 2023, 11:29:19 PM
Robert Moses built overpasses purposefully low so buses full of Black people couldn't get to the beaches as easily.
See the funny thing of that is, there IS a bus to Jones Beach (https://www.nicebus.com/Tools/Maps-and-Schedules/Line?route=n88X), which uses the Moses-planned Meadowbrook Parkway. No, the overpasses in that area have not been raised from their original construction. No, it does not use special low-clearance buses.
And, well, this makes sense because if you look at a map you'll realize there is no access to Jones Beach without using one of the parkways. Trucks need to be able to get there to deliver stuff, so the overpasses on the parkways leading there were built high enough to accommodate them in at least one lane, and by virtue of this can also accommodate buses.
Nonetheless, in general parkways were intended solely for use by private automobiles, and as such effort was not made to enusre larger vehicles could fit under the bridges except in specific cases like this where it had to be.
Pfft. You still have to take the train to get to that bus...
Quote from: Rothman on September 25, 2023, 06:46:00 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 25, 2023, 02:21:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 08:18:14 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 23, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
But this also means that office vacancy skyrockets, local businesses that depend on office workers shut down, which means a lot more vacant storefronts, which means unemployment for people not working in offices goes up. It's a Catch-22.
And for every good employee that works at home, often putting in more time than if they did in the office, there's other employees that if you called them (and they actually answered) you'll hear seagulls in the background or the intercom system requesting a cleanup on aisle 7. They're the ones that ruin it for the rest of us that truly work at home.
The mistake a lot of managers make with WFH is getting past the idea of "putting in time". A manager should want their employees to put in work, not time.
Say you assign Bill a project that is going to take 6 months to do, and you pay him $500/week, so you've budgeted $13,000 for this project. Now, Bill is a clever guy, so he knows how to write a fancy Excel macro that will automatically do the entire project in five minutes. He could spend a week writing this macro, radically increase the efficiency of the company, and get paid $500. Or he could pretend he doesn't know how to do that and get paid $13,000. Or, more likely, he writes the macro, gets the project done, and dorks around for the other 25 weeks not turning it in and pretending to work on the project and then turns it in, oh, say, three days before the deadline so he still looks like he did a good job. Ahead of schedule and under budget, yay!
With WFH we had a golden opportunity to restructure the workplace to be task-oriented rather than time-oriented. (If Bill gets his tasks done by knocking them out faster who cares if he uses the rest of the day to go to the beach?) But instead we've largely squandered it because somebody with 47 Lamborghinis in their Lamborghini account lies awake at night paralyzed with fear that a low level employee at the company they lord over might dare to be happy at some point...
So...piecework. Back in the day, piecework pay in factories was common. It wasn't so great for the laborers...
But those working in factories generally can't work from home.
I would prefer being allowed to leave the office early if my work is finished. At least at home, I can do chores here and there, or bring the laptop to where my chores are. And in many cases, I need to be ready to answer questions or provide info to others, and same with those I supervise, so we still need to be available even after our main work functions are completed.
If your travel route brings you in, out, and back in again, do you need to pay twice?
Quote from: 1 on September 25, 2023, 09:58:15 AM
If your travel route brings you in, out, and back in again, do you need to pay twice?
On Page 9 of the linked document above, it's proposed to only charge a vehicle once per day, regardless of the number of times it may leave and reenter the zone.
Quote from: 1 on September 25, 2023, 09:58:15 AM
If your travel route brings you in, out, and back in again, do you need to pay twice?
According to this Washington Post article about the plan (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/06/28/congestion-pricing-in-new-york-city-how-the-new-system-would-work/f3281d58-15be-11ee-9de3-ba1fa29e9bec_story.html), private vehicles and for-hire cars (cabs, Uber, etc.) will only get charged once per day. (Edited to add: I see jeffandnicole cited what I would consider a more reliable source than the Post article, but I went ahead and posted the link anyway in case someone finds the article useful.)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 25, 2023, 09:51:26 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 25, 2023, 06:46:00 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 25, 2023, 02:21:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 08:18:14 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 23, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
But this also means that office vacancy skyrockets, local businesses that depend on office workers shut down, which means a lot more vacant storefronts, which means unemployment for people not working in offices goes up. It's a Catch-22.
And for every good employee that works at home, often putting in more time than if they did in the office, there's other employees that if you called them (and they actually answered) you'll hear seagulls in the background or the intercom system requesting a cleanup on aisle 7. They're the ones that ruin it for the rest of us that truly work at home.
The mistake a lot of managers make with WFH is getting past the idea of "putting in time". A manager should want their employees to put in work, not time.
Say you assign Bill a project that is going to take 6 months to do, and you pay him $500/week, so you've budgeted $13,000 for this project. Now, Bill is a clever guy, so he knows how to write a fancy Excel macro that will automatically do the entire project in five minutes. He could spend a week writing this macro, radically increase the efficiency of the company, and get paid $500. Or he could pretend he doesn't know how to do that and get paid $13,000. Or, more likely, he writes the macro, gets the project done, and dorks around for the other 25 weeks not turning it in and pretending to work on the project and then turns it in, oh, say, three days before the deadline so he still looks like he did a good job. Ahead of schedule and under budget, yay!
With WFH we had a golden opportunity to restructure the workplace to be task-oriented rather than time-oriented. (If Bill gets his tasks done by knocking them out faster who cares if he uses the rest of the day to go to the beach?) But instead we've largely squandered it because somebody with 47 Lamborghinis in their Lamborghini account lies awake at night paralyzed with fear that a low level employee at the company they lord over might dare to be happy at some point...
So...piecework. Back in the day, piecework pay in factories was common. It wasn't so great for the laborers...
But those working in factories generally can't work from home.
I would prefer being allowed to leave the office early if my work is finished. At least at home, I can do chores here and there, or bring the laptop to where my chores are. And in many cases, I need to be ready to answer questions or provide info to others, and same with those I supervise, so we still need to be available even after our main work functions are completed.
Piecework is piecework, whether on an assembly line or at home. Sounds like a good way of arguing to get rid of salaries. "What, you're doing chores? Fine, we'll pay you by some quantification of product rather than time. Welcome to the gig economy. Oh wait, we can probably get rid of benefits, too, in the process..."
Quote from: Rothman on September 25, 2023, 10:45:53 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 25, 2023, 09:51:26 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 25, 2023, 06:46:00 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 25, 2023, 02:21:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 08:18:14 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 23, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 23, 2023, 09:41:14 AMOr will 1 or more companies ultimately say, why are we putting up with this BS - already over half our employees live in NJ - we can just move the offices to Jersey City or Newark and work in one of their new office towers there, and NYers can take the PATH or NJ Transit.
I had hopes that employers would have learned from pandemic lockdowns that they don't need their workers in the office 40 hours a week....or even 40 hours a month.
A permanent change in that regard would have gone a long way towards addressing some of NYC's gridlock, both from the reduced commuting as well as some people moving to more affordable locations.
But this also means that office vacancy skyrockets, local businesses that depend on office workers shut down, which means a lot more vacant storefronts, which means unemployment for people not working in offices goes up. It's a Catch-22.
And for every good employee that works at home, often putting in more time than if they did in the office, there's other employees that if you called them (and they actually answered) you'll hear seagulls in the background or the intercom system requesting a cleanup on aisle 7. They're the ones that ruin it for the rest of us that truly work at home.
The mistake a lot of managers make with WFH is getting past the idea of "putting in time". A manager should want their employees to put in work, not time.
Say you assign Bill a project that is going to take 6 months to do, and you pay him $500/week, so you've budgeted $13,000 for this project. Now, Bill is a clever guy, so he knows how to write a fancy Excel macro that will automatically do the entire project in five minutes. He could spend a week writing this macro, radically increase the efficiency of the company, and get paid $500. Or he could pretend he doesn't know how to do that and get paid $13,000. Or, more likely, he writes the macro, gets the project done, and dorks around for the other 25 weeks not turning it in and pretending to work on the project and then turns it in, oh, say, three days before the deadline so he still looks like he did a good job. Ahead of schedule and under budget, yay!
With WFH we had a golden opportunity to restructure the workplace to be task-oriented rather than time-oriented. (If Bill gets his tasks done by knocking them out faster who cares if he uses the rest of the day to go to the beach?) But instead we've largely squandered it because somebody with 47 Lamborghinis in their Lamborghini account lies awake at night paralyzed with fear that a low level employee at the company they lord over might dare to be happy at some point...
So...piecework. Back in the day, piecework pay in factories was common. It wasn't so great for the laborers...
But those working in factories generally can't work from home.
I would prefer being allowed to leave the office early if my work is finished. At least at home, I can do chores here and there, or bring the laptop to where my chores are. And in many cases, I need to be ready to answer questions or provide info to others, and same with those I supervise, so we still need to be available even after our main work functions are completed.
Piecework is piecework, whether on an assembly line or at home. Sounds like a good way of arguing to get rid of salaries. "What, you're doing chores? Fine, we'll pay you by some quantification of product rather than time. Welcome to the gig economy. Oh wait, we can probably get rid of benefits, too, in the process..."
Is there an ideal solution?
Salary is salary, whether in the office or at home. Sounds like a good way of arguing to get rid of work efficiency control. "What, you're playing games in the office? Fine, we'll pay you by the hour rather than the outcome of your work. Welcome to the union."
If there is a good way to quantify outcomes, rewarding sloppy slow work isn't a good idea. As a customer, I prefer to pay per result anyway - be it a loaf of bread, car service task, or case processed by the office. Quantifying more diverse work environment is definitely a problem.
PS - should the WFH thread be split off? It may become pretty long, and has minimum relation to the original subject
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 25, 2023, 10:17:49 AM
Quote from: 1 on September 25, 2023, 09:58:15 AM
If your travel route brings you in, out, and back in again, do you need to pay twice?
On Page 9 of the linked document above, it's proposed to only charge a vehicle once per day, regardless of the number of times it may leave and reenter the zone.
Thanks, I was going to ask that.
I still think though that it would just be a better plan to bump all the bridges and tunnels up to $40, since everyone coming through will immediately be hit with the congestion toll anyway. Most of the traffic in Manhattan is from the crossings, so put the increases there, is any.
At least that wouldn't make people pay just for crossing an arbitrary point on 5th Avenue. And that wouldn't result in pushing even more traffic north, if the GWB was increased too.
Congestion pricing has also got to be the 1st ever system that will put a fee on roads with traffic lights. Normally fees are only on expressway-type routes.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 12:38:55 PM
Congestion pricing has also got to be the 1st ever system that will put a fee on roads with traffic lights. Normally fees are only on expressway-type routes.
1. Congestion pricing isn't new. It's only new to North America.
2. What about the traffic lights on Prince Edward Island? To get to the island, you have to pay for either the bridge or the ferry.
Singapore has had a congestion charge since 1975. Central London has had one since 2003. Other places across Europe have them as well, such as Stockholm, Milan, and Gothenburg. In the future, Asia, Australia, and other cities in North, Central and South America will likely get them as well. I don't foresee any coming to Africa, save for some of the more urbanized areas.
Quote from: 1 on September 25, 2023, 12:41:01 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 12:38:55 PM
Congestion pricing has also got to be the 1st ever system that will put a fee on roads with traffic lights. Normally fees are only on expressway-type routes.
1. Congestion pricing isn't new. It's only new to North America.
2. What about the traffic lights on Prince Edward Island? To get to the island, you have to pay for either the bridge or the ferry.
Because it's a bridge or a ferry. I've never heard of tolls to just drive through a neighborhood.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 12:54:27 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 25, 2023, 12:41:01 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 12:38:55 PM
Congestion pricing has also got to be the 1st ever system that will put a fee on roads with traffic lights. Normally fees are only on expressway-type routes.
1. Congestion pricing isn't new. It's only new to North America.
2. What about the traffic lights on Prince Edward Island? To get to the island, you have to pay for either the bridge or the ferry.
Because it's a bridge or a ferry. I've never heard of tolls to just drive through a neighborhood.
See London...
You're ignoring other posts in the thread...like a recently banned member...
Quote from: Rothman on September 25, 2023, 01:05:16 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 12:54:27 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 25, 2023, 12:41:01 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 12:38:55 PM
Congestion pricing has also got to be the 1st ever system that will put a fee on roads with traffic lights. Normally fees are only on expressway-type routes.
1. Congestion pricing isn't new. It's only new to North America.
2. What about the traffic lights on Prince Edward Island? To get to the island, you have to pay for either the bridge or the ferry.
Because it's a bridge or a ferry. I've never heard of tolls to just drive through a neighborhood.
See London...
You're ignoring other posts in the thread...like a recently banned member...
Maybe reasonable to say that such toll on general purpose street is the first in US. Which may be closer to reality.
Florida has a couple of surface roads that are tolled, though I don't believe any of them have traffic lights.
A US location with a toll to drive through a neighborhood might be Lake Harmony, Pennsylvania. You have to pay a toll to use Moseywood Road as a shortcut from PA-940 to PA-903. It's a privately-owned road.
I know other countries have done it, but added onto already existing fees in NY, it is pretty steep. And it will worsen GWB traffic. Manhattan streets are public roads, not privately owned, and are just intersections with traffic lights and sidewalks. It's not a typical route, such as a bridge, tunnel, state park, or private that one would be charged for.
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Staten Island is geographically, geologically, and topographically, New Jersey. Why it was ever considered part of NY is beyond me. It has extremely similar terrain and geological features as eastern NJ, and the borough as a whole does not look at all like it's a part of "New York City". Driving on the West Shore Expressway you would not think you were in a city or anywhere near one. It is more rural than parts of Long Island. The Verrazano Bridge, going from NY to NY, span is almost 2.5 miles long and the Geothals bridge is only 1/2 - 1 mile long at most. It has 3 short bridges connecting it to NJ, but one, long bridge connecting it to NYC, showing that it most likely broke off from NJ ages ago. Also, redesignating it NJ may show how ridiculous the double-toll is to drive from NJ to Brooklyn. The goethals bridge shouldn't be tolled, only the Verrazano, since that is the real "Hudson River Crossing". Also, this would allow the speed limits to be bumped to 55 mph, since NYC caps all highways at 50 mph within it's confines.. To summarize, it is closer, and looks very much more like NJ than NY, let alone NYC. Please forgive me of this has been discussed elsewhere in the forums years ago. I just joined the site this month, and while I do look at the first page of threads in a topic, like off-topic, to see if someone already started a similar topic, but I don't check every page, also I might be sharing a new specific reason/justification of why that same idea should be implemented, so Don't get all "oh FritzOwl already included that in his pave all of America with roads plan!"
Maybe if you got your wish and Staten Island were part of New Jersey, the Staten Island Expressway could be turned over to the New Jersey Turnpike and upgraded to some version of a dual-dual setup (though space constraints might require use of double-decking to pull that off, which would would raise various other issues relating both to aesthetic issues and how to tie it into the approach to the Verrazzano). That, in turn, would reduce the amount of congestion on the SIE and maybe reduce the amount of time it shows as "Black" or "Red" on Google Maps.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 25, 2023, 01:37:31 PM
Florida has a couple of surface roads that are tolled, though I don't believe any of them have traffic lights.
A US location with a toll to drive through a neighborhood might be Lake Harmony, Pennsylvania. You have to pay a toll to use Moseywood Road as a shortcut from PA-940 to PA-903. It's a privately-owned road.
Another place like that is Hilton Head, SC. We wanted to go to the lighthouse at the far southern end of the island, but south of the last entry/exit for the route to the mainland (which is the roundabout at the end of US 278), is a toll booth. Everything south of that point is privately owned and we had to pay to pass that point.
EDIT - yes - just noticed that I am mentioning US 278 in a thread where many other posts are mentioning I-278 for good reason.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 25, 2023, 05:28:44 PM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 25, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Staten Island is geographically, geologically, and topographically, New Jersey. Why it was ever considered part of NY is beyond me. It has extremely similar terrain and geological features as eastern NJ, and the borough as a whole does not look at all like it's a part of "New York City". Driving on the West Shore Expressway you would not think you were in a city or anywhere near one. It is more rural than parts of Long Island. The Verrazano Bridge, going from NY to NY, span is almost 2.5 miles long and the Geothals bridge is only 1/2 - 1 mile long at most. It has 3 short bridges connecting it to NJ, but one, long bridge connecting it to NYC, showing that it most likely broke off from NJ ages ago. Also, redesignating it NJ may show how ridiculous the double-toll is to drive from NJ to Brooklyn. The goethals bridge shouldn't be tolled, only the Verrazano, since that is the real "Hudson River Crossing". Also, this would allow the speed limits to be bumped to 55 mph, since NYC caps all highways at 50 mph within it's confines.. To summarize, it is closer, and looks very much more like NJ than NY, let alone NYC. Please forgive me of this has been discussed elsewhere in the forums years ago. I just joined the site this month, and while I do look at the first page of threads in a topic, like off-topic, to see if someone already started a similar topic, but I don't check every page, also I might be sharing a new specific reason/justification of why that same idea should be implemented, so Don't get all "oh FritzOwl already included that in his pave all of America with roads plan!"
Maybe if you got your wish and Staten Island were part of New Jersey, the Staten Island Expressway could be turned over to the New Jersey Turnpike and upgraded to some version of a dual-dual setup (though space constraints might require use of double-decking to pull that off, which would would raise various other issues relating both to aesthetic issues and how to tie it into the approach to the Verrazzano). That, in turn, would reduce the amount of congestion on the SIE and maybe reduce the amount of time it shows as "Black" or "Red" on Google Maps.
What's this?? I never said that anywhere. You're just making stuff up now?
I was giving this site the benefit of the doubt, but reading the comments on this topic is confirming my first impression.
"Baiting" people into bans, immediately accusing new members of duplicate accounts for having the same opinions of banned users, somehow bringing race into the topic of highway overpasses/etc. Now manufacturing quotes. I never said any borough of NYC shouldn't be part of the city, or anything about speed limits, or the Verrazano bridge. Where are you getting this from?
Googlemaps showing slow and stopped traffic all the time has nothing to do with what state parts of NYC exist in. It's the amount of cars. I don't think widening every road in the city (impossible).to even the size of route 95 in NJ would help more than a little.
Is there a way to delete my account? It seems this forum isn't a place of fair/normal discussion.
Generally, when a user no longer wishes to participate in the forum, we recommend that they scramble their password and cease using the account. We do not delete user accounts on request because doing so interferes with certain functions of the forum.
According to the MTA's report congestion will actually increase in the Bronx especially the Cross-Bronx Expressway. So we are just shifting traffic from the 'CBD' of Manhattan to the less affluent outer boroughs. Manhattan below 60th street is majority white and has a median income of $83,008, the Bronx which is around 90% non-white and has a per capita income of $23,862, seems like they want to shift traffic from white areas to non-white neighborhoods. Also I don't know how this will affect traffic flow in Manhattan, delivery trucks will continue to clog Manhattan streets unless everyone gets a cargo bike and taxis/ubers are still needed in Manhattan and will also clog streets. NYCDOT is on a mission to make driving in Manhattan worse and worse and this congestion pricing further drives that mission but trucks and taxis aren't going away anytime soon regardless of what politicians and new urbanists want.
Also a couple of things, the London congestion pricing is only in effect from 7 am to 6 PM M-F and from noon-6 PM on Saturday/sunday and covers a much smaller geographical area, NYC congestion pricing is 24/7 including weekends from my understanding.
Quote from: Duke87 on September 22, 2023, 12:34:14 AM
Quote from: RoadRage2023 on September 21, 2023, 08:53:27 AM
I did the math, and with the current toll increases and proposed rates to drive in midtown Manhattan next year, a commuter from Elizabeth NJ to Midtown would pay approximately $85 in tolls in total to commute both ways. (Using the Optimal Route of I-278/Battery tunnel)
First of all, if you're commuting to Manhattan on a daily basis and you insist on getting there by car instead of by train, you need to seriously reevaluate your choices in life.
I wonder what all those vehicular tunnels and bridges going in and out of Manhattan are for then.
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 25, 2023, 08:40:31 PM
According to the MTA's report congestion will actually increase in the Bronx especially the Cross-Bronx Expressway. So we are just shifting traffic from the 'CBD' of Manhattan to the less affluent outer boroughs. Manhattan below 60th street is majority white and has a median income of $83,008, the Bronx which is around 90% non-white and has a per capita income of $23,862, seems like they want to shift traffic from white areas to non-white neighborhoods. Also I don't know how this will affect traffic flow in Manhattan, delivery trucks will continue to clog Manhattan streets unless everyone gets a cargo bike and taxis/ubers are still needed in Manhattan and will also clog streets. NYCDOT is on a mission to make driving in Manhattan worse and worse and this congestion pricing further drives that mission but trucks and taxis aren't going away anytime soon regardless of what politicians and new urbanists want.
Also a couple of things, the London congestion pricing is only in effect from 7 am to 6 PM M-F and from noon-6 PM on Saturday/sunday and covers a much smaller geographical area, NYC congestion pricing is 24/7 including weekends from my understanding.
London's fee is around $16. That could be either a little cheaper or a little more expensive than the NYC plan, depending on how they define the "peak hours" here. I agree with the rest of the comment, hit the nail on the head.
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 25, 2023, 08:43:54 PMI wonder what all those vehicular tunnels and bridges going in and out of Manhattan are for then.
Busses, trucks, and masochists.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 26, 2023, 07:43:23 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 25, 2023, 08:43:54 PMI wonder what all those vehicular tunnels and bridges going in and out of Manhattan are for then.
Busses, trucks, and masochists.
Lol... I wrote half a page of a response yesterday, and then decided not to post. Now you said same thing in 3 words!
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 26, 2023, 07:43:23 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 25, 2023, 08:43:54 PMI wonder what all those vehicular tunnels and bridges going in and out of Manhattan are for then.
Busses, trucks, and masochists.
Bridges and tunnels are built for people to kiss each other? Who knew?
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 26, 2023, 09:16:22 AM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 26, 2023, 07:43:23 AM
Busses, trucks, and masochists.
Bridges and tunnels are built for people to kiss each other? Who knew?
meh. It's just an older plural form.
Quote from: kphoger on September 26, 2023, 10:17:04 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 26, 2023, 09:16:22 AM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 26, 2023, 07:43:23 AM
Busses, trucks, and masochists.
Bridges and tunnels are built for people to kiss each other? Who knew?
meh. It's just an older plural form.
No internet community is complete without a nitpicker, grammar nazi, and the most hated person.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 26, 2023, 09:16:22 AM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on September 26, 2023, 07:43:23 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 25, 2023, 08:43:54 PMI wonder what all those vehicular tunnels and bridges going in and out of Manhattan are for then.
Busses, trucks, and masochists.
Bridges and tunnels are built for people to kiss each other? Who knew?
Those of us who post before we're fully caffeinated need love too. :)
It's all for the birds anyway. Just like the technology dependency we have.
Both inflation and technology are both a thing we will never able to control.
No sense in saying what we should have done or should be doing. It's a thing that just spins and spins.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on September 24, 2023, 11:29:19 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 24, 2023, 10:51:34 PM
The old proposals of Robert Moses just keep looking better and better.
Robert Moses built overpasses purposefully low so buses full of Black people couldn't get to the beaches as easily.
I still reject that lie. There's no logic behind it whatsoever. Oh, so you want me to think white people drive cars and blacks and Hispanics only use trucks and buses? Where were the entrance ramps with "Whites Only" signs on them? I've seen enough historic images of the parkways to know there isn't a single one.
Do you know what other kinds of vehicles used to be forbidden from the parkways? Motorcycles and station wagons? How is that an attempt to keep minorities from using the beaches, or any other parks?
Did you also know that Moses' original plan for the Sheridan Expressway was to make it a trucks-only highway, and it was going to include what became the New England Thruway? In time that road was going to have to accept buses as well.
Quote from: Duke87 on September 25, 2023, 12:19:31 AM
See the funny thing of that is, there IS a bus to Jones Beach (https://www.nicebus.com/Tools/Maps-and-Schedules/Line?route=n88X), which uses the Moses-planned Meadowbrook Parkway. No, the overpasses in that area have not been raised from their original construction. No, it does not use special low-clearance buses.
And, well, this makes sense because if you look at a map you'll realize there is no access to Jones Beach without using one of the parkways. Trucks need to be able to get there to deliver stuff, so the overpasses on the parkways leading there were built high enough to accommodate them in at least one lane, and by virtue of this can also accommodate buses.
Also, if NY 135 had been completed with the extension to Wantagh State Parkway, trucks would've been better able to deliver goods to Jones Beach without having to use any of the other parkways. I still remember maps of of the Wantagh State Parkway that had the dual name "Jones Beach Causeway" from south of where that wye interchange with NY 135 was supposed to be.
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 29, 2023, 01:12:17 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on September 24, 2023, 11:29:19 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 24, 2023, 10:51:34 PM
The old proposals of Robert Moses just keep looking better and better.
Robert Moses built overpasses purposefully low so buses full of Black people couldn't get to the beaches as easily.
I still reject that lie. There's no logic behind it whatsoever. Oh, so you want me to think white people drive cars and blacks and Hispanics only use trucks and buses? Where were the entrance ramps with "Whites Only" signs on them? I've seen enough historic images of the parkways to know there isn't a single one.
Do you know what other kinds of vehicles used to be forbidden from the parkways? Motorcycles and station wagons? How is that an attempt to keep minorities from using the beaches, or any other parks?
Look back to the time when the roadways were proposed and built. Different era than today.
There is no way any of the parkways could be modified to accommodate trucks. Any attempts would likely require massive numbers of homes and businesses to be demolished, which would make the locals go ballistic. Also, there are massive space constraints that would also prevent any such project from taking place. It's a no-win situation.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 29, 2023, 01:40:44 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 29, 2023, 01:12:17 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on September 24, 2023, 11:29:19 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 24, 2023, 10:51:34 PM
The old proposals of Robert Moses just keep looking better and better.
Robert Moses built overpasses purposefully low so buses full of Black people couldn't get to the beaches as easily.
I still reject that lie. There's no logic behind it whatsoever. Oh, so you want me to think white people drive cars and blacks and Hispanics only use trucks and buses? Where were the entrance ramps with "Whites Only" signs on them? I've seen enough historic images of the parkways to know there isn't a single one.
Do you know what other kinds of vehicles used to be forbidden from the parkways? Motorcycles and station wagons? How is that an attempt to keep minorities from using the beaches, or any other parks?
Look back to the time when the roadways were proposed and built. Different era than today.
Also look at the racial makeup of those who owned cars and would use them for the originally intended purpose.
Then, look at where Moses located parks under his tenure...
The idea that racial considerations did not come into play is pretty weak when one considers the wealth of evidence to the contrary, whether in The Power Broker or otherwise.
He built parks and parkways in the city too. You know that right?
Again, I've never dismissed the fact that he was a racist, but there have never been any signs restricting white people to Jones Beach and non-whites to Jacob Riis Park
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 29, 2023, 10:27:55 PM
He built parks and parkways in the city too. You know that right?
Again, I've never dismissed the fact that he was a racist, but there have never been any signs restricting white people to Jones Beach and non-whites to Jacob Riis Park
Dear heavens, of course. It's where in the City he built them.
Right, no overt signage. The North learned quickly that was a bad look, unlike the South. So, us Northerners refined and mastered covert racism...
Quote from: Rothman on September 30, 2023, 06:29:59 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on September 29, 2023, 10:27:55 PM
He built parks and parkways in the city too. You know that right?
Again, I've never dismissed the fact that he was a racist, but there have never been any signs restricting white people to Jones Beach and non-whites to Jacob Riis Park
Dear heavens, of course. It's where in the City he built them.
Right, no overt signage. The North learned quickly that was a bad look, unlike the South. So, us Northerners refined and mastered covert racism...
Ok, let's throw an oddball.
Parkways are still "cars only", not even relieved to normal max height - essentially upholding Moses values.
Do you think that the fact parkways rules are not changing and not opening up to things like commercial vans means current NY administration is also racist?
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
That's a much better question and no, it doesn't.
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
What kind of routings you have in mind saying "the outer boroughs get ...more traffic"? Manhattan is
the destination as a center of a very high-profile city. Outer boroughs are much less so.
Quote from: Rothman on October 01, 2023, 06:56:35 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
That's a much better question and no, it doesn't.
That's right, it doesn't. Here's the true relevance, though -- Congestion pricing is an attack on drivers, and limited-access highways aren't. Plus, south of 60th Street isn't dominated by one class of people. The "wealthy white areas" are all north of 60th Street, until you get to Harlem.
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
Who said it's intended to "right" any alleged "wrongs"?
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 01, 2023, 11:20:45 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
Who said it's intended to "right" any alleged "wrongs"?
Whats the point of mentioning moses in this thread unless its to bring up a larger discussion on past nyc car centric planning?
Quote from: kalvado on October 01, 2023, 07:22:46 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
What kind of routings you have in mind saying "the outer boroughs get ...more traffic"? Manhattan is the destination as a center of a very high-profile city. Outer boroughs are much less so.
The Bronx for example will see worse traffic congestion (esp. on the cross bronx expressway) as a result of congestion pricing according to the MTA
Not "MMM" hasn't popped back into this thread since the forum went into maintenance mode?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 01, 2023, 02:42:44 PM
Not "MMM" hasn't popped back into this thread since the forum went into maintenance mode?
He got banned.
Quote from: 1 on October 01, 2023, 02:50:05 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 01, 2023, 02:42:44 PM
Not "MMM" hasn't popped back into this thread since the forum went into maintenance mode?
He got banned.
:-D
Quote from: D-Dey65 on October 01, 2023, 10:33:08 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 01, 2023, 06:56:35 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
That's a much better question and no, it doesn't.
That's right, it doesn't. Here's the true relevance, though -- Congestion pricing is an attack on drivers, and limited-access highways aren't. Plus, south of 60th Street isn't dominated by one class of people. The "wealthy white areas" are all north of 60th Street, until you get to Harlem.
I must of forgotten that the west village, tribeca, murray hill, kips bay, battery park, stuy town were north of 60th street ;)
Congestion pricing is in compliance with the pleas of the Manhattan rich people (not just whites, there are Asians there too). You don't get that plea elsewhere because other boroughs actually value having people visit.
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 01, 2023, 03:15:40 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on October 01, 2023, 10:33:08 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 01, 2023, 06:56:35 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
That's a much better question and no, it doesn't.
That's right, it doesn't. Here's the true relevance, though -- Congestion pricing is an attack on drivers, and limited-access highways aren't. Plus, south of 60th Street isn't dominated by one class of people. The "wealthy white areas" are all north of 60th Street, until you get to Harlem.
I must of forgotten that the west village, tribeca, murray hill, kips bay, battery park, stuy town were north of 60th street ;)
The lower east side is still not a wealthy neighborhood.
Quote from: Alps on October 01, 2023, 03:32:13 PM
Congestion pricing is in compliance with the pleas of the Manhattan rich people (not just whites, there are Asians there too). You don't get that plea elsewhere because other boroughs actually value having people visit still have some parking available
FTFY
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 01, 2023, 02:20:43 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 01, 2023, 11:20:45 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
Who said it's intended to "right" any alleged "wrongs"?
Whats the point of mentioning moses in this thread unless its to bring up a larger discussion on past nyc car centric planning?
It looks like the original point of mentioning him was in the context of a post commenting that people might wind up wishing some of the expressways (which don't have the low overpasses and the commercial vehicle restrictions) he proposed had actually been built, which is a point that has nothing to do with race. You still haven't explained why you think congestion pricing is intended to, or even should be intended to, "right" any perceived past "wrongs" against black people. I think it's mostly about two things—discouraging traffic and mining a new source of revenue.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 01, 2023, 05:53:04 PM
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 01, 2023, 02:20:43 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 01, 2023, 11:20:45 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
Who said it's intended to "right" any alleged "wrongs"?
Whats the point of mentioning moses in this thread unless its to bring up a larger discussion on past nyc car centric planning?
It looks like the original point of mentioning him was in the context of a post commenting that people might wind up wishing some of the expressways (which don't have the low overpasses and the commercial vehicle restrictions) he proposed had actually been built, which is a point that has nothing to do with race. You still haven't explained why you think congestion pricing is intended to, or even should be intended to, "right" any perceived past "wrongs" against black people. I think it's mostly about two things—discouraging traffic and mining a new source of revenue.
The post was mostly about congestion pricing pushing traffic to less affluent boroughs, which is irrefutable. My intepertation is that once again less affluent people in the outer boroughs are going to get screwed because of manhattan centric thinking. Congestion pricing isn't righting any wrongs in my opinion its only going to exacerbate income inequality.
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 01, 2023, 06:47:50 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 01, 2023, 05:53:04 PM
Quote from: TheDon102 on October 01, 2023, 02:20:43 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 01, 2023, 11:20:45 AM
Quote from: TheDon102 on September 30, 2023, 09:16:56 PM
How does congestion pricing right the wrongs of the Moses era? Are we going to start tolling the parkways too? I don't quite understand the relevance here. Manhattan south of 60th street is majority non-hispanic white as of the latest census, The outer boroughs sans Staten Island are all majority non-white...see the pattern here. If you drive in the wealthy white areas in Manhattan you will be tolled, the outer boroughs get the shaft in regards to more pollution/more traffic...as usual.
Who said it's intended to "right" any alleged "wrongs"?
Whats the point of mentioning moses in this thread unless its to bring up a larger discussion on past nyc car centric planning?
It looks like the original point of mentioning him was in the context of a post commenting that people might wind up wishing some of the expressways (which don't have the low overpasses and the commercial vehicle restrictions) he proposed had actually been built, which is a point that has nothing to do with race. You still haven't explained why you think congestion pricing is intended to, or even should be intended to, "right" any perceived past "wrongs" against black people. I think it's mostly about two things—discouraging traffic and mining a new source of revenue.
The post was mostly about congestion pricing pushing traffic to less affluent boroughs, which is irrefutable. My intepertation is that once again less affluent people in the outer boroughs are going to get screwed because of manhattan centric thinking. Congestion pricing isn't righting any wrongs in my opinion its only going to exacerbate income inequality.
There may be some through traffic that would choose other roads, like Cross Bronx you mentioned.
There will also be some Manhattan bound traffic switching to public transportation, reducing the flow on Cross Bronx. I am not sure how big those two components are, and which one will be larger
Basically expected result is traffic reduction, so other boroughs may be net positive after all
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 01, 2023, 02:42:44 PM
Not "MMM" hasn't popped back into this thread since the forum went into maintenance mode?
If you mean the latest (suspected) sockpuppet, he was online tonight but didn't post anything.
I agree we are way too dependent on cars and NYC is way too overrated on autos.
However, this is not the solution as it's not going to end excessive driving as motorists will pay it and bitch later. Just offer the alternatives instead of the proposals of the other means through legislation. If you want alternative transportation it needs to be introduced through the private sector. People like those elected need to stop using governments ( divided by a two party system) to get new ideas introduced and just market it.
End rant.
I don't think a private MBTA would work well nearly as well as the current state-run one. For one, it would need to financially at least break even, which would drive prices up and decrease ridership.
Quote from: 1 on October 03, 2023, 04:41:38 PM
I don't think a private MBTA would work well nearly as well as the current state-run one. For one, it would need to financially at least break even, which would drive prices up and decrease ridership.
Where'd Boston come from?
Quote from: Rothman on October 03, 2023, 11:19:50 PM
Quote from: 1 on October 03, 2023, 04:41:38 PM
I don't think a private MBTA would work well nearly as well as the current state-run one. For one, it would need to financially at least break even, which would drive prices up and decrease ridership.
Where'd Boston come from?
I was just using a local example. I think it would be the same everywhere.
The New York subway was originally constructed and operated by two private companies (the IRT and the BMT) under contracts with the city. The city, which by then had constructed some lines of its own (the IND) bought them out in mid-1940. One reason you sometimes see some oddities in where the lines go and in particular construction is that the operators, and the IND, were competing with each other. The now-closed (and partially demolished) lower level of the IND's 42 Street stop is said to be an example of that—it's widely thought the IND built it simply to stop the IRT from extending the 7 train further west (and when that eventually happened, they had to demolish part of said lower-level platform to do it).
I tend to suspect that nowadays there would be much stronger noncompete clauses written into any contracts if a private company were to be operating subway lines. No doubt the fact that the BMT was originally the BRT, operating in the separate City of Brooklyn prior to consolidation, was part of why things evolved the way they did 120 years ago.
I believe a lot of transit companies were privately-owned prior to the passage of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, when most of those private companies were converted into public transit agencies.
Quote from: 1 on October 03, 2023, 04:41:38 PM
I don't think a private MBTA would work well nearly as well as the current state-run one. For one, it would need to financially at least break even, which would drive prices up and decrease ridership.
In New Jersey the state there managed to get Academy Bus Lines to take over bus transit. That, I'm sure is a private company. And if they didn't take over all of NJ Transit Bus routes, they sure have a lot of bus routes in New Jersey.
So it's plausible to get private companies to invest in public transportation.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2023, 08:24:26 AM
Quote from: 1 on October 03, 2023, 04:41:38 PM
I don't think a private MBTA would work well nearly as well as the current state-run one. For one, it would need to financially at least break even, which would drive prices up and decrease ridership.
In New Jersey the state there managed to get Academy Bus Lines to take over bus transit. That, I'm sure is a private company. And if they didn't take over all of NJ Transit Bus routes, they sure have a lot of bus routes in New Jersey.
So it's plausible to get private companies to invest in public transportation.
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 06, 2023, 12:51:18 PM
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
The very fact that there are "trips that they were contractually supposed to be running" diminishes the private-ness of the business model.
It's a sticky situation. Heavy government investment seems to be the only way to make a public transit network actually work well. But, as soon as the government takes the reins, it becomes responsible to the public for how it spends their money, therefore it seeks to trim the budget as much as it can. So the government shares a bed with private enterprise, and in the process limiting the very freedom and flexibility that makes private enterprise an attractive solution in the first place.
Amtrak anyone?
I still remember when certain Pace bus routes (Chicago suburban bus service) started getting contracted out to Laidlaw and First Student, and they ran a lot of those schedules with yellow school buses. The paper timetables said all Pace buses had bike racks, yet none of those yellow buses had bike racks.
There's a lot about this plan that I don't like.
I can accept a charge to encourage long distance traffic to stay away from Manhattan, by charging more for driving within the perimeter, but there is a lot of this that does not seem at all fair.
The entire region's tolling structure must change in order for this to work. A fair system would be one where everyone driving to Manhattan will pay the same amount regardless of where they are coming from.
And AFAIK, the plan is to institute the charge both for entrance and exit from the charge zone (with special allowances for vehicles that will make multiple trips crossing the zone like taxis). With this being the case, all tolls in the region should be bi-directional.
Let's look at Hudson River crossings. Right now, Port Authority charges peak EZ-Pass $14.75, Tappan Zee charges non-NY $6.61, and NYSBA (Bear Mountain and other bridges north of Tappan Zee until just before Albany) charges $1.65. This does seem to correllate to charge more for crossings that are closer to the city, even though PANYNJ is way overboard given the pricing of the other crossings. Plus, currently there does not appear to be any discount or incentive within the PANYNJ crossings for avoiding Lower Manhattan.
So that these tolls correllate better with congestion charging, and given that all crossings are all-electronic-tolling, each crossing should charge half of their current amount, but in both directions.
A toll crossing to cross a body of water should be fully credited to the congestion charge. A toll crossing that simply moves people along quicker should not be credited, since there is a free option available. This means that if a driver crosses the Hudson and within 2 hours (before or after) crosses into Lower Manhattan, the congestion charge that is charged to the driver should be reduced by the amount of toll that the driver paid to PANYNJ, NYSBA, or Tappan Zee. But tolls on the Thruway (even in Westchester County) would not be credited.
The MTA toll crossings (except Henry Hudson) are $6.94 with NY EZ-Pass. This is the charge to cross between Queens and Bronx or between Brooklyn and Staten Island. The congestion charge to cross into Manhattan is likely higher, but the toll on any MTA crossing should be credited to the congestion charge. This means that a driver from Brooklyn to Manhattan will pay more than a driver from Brooklyn to Staten Island, but will be paying the exact same amount as a driver from NJ to Manhattan. And like he Hudson crossings, a toll can be credited to the congestion charge if made within 2 hours. So regardless if a driver drives into/out of Lower Manhattan on the Midtown Tunnel, Williamsburg Bridge, or Triboro Bridge (and then drives in south of 60th), the charge is the same. The toll on the Henry Hudson bridge, while lower than the other crossings, should also be creditable to the congestion charge.
West Side Highway and FDR drive should be free, in every sense of the word. In order to allow for this practically speaking, this means that travel on the Brooklyn Bridge to FDR should be free, the toll on the Battery Tunnel should be removed completely, and the congestion charging boundary should be moved to between 57th and 58th east of 3rd Ave. This would mean that the Queensboro Bridge touches Manhattan outside of the congestion zone, and regardless of using the lower or upper level of the bridge, there is free access to the Upper East Side via 1st and 2nd Avenues and also free access to the FDR (via 61st, 62nd, or 63rd).
What would all of this mean practically speaking?
NJ to Lower Manhattan. Since the price would be the same regardless, no one crossing would be favored. Each driver pays the congestion charge amount, and tolls are credited.
NJ to Upper Manhattan/Bronx/Westchester. The congestion charge would redirect drivers away from Lincoln and Holland Tunnels, and more would take GWB.
NJ to Brooklyn/Queens/LI. The congestion charge would redirect drivers away from Lincoln and Holland Tunnels, and more would take GWB or Staten Island crossings and then cross again with an East River crossing (Triboro, Whitestone, Throgs Neck) or Verrazanno. So each driver will face two tolls, but the price of the combination will always be the same, assuming they avoid Lower Manhattan local streets.
Bronx/Westchester to Manhattan. Free Harlem river bridges are preferred over Triboro or Henry Hudson because of tolling. However, if the ultimate destination is below 60th, there would be no preference in crossings, since the tolls would be credited to the congestion charge.
Upper Manhattan/Bronx/Westchester to Brooklyn/Queens/LI. The free option via FDR or West Side Highway will be available if using Battery Tunnel, Brooklyn Bridge, or Queensboro Bridge. The normal tolls apply if using Triboro, Whitestone, or Throgs Neck. Traveling through Lower Manhattan streets to make connections to FDR or West Side Highway will be most expensive and discouraged.
Lower Manhattan to Brooklyn/Queens/LI. Every driver will face the congestion charge once they reach or leave a local Manhattan street. The charge is exactly the same regardless of which crossing is used, whether you use a crossing that puts you directly in Lower Manhattan like Williamsburg Bridge, or whether you use a crossing that crosses outside the zone (like Queensboro or Triboro) and then cross into the zone, or whether you use the Brooklyn Bridge or Battery Tunnel to FDR or West Side Highway and then cross into the zone from the expressways.
QuoteAnd AFAIK, the plan is to institute the charge both for entrance and exit from the charge zone (with special allowances for vehicles that will make multiple trips crossing the zone like taxis). With this being the case, all tolls in the region should be bi-directional.
Having it charge exiting vehicles makes sense because how else would you account for trips that originate within the charging zone? My office is in Lower Manhattan. While I normally take Amtrak and the subway to get there, suppose I drove up, parked there, left the car there for three days, then left to drive back to Virginia. I should be charged the congestion charge on two days—the day of my arrival and the day of my departure—but if they don't have something detecting when you exit the zone, how would I be charged on the departure day?
Quote from: kphoger on October 06, 2023, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 06, 2023, 12:51:18 PM
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
The very fact that there are "trips that they were contractually supposed to be running" diminishes the private-ness of the business model.
It's a sticky situation. Heavy government investment seems to be the only way to make a public transit network actually work well. But, as soon as the government takes the reins, it becomes responsible to the public for how it spends their money, therefore it seeks to trim the budget as much as it can. So the government shares a bed with private enterprise, and in the process limiting the very freedom and flexibility that makes private enterprise an attractive solution in the first place.
Amtrak anyone?
I still remember when certain Pace bus routes (Chicago suburban bus service) started getting contracted out to Laidlaw and First Student, and they ran a lot of those schedules with yellow school buses. The paper timetables said all Pace buses had bike racks, yet none of those yellow buses had bike racks.
After much thought, I still think that subsidizing riders rather than transit system makes at least some sense. At least it forces transit to attract riders and not just go after government money.
We are used to transit being much cheaper than any alternative, while transit is in fact expensive. People don't value something they get on a cheap, moreso free stuff.
Quote from: kphoger on October 06, 2023, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 06, 2023, 12:51:18 PM
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
The very fact that there are "trips that they were contractually supposed to be running" diminishes the private-ness of the business model.
It's a sticky situation. Heavy government investment seems to be the only way to make a public transit network actually work well. But, as soon as the government takes the reins, it becomes responsible to the public for how it spends their money, therefore it seeks to trim the budget as much as it can. So the government shares a bed with private enterprise, and in the process limiting the very freedom and flexibility that makes private enterprise an attractive solution in the first place.
Amtrak anyone?
I still remember when certain Pace bus routes (Chicago suburban bus service) started getting contracted out to Laidlaw and First Student, and they ran a lot of those schedules with yellow school buses. The paper timetables said all Pace buses had bike racks, yet none of those yellow buses had bike racks.
Just keep it public. It's providing a public service that will never be profitable, which shouldn't be a goal anyway.
Quote from: Rothman on October 06, 2023, 11:14:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 06, 2023, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 06, 2023, 12:51:18 PM
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
The very fact that there are "trips that they were contractually supposed to be running" diminishes the private-ness of the business model.
It's a sticky situation. Heavy government investment seems to be the only way to make a public transit network actually work well. But, as soon as the government takes the reins, it becomes responsible to the public for how it spends their money, therefore it seeks to trim the budget as much as it can. So the government shares a bed with private enterprise, and in the process limiting the very freedom and flexibility that makes private enterprise an attractive solution in the first place.
Amtrak anyone?
I still remember when certain Pace bus routes (Chicago suburban bus service) started getting contracted out to Laidlaw and First Student, and they ran a lot of those schedules with yellow school buses. The paper timetables said all Pace buses had bike racks, yet none of those yellow buses had bike racks.
Just keep it public. It's providing a public service that will never be profitable, which shouldn't be a goal anyway.
It shouldn't be a major profit center, true. But being more or less close to breakeven is a good idea - for roads (yes, gas taxes), power, water, sewer etc. Otherwise those pretty expensive things end up in disrespect and disrepair.
Case in point, MTA farebox doesn't cover MTA payroll. That's anything but healthy, from my perspective.
Quote from: kalvado on October 07, 2023, 02:24:26 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 06, 2023, 11:14:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 06, 2023, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 06, 2023, 12:51:18 PM
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
The very fact that there are "trips that they were contractually supposed to be running" diminishes the private-ness of the business model.
It's a sticky situation. Heavy government investment seems to be the only way to make a public transit network actually work well. But, as soon as the government takes the reins, it becomes responsible to the public for how it spends their money, therefore it seeks to trim the budget as much as it can. So the government shares a bed with private enterprise, and in the process limiting the very freedom and flexibility that makes private enterprise an attractive solution in the first place.
Amtrak anyone?
I still remember when certain Pace bus routes (Chicago suburban bus service) started getting contracted out to Laidlaw and First Student, and they ran a lot of those schedules with yellow school buses. The paper timetables said all Pace buses had bike racks, yet none of those yellow buses had bike racks.
Just keep it public. It's providing a public service that will never be profitable, which shouldn't be a goal anyway.
It shouldn't be a major profit center, true. But being more or less close to breakeven is a good idea - for roads (yes, gas taxes), power, water, sewer etc. Otherwise those pretty expensive things end up in disrespect and disrepair.
Case in point, MTA farebox doesn't cover MTA payroll. That's anything but healthy, from my perspective.
This is a pretty narrow way of looking at such things. Transportation, whichever its type, enables development and commerce. Fuel taxes come nowhere near maintaining all the roads in the country; much of the money comes from property, income, and other sales taxes. New York wouldn't have nearly the same taxbase as it has now if not for the MTA; it's much better to allow the MTA to be affordable to use and to subsidize it using revenue from the development it has enabled.
Quote from: kphoger on October 06, 2023, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 06, 2023, 12:51:18 PM
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
The very fact that there are "trips that they were contractually supposed to be running" diminishes the private-ness of the business model.
NJ has two different business models for the private bus operators. Academy's routes were NJ transit "owned" routes which were contracted out to private companies to run for a fixed term, which isn't unusual. What is unique to NJ are the private routes "owned" by private companies, like the Coach USA ONE BUS routes which are going extinct in the next few weeks. Those routes were not run under any contract with NJ Transit, and the private companies chose their own fares and schedules. I think this situation is now extremely rare in the US, especially for local city bus routes. NJ Transit was not allowed to compete and run their own service on these lines because it's prohibited by their charter. So instead they opted to lease free buses to these companies.
https://gothamist.com/news/mta-asks-to-joins-federal-lawsuit-to-fight-new-jersey-over-congestion-pricing
MTA is joining the feds against NJ over congestion pricing lawsuits.
Quote from: Ellie on October 07, 2023, 02:46:06 PM
Quote from: kalvado on October 07, 2023, 02:24:26 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 06, 2023, 11:14:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 06, 2023, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on October 06, 2023, 12:51:18 PM
Academy got cut off from running the local routes because they were not actually running all the trips that they were contractually supposed to be running and the state got sick of the scam.
Other private operators like Decamp and Coach USA (aka ONE Bus) are in the process of ending all their public bus routes and now only doing charter routes, because they're not profitable for them anymore. They also received state subsidies in the form of free leased buses to use on their commuter routes.
The only reason they lasted so long was receiving government subsidies, which were only given in the first place because NJ Transit is legally prohibited from competing with private bus companies.
The very fact that there are "trips that they were contractually supposed to be running" diminishes the private-ness of the business model.
It's a sticky situation. Heavy government investment seems to be the only way to make a public transit network actually work well. But, as soon as the government takes the reins, it becomes responsible to the public for how it spends their money, therefore it seeks to trim the budget as much as it can. So the government shares a bed with private enterprise, and in the process limiting the very freedom and flexibility that makes private enterprise an attractive solution in the first place.
Amtrak anyone?
I still remember when certain Pace bus routes (Chicago suburban bus service) started getting contracted out to Laidlaw and First Student, and they ran a lot of those schedules with yellow school buses. The paper timetables said all Pace buses had bike racks, yet none of those yellow buses had bike racks.
Just keep it public. It's providing a public service that will never be profitable, which shouldn't be a goal anyway.
It shouldn't be a major profit center, true. But being more or less close to breakeven is a good idea - for roads (yes, gas taxes), power, water, sewer etc. Otherwise those pretty expensive things end up in disrespect and disrepair.
Case in point, MTA farebox doesn't cover MTA payroll. That's anything but healthy, from my perspective.
This is a pretty narrow way of looking at such things. Transportation, whichever its type, enables development and commerce. Fuel taxes come nowhere near maintaining all the roads in the country; much of the money comes from property, income, and other sales taxes. New York wouldn't have nearly the same taxbase as it has now if not for the MTA; it's much better to allow the MTA to be affordable to use and to subsidize it using revenue from the development it has enabled.
Thanks for the boilerplate response.
How much growth occurred in NYC despite the stagnant MTA system falling into disrepair? Is NYC further growth actually a good idea at all?
Nothing is truly free - and money for transportation coming from elsewhere are still more or less the same money as would be collected at the farebox, but with inefficiencies and bureaucracy stapled on top.
I guess extortion is now legal.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/traffic/transit-traffic/mta-board-approves-nyc-congestion-pricing-plan-what-to-know-about-tolls-exemptions-and-more/4926113/
This paragraph appears to answer my question further up the thread about driving into the zone, parking for a few days in a garage, and then leaving—apparently, that will incur only one charge upon the initial entry. I wonder if it really means what it appears to say, though, because this would seem to leave a giant loophole for someone already in the zone to drive to other locations within the zone—say, driving from the Financial District to Madison Square Garden—without paying.
QuoteDrivers would only be charged to enter the zone, not to leave it or stay in it. That means that residents who enter the CBD and circle their block to look for parking won't be charged.
If Manhattan's congestion pricing plan is successful (from a congestion-reduction standpoint), I wouldn't be surprised if it spread to NYC's bridges, tunnels, freeways, and parkways. Since New York's road system can't be expanded without massive condemning of homes and businesses, congestion pricing may be the only option to reduce congestion on NYC's road system.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 07, 2023, 01:40:52 PM
If Manhattan's congestion pricing plan is successful (from a congestion-reduction standpoint), I wouldn't be surprised if it spread to NYC's bridges, tunnels, freeways, and parkways. Since New York's road system can't be expanded without massive condemning of homes and businesses, congestion pricing may be the only option to reduce congestion on NYC's road system.
Millenials are now inventing tolls?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 07, 2023, 01:40:52 PM
If Manhattan's congestion pricing plan is successful (from a congestion-reduction standpoint), I wouldn't be surprised if it spread to NYC's bridges, tunnels, freeways, and parkways. Since New York's road system can't be expanded without massive condemning of homes and businesses, congestion pricing may be the only option to reduce congestion on NYC's road system.
Note that the current plan actually
exempts a freeway - FDR Drive, to be specific.
While it is nice to see some level of toll crediting being proposed, a far more comprehensive tolling structure change is needed to make this more fair.
This means that all NYC toll crossings need to be adjusted.
Lincoln and Holland Tunnels should be $5 more expensive than the other PA crossings. Those crossing at Lincoln/Holland should not incur any additional fees, but those using the other crossings and then further driving into CBD should pay more at the additional crossing point.
MTA East River crossings should all be one-way, charged as you leave Brooklyn/Queens. The rates are currently too high. They should be lowered and should be time dependent (rush hours are higher than off-peak and even less if traveling between midnight and 5 am). Each crossing should charge a basic toll, but the following connections should be completely free:
Battery tunnel to either FDR or West Side Highway
Brooklyn Bridge to FDR
Queensboro Bridge (either level) to Upper East Side*
* This may necessitate moving the charging boundary to 57th street for 1st and 2nd Ave so that there if free travel between Queens and the Upper East Side in both directions on both levels.
Beyond the basic toll, any travel on a crossing that leads into Manhattan CBD shuold be subject to the surcharge. All travel on Manhattan Bridge, Williamsburg Bridge, Midtown Tunnel, Brooklyn Bridge (except to FDR), and Batter Tunnel (except to FDR or WS Hwy) and all travel crossing the 60th street boundary should be subject to the exact same tolling structure.
So if the basic toll on a non-Manhattan crossing is $5, add an additional $5 charge on any of the above crossings to account for the congestion.
I wouldn't be surprised if travel in the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels incurs the charge no matter what, as they don't have direct connections to West Street; traveling local streets for 3-4 blocks is required.
I agree that moving the boundary south to accommodate travel to/from the upper part of Manhattan on the Queensboro Bridge is a good idea.
Quote from: vdeane on December 10, 2023, 03:13:17 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if travel in the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels incurs the charge no matter what, as they don't have direct connections to West Street; traveling local streets for 3-4 blocks is required.
I agree that moving the boundary south to accommodate travel to/from the upper part of Manhattan on the Queensboro Bridge is a good idea.
but they can make so much money off Qboro Bridge traffic if they don't!
anyway, note that Holland/Lincoln is a different agency, and you really can't collect tolls for two agencies at a single point, so you will not see an increased toll for those tunnels - you will just incur an additional toll once your car comes out the other side.
^^^^
Sure you can. You just have to get the agencies to cooperate and then program the electronics to keep track of it. The Dulles Greenway in Virginia is privately owned and operated. Traffic going straight through from VDOT's Dulles Toll Road onto the Dulles Greenway pays an extra toll compared to people entering the Greenway from I-366 VA-28. The extra amount represents the cost of "exiting" the Dulles Toll Road. But it's all collected at the Greenway toll plaza in a single transaction to avoid having two toll plazas back-to-back in quick succession. It's surely feasible to connect the tunnel toll and the congestion charge if the agencies cooperate. I have no idea, however, what sort of programming is involved or what it would cost to set it up.
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 11, 2023, 09:27:18 PM
^^^^
Sure you can. You just have to get the agencies to cooperate and then program the electronics to keep track of it. The Dulles Greenway in Virginia is privately owned and operated. Traffic going straight through from VDOT's Dulles Toll Road onto the Dulles Greenway pays an extra toll compared to people entering the Greenway from I-366 VA-28. The extra amount represents the cost of "exiting" the Dulles Toll Road. But it's all collected at the Greenway toll plaza in a single transaction to avoid having two toll plazas back-to-back in quick succession. It's surely feasible to connect the tunnel toll and the congestion charge if the agencies cooperate. I have no idea, however, what sort of programming is involved or what it would cost to set it up.
Hm. I've never heard of any two agencies collecting at a single toll plaza. It's good to know there's an example out there.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 11, 2023, 09:27:18 PM
^^^^
Sure you can. You just have to get the agencies to cooperate and then program the electronics to keep track of it. The Dulles Greenway in Virginia is privately owned and operated. Traffic going straight through from VDOT's Dulles Toll Road onto the Dulles Greenway pays an extra toll compared to people entering the Greenway from I-366 VA-28. The extra amount represents the cost of "exiting" the Dulles Toll Road. But it's all collected at the Greenway toll plaza in a single transaction to avoid having two toll plazas back-to-back in quick succession. It's surely feasible to connect the tunnel toll and the congestion charge if the agencies cooperate. I have no idea, however, what sort of programming is involved or what it would cost to set it up.
There is no way this would happen, because it would be open to political meddling from NJ through the Port Authority.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Why not? I've driven into Manhattan and stayed there more than a few times. Much more convenient than having to take a train out to the burbs or wherever every evening and come back in again.
Even the Marriott Marquis can be reasonably priced.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
The one-seat private ride is certainly what I'd prefer, if I knew I had a convenient and available parking space at my destination, and if it were faster than the alternatives.
I've driven into Manhattan multiple times. However, I always find a place to park the car, and rely on either transit or my feet to get around once parked. It's not worth the hassle to use my own car to get around Manhattan.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 13, 2023, 06:54:34 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
The one-seat private ride is certainly what I'd prefer, if I knew I had a convenient and available parking space at my destination, and if it were faster than the alternatives.
I've driven into Manhattan multiple times. However, I always find a place to park the car, and rely on either transit or my feet to get around once parked. It's not worth the hassle to use my own car to get around Manhattan.
Yep, that's what I'm talking about. Sure, on the island you hoof it. But there's no beating the convenience of not having to commute from some godforsaken place like Secaucus.
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2023, 10:38:45 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 13, 2023, 06:54:34 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
The one-seat private ride is certainly what I'd prefer, if I knew I had a convenient and available parking space at my destination, and if it were faster than the alternatives.
I've driven into Manhattan multiple times. However, I always find a place to park the car, and rely on either transit or my feet to get around once parked. It's not worth the hassle to use my own car to get around Manhattan.
Yep, that's what I'm talking about. Sure, on the island you hoof it. But there's no beating the convenience of not having to commute from some godforsaken place like Secaucus.
Staying in a hotel one time, I located a garage nearby where I reserved a space for $35 a day for 3 days. 2 people on a NJ Transit train costs about $64, plus $10 per 24 hours in parking fees, plus the subway would run me about $11 to and from Penn Station and the Hotel. The direct drive in cost me the $12 in tolls, $105 in parking, and a few bucks more on the NJ Turnpike. The drive in was only about $15 more when it came down to it, much less hassle with the luggage, no time constraints making sure I made it to the train stations on time, plus I could drive a bit around Manhattan to, well, experience driving around Manhattan.
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 13, 2023, 10:43:53 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 11, 2023, 09:27:18 PM
^^^^
Sure you can. You just have to get the agencies to cooperate and then program the electronics to keep track of it. The Dulles Greenway in Virginia is privately owned and operated. Traffic going straight through from VDOT's Dulles Toll Road onto the Dulles Greenway pays an extra toll compared to people entering the Greenway from I-366 VA-28. The extra amount represents the cost of "exiting" the Dulles Toll Road. But it's all collected at the Greenway toll plaza in a single transaction to avoid having two toll plazas back-to-back in quick succession. It's surely feasible to connect the tunnel toll and the congestion charge if the agencies cooperate. I have no idea, however, what sort of programming is involved or what it would cost to set it up.
There is no way this would happen, because it would be open to political meddling from NJ through the Port Authority.
My point was simply that it is possible because it has been done, not that it would be feasible or realistic in any particular proposed implementation. Note that the post to which I was responding said you can't collect tolls for two agencies at a single collection point. I was offering an example of a location where they do exactly that.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
Then that's on you, if you want to subject yourself to that. The way I see it, it doesn't make sense in the majority of cases.
For example, my girlfriend lives in Newark. It is much less of a hassle for me to pick up a southbound Northeast Regional from Hartford than dealing with traffic no matter which inbound route I choose. Granted, there is a time and place for driving to a destination, but if I can help it, I will travel by train if I'm going anywhere in the Tri-State.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 14, 2023, 08:24:57 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
Then that's on you, if you want to subject yourself to that. The way I see it, it doesn't make sense in the majority of cases.
For example, my girlfriend lives in Newark. It is much less of a hassle for me to pick up a southbound Northeast Regional from Hartford than dealing with traffic no matter which inbound route I choose. Granted, there is a time and place for driving to a destination, but if I can help it, I will travel by train if I'm going anywhere in the Tri-State.
I take it she has a car.
Quote from: Rothman on December 14, 2023, 11:02:54 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 14, 2023, 08:24:57 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
Then that's on you, if you want to subject yourself to that. The way I see it, it doesn't make sense in the majority of cases.
For example, my girlfriend lives in Newark. It is much less of a hassle for me to pick up a southbound Northeast Regional from Hartford than dealing with traffic no matter which inbound route I choose. Granted, there is a time and place for driving to a destination, but if I can help it, I will travel by train if I'm going anywhere in the Tri-State.
I take it she has a car.
No. Doesn't even have a license. She arrived via a Hudson Line train. However, because I had already driven all the way down there, and to save her some money, I drove her home to Newark. That is one exception to my trains-only rule, since I was going to a destination from which traveling by rail would be less practical. Most other times, however, she rides the train back.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 13, 2023, 11:30:12 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2023, 10:38:45 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 13, 2023, 06:54:34 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
The one-seat private ride is certainly what I'd prefer, if I knew I had a convenient and available parking space at my destination, and if it were faster than the alternatives.
I've driven into Manhattan multiple times. However, I always find a place to park the car, and rely on either transit or my feet to get around once parked. It's not worth the hassle to use my own car to get around Manhattan.
Yep, that's what I'm talking about. Sure, on the island you hoof it. But there's no beating the convenience of not having to commute from some godforsaken place like Secaucus.
Staying in a hotel one time, I located a garage nearby where I reserved a space for $35 a day for 3 days. 2 people on a NJ Transit train costs about $64, plus $10 per 24 hours in parking fees, plus the subway would run me about $11 to and from Penn Station and the Hotel. The direct drive in cost me the $12 in tolls, $105 in parking, and a few bucks more on the NJ Turnpike. The drive in was only about $15 more when it came down to it, much less hassle with the luggage, no time constraints making sure I made it to the train stations on time, plus I could drive a bit around Manhattan to, well, experience driving around Manhattan.
but how much did it cost in fuel and wear & tear? It costs me roughly $20 to drive into the city before adding in tolls or any other charges. Train and bus are cheaper overall. If I'm driving into NYC, it's either continuing to Long Island or coming back from somewhere east.
Quote from: Alps on December 14, 2023, 05:20:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 13, 2023, 11:30:12 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2023, 10:38:45 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 13, 2023, 06:54:34 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 13, 2023, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 13, 2023, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 12, 2023, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 12, 2023, 12:47:13 AM
Makes me wonder if hotel prices north of 60th will go up...or if those below 60th will go down.
Hotel prices vary widely in NYC to begin with. Sunday nights especially - Hilton and Marriott branded hotels can be had for about $100 plus taxes on occasion.
For the most part, people staying at hotels aren't driving and parking, so it probably won't factor in too much. Not much different than the parking surcharge most garages charge if one had an SUV.
Frankly, if you're staying in Manhattan, don't drive to get there.
Right because who'd want to take a one seat ride to their destination in the privacy and comfort of a private car. Pft...
The one-seat private ride is certainly what I'd prefer, if I knew I had a convenient and available parking space at my destination, and if it were faster than the alternatives.
I've driven into Manhattan multiple times. However, I always find a place to park the car, and rely on either transit or my feet to get around once parked. It's not worth the hassle to use my own car to get around Manhattan.
Yep, that's what I'm talking about. Sure, on the island you hoof it. But there's no beating the convenience of not having to commute from some godforsaken place like Secaucus.
Staying in a hotel one time, I located a garage nearby where I reserved a space for $35 a day for 3 days. 2 people on a NJ Transit train costs about $64, plus $10 per 24 hours in parking fees, plus the subway would run me about $11 to and from Penn Station and the Hotel. The direct drive in cost me the $12 in tolls, $105 in parking, and a few bucks more on the NJ Turnpike. The drive in was only about $15 more when it came down to it, much less hassle with the luggage, no time constraints making sure I made it to the train stations on time, plus I could drive a bit around Manhattan to, well, experience driving around Manhattan.
but how much did it cost in fuel and wear & tear? It costs me roughly $20 to drive into the city before adding in tolls or any other charges. Train and bus are cheaper overall. If I'm driving into NYC, it's either continuing to Long Island or coming back from somewhere east.
It's irrelevant or inconsequential.
Normally, I would go to the Metropark Train Station to take the train to NYC. Using that as my base:
A) It's cheaper not to travel at all and just stay home, saving all sorts of costs.
B) I could walk 15 minutes to the bus stop, take the bus to the NJ Transit River Line to Trenton to the NJ Transit Train to NYC, not incurring any car costs.
C) I could drive to a nearby Riverline stop, taking the Riverline to Trenton to the Train to NYC.
D) I could drive to the Hamilton Train Station to take the Train to NYC.
Based on my normal travel option, driving into NYC may cost me an additional 1.5 to 2.5 gallons of fuel and 60 miles of travel, on top of the costs already being incurred which is at minimum 3 - 4 times that. But as I mentioned - also to drive in different areas, on different roads, and maybe clinching different routes. No doubt many people got to drive in the city in their younger days, and don't have the desire to do it now. I didn't have that opportunity then, so I'm doing it now.
When I lived in the Albany area, figuring out how to get into NYC the "best way" was a frustrating experience. Looked at Amtrak, driving down to Metro North, driving down to NJ...done them all.
Driving straight in and parking at my hotel was more convenient than any other option.
When we stayed in NYC last time, we took the train in as we normally do. The only frustrating experience was leaving - we happened to make it just in time for a departing train, allowing us to avoid a 30+ minute wait for the next one. But I hadn't purchased tickets yet, and the NJ Transit app was giving me fits especially in the tunnel leaving. The conductor was understanding and came around again after the Newark Penn Station stop, which had given us the time needed to finally purchase the tickets online.
Related:
MTA wants to charge NYC Marathon for shutting down Verrazzano-Narrows Bridgehttps://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/nyc-marathon-congestion-pricing-new-york-road-runners/
QuoteNEW YORK -- The MTA is hungry for money, according to angry runners and some local leaders. They're growing outraged over the transit authority wanting to charge extra fees for the TCS New York City Marathon.
The marathon is one of J. Solle's favorite annual events, and now they're getting ready to run their third. But something new, a possibly surcharge my lesd to a pricey race.
"Everyone wants to be part of the celebration of the New York City Marathon and we should do what we can to increase that and not make it more restrictive," Solle said.
The MTA now wants to charge New York Road Runners, which puts on the world-famous marathon, $750,000 per year, claiming that's how much it loses in toll revenue when the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge is closed to cars for the race. The MTA said in a statement, "Taxpayers cannot be expected to subsidize a wealthy non-government organization."
Race officials say that could mean an increase to entry fees. Right now, non-members pay $315 and members, $255.
ha ha ha good
I dunno where I stand on this personally. On one hand, the marathon is holding up traffic, but on the other hand, this is the MTA going mask off and admitting they're greedy.
So, how much would this cost be per participant?
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on April 04, 2024, 08:47:10 AMSo, how much would this cost be per participant?
Extra $15 on top of $200 or 300 they already pay.
I think MTA is right. I hate these marathons because of their unreasonable disruption to traffic. Does the NYC government think that no one has to go anywhere or get to or from work on a Sunday morning? Think of all the police, fire , EMS, hospital, public works employees, etc. who have to fight their way around road closings and detours just to get to work or get home from an overnight shift.
I know; I used to be one of them on Long Island and had to deal with the Nassau County Marathon. So let MTA charge them for the lost toll revenue. That's the price the marathoners pay for inconveniencing the rest of us.
Quote from: SignBridge on April 04, 2024, 04:47:12 PMI think MTA is right. I hate these marathons because of their unreasonable disruption to traffic. Does the NYC government think that no one has to go anywhere or get to or from work on a Sunday morning? Think of all the police, fire , EMS, hospital, public works employees, etc. who have to fight their way around road closings and detours just to get to work or get home from an overnight shift.
I know; I used to be one of them on Long Island and had to deal with the Nassau County Marathon. So let MTA charge them for the lost toll revenue. That's the price the marathoners pay for inconveniencing the rest of us.
The marathon is a year-round planning effort. In the June, 2023 Board Minutes of the MTA (TBTA), Pages 5 - 8 of https://new.mta.info/document/113966 , the MTA describes the process used in planning the 5 boro bike tour. At the end, on page 8, it mentions that the process described is similar to the marathon. It also mentioned that the labor utilized in its planning and day-of event is reimbursed. The MTA is well aware of its finances and builds any planned closure into their overall budgets. It's not like they're shocked the marathon occurs. Even something like having a February 29th equates to an additional 1 day's revenue for the entire year.
It's also interesting to note that in this story: https://nypost.com/2024/04/03/us-news/mta-made-more-from-nyc-marathon-than-it-lost-in-bridge-tolls/ , the increase in subway usage more than offset the income lost from travelers not using the bridge.
As far as traffic disruptions go: Many of the workers you reference commute to and from work via the subway. Many are also part of the planning process. There are many weekend closures of subway lines, along with occasional road or bridge closures for routine work. This is basically the same; just on a larger scale.
Congestion pricing starts June 30th for anyone that has not seen that yet. (https://www.fox5ny.com/news/nyc-congestion-pricing-map-exemptions-start-date)
And so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Never.
Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2024, 07:17:18 PMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Never.
Heh.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6c/Never_Say_Never_Again_%E2%80%93_UK_cinema_poster.jpg)
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 09:01:54 PMQuote from: Rothman on April 29, 2024, 07:17:18 PMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Never.
Heh.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6c/Never_Say_Never_Again_%E2%80%93_UK_cinema_poster.jpg)
Never.
Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2024, 07:17:18 PMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Never.
hopefully
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 30, 2024, 08:28:31 AMQuote from: Rothman on April 29, 2024, 07:17:18 PMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Never.
hopefully
Finland
Quote from: Rothman on April 30, 2024, 08:32:00 AMQuote from: Plutonic Panda on April 30, 2024, 08:28:31 AMQuote from: Rothman on April 29, 2024, 07:17:18 PMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Never.
hopefully
Finland
The ghost of p13 enters the room
Quote from: kalvado on April 30, 2024, 08:35:51 AMQuote from: Rothman on April 30, 2024, 08:32:00 AMQuote from: Plutonic Panda on April 30, 2024, 08:28:31 AMQuote from: Rothman on April 29, 2024, 07:17:18 PMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Never.
hopefully
Finland
The ghost of p13 enters the room
Oh you can always count on that
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 29, 2024, 04:40:39 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2024, 02:56:17 PMAnd so, congestion pricing will begin in two months. There's no going back now.
I believe there is a pending case in the US District Court in Newark and that the judge has promised a ruling well in advance of June 30. So never say never.
Here's some links at https://tinyurl.com/2vtr4fp4 .
Wasn't the possibility of such a case being filed discussed upthread?