Jump to content

Congestion Pricing Myths


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

No. The opposition to congestion pricing is based on the myth that everyone who accesses the Manhattan core must do so by car because public transportation has never existed.

 

Of course, that myth is gleefully perpetuated by politicians who demand "forensic audits" of the MTA (which is already the single most audited State agency) and then refuse to release the findings of those audits (so that We The People won't see how much transit funding those politicians divert to other purposes or how much the MTA has to spend each year on audits). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

No. The opposition to congestion pricing is based on the myth that everyone who accesses the Manhattan core must do so by car because public transportation has never existed.

 

Of course, that myth is gleefully perpetuated by politicians who demand "forensic audits" of the MTA (which is already the single most audited State agency) and then refuse to release the findings of those audits (so that We The People won't see how much transit funding those politicians divert to other purposes or how much the MTA has to spend each year on audits). 

Personally, I would've left this thread well alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/16/2022 at 4:13 PM, Gotham Bus Co. said:

No. The opposition to congestion pricing is based on the myth that everyone who accesses the Manhattan core must do so by car because public transportation has never existed.

 

Of course, that myth is gleefully perpetuated by politicians who demand "forensic audits" of the MTA (which is already the single most audited State agency) and then refuse to release the findings of those audits (so that We The People won't see how much transit funding those politicians divert to other purposes or how much the MTA has to spend each year on audits). 

If the (MTA) ran reliable transportation, they wouldn't be so heavily audited in the first place. Lots of people are getting cars because the service is unreliable and unsafe. I personally call BS on your end. I don't think you use public transit that much. I never hear of you ever having any issues with long waits, whicn is impossible given how much service has been cancelled, both on the bus and subway side. I think you just like to speak on hypotheticals either because you worked for the (MTA) or want to work for them, but you don't really commute with the system. If you did, half of what you say you wouldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

If the (MTA) ran reliable transportation, they wouldn't be so heavily audited in the first place. Lots of people are getting cars because the service is unreliable and unsafe. I personally call BS on your end. I don't think you use public transit that much. I never hear of you ever having any issues with long waits, whicn is impossible given how much service has been cancelled, both on the bus and subway side. I think you just like to speak on hypotheticals either because you worked for the (MTA) or want to work for them, but you don't really commute with the system. If you did, half of what you say you wouldn't.

It would be far easier to run reliable transportation with actual investment in it.

Don't say anything about the Feds, as that only emphasizes how shit we've been at investing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lex said:

It would be far easier to run reliable transportation with actual investment in it.

Don't say anything about the Feds, as that only emphasizes how shit we've been at investing.

The question is how much investment is enough and can the (MTA) be trusted to not squander it? Yes, I'm bringing in the Feds because if the authority can't run the service it has now with funding allocated specifically to keep service running for the next few years, how is anyone to believe that them receiving ~$1 billion+ annually from Congestion Pricing will mean better service for commuters? Now the "advocates" that are being paid to blindly support funding the (MTA) will say OH but service WILL be better. We have ZERO assurances that it will be. Even if there are significant investments in infrastructure improvements, we still have the issue of the (MTA) being unable to meet their bus and train schedules, as they continue to post DAILY about worker shortages, leaving them unable to meet their service obligations. 95% of the time, I take public transit into and out of the CBD, and the main reason I started going by car for some trips is because the (MTA) was incapable of running reliable service.

Congestion Pricing in theory makes sense, but if you are "incentivizing" people to use public transit and leave their cars at home, then the plan should include benchmarks that hold the (MTA) accountable to do just that. This plan does not increase the span or frequency of public transit, and in fact if anything, the (MTA) has proposed to cut bus service in every bus redesign it has presented. In Queens, they want people to take mass transit, but under their plan, they would be waiting longer in subway deserts, as just about every express bus line would see service cuts. In Co-Op City, I see posts regularly from residents complaining that local bus service leaves them waiting for several buses that don't show after just having a redesign that was supposedly giving them "better bus service". This is my issue with all of this. Saying that we haven't invested enough in the (MTA) and that if we do, that will mean that things will be better.... I remain extremely skeptical. What I found hilarious was that even some people that spoke and said we need Congestion Pricing "now" because we have a "great transit system", then went on to say that they expect that the (MTA) will fix the issues in the system, such as the unreliable and poorly run (R) train service, as one Bay Ridge resident noted. Having a vast and large system does not automatically make it great. What makes it great is that people can depend on it when they need it most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The question is how much investment is enough and can the (MTA) be trusted to not squander it? Yes, I'm bringing in the Feds because if the authority can't run the service it has now with funding allocated specifically to keep service running for the next few years, how is anyone to believe that them receiving ~$1 billion+ annually from Congestion Pricing will mean better service for commuters? Now the "advocates" that are being paid to blindly support funding the (MTA) will say OH but service WILL be better. We have ZERO assurances that it will be. Even if there are significant investments in infrastructure improvements, we still have the issue of the (MTA) being unable to meet their bus and train schedules, as they continue to post DAILY about worker shortages, leaving them unable to meet their service obligations. 95% of the time, I take public transit into and out of the CBD, and the main reason I started going by car for some trips is because the (MTA) was incapable of running reliable service.

Congestion Pricing in theory makes sense, but if you are "incentivizing" people to use public transit and leave their cars at home, then the plan should include benchmarks that hold the (MTA) accountable to do just that. This plan does not increase the span or frequency of public transit, and in fact if anything, the (MTA) has proposed to cut bus service in every bus redesign it has presented. In Queens, they want people to take mass transit, but under their plan, they would be waiting longer in subway deserts, as just about every express bus line would see service cuts. In Co-Op City, I see posts regularly from residents complaining that local bus service leaves them waiting for several buses that don't show after just having a redesign that was supposedly giving them "better bus service". This is my issue with all of this. Saying that we haven't invested enough in the (MTA) and that if we do, that will mean that things will be better.... I remain extremely skeptical. What I found hilarious was that even some people that spoke and said we need Congestion Pricing "now" because we have a "great transit system", then went on to say that they expect that the (MTA) will fix the issues in the system, such as the unreliable and poorly run (R) train service, as one Bay Ridge resident noted. Having a vast and large system does not automatically make it great. What makes it great is that people can depend on it when they need it most.

You are 100 percent correct. If the answer were more investment in the system, how does someone explain why the new bus command center in East NY still isn’t operational? Yes there were some delays with Covid, but if the MTA were competent, they would have been addressed by now. What about other MTA inefficiencies, like the media revealed track workers had to wait four hours for supplies to arrive every day. Why didn’t they follow up, so riders would know if this problem was ever resolved or still exists? 

what about all the bond issues to build the Second Avenue Subway with the monies diverted? How can the MTA ever be trusted? And what percentage of congestion pricing funds will even go to MTA Capital Projects with the highest construction costs in the world? 

How much will go to slow traffic even more with construction of new medians and islands, extended intersections, and unnecessary new bus and bike lanes? In Sheepshead Bay, they started building a new bike lane. They started by ripping out a perfectly good short median to replace it with a new median of the same size. Total waste of money.

The average speed on local streets is 10 mph. We don’t need that reduced to 5 mph. The purpose of congestion pricing shouldn’t be to increase congestion more which is what will happen once congestion pricing goes into effect with projected reduction in congestion within the zone a measly 5 to 7 percent. Congestion outside the zone will increase by way more. If this were about reducing congestion, there would be no fees during the night. Someone whose shift ends at 1AM shouldn’t be expected to wait up to 75 minutes for a bus after getting off the subway and has no choice but to drive. They shouldn’t have to pay an extra fee. 

When the desired funding is not raised, the zone will be extended to 72 or 86 Street to include all the hospitals, and raise it every two years?  Then what? Add a toll to any congested highway like the BQE, XBronx,  Van Wyck and LIE? 

Don’t forget the prices of all goods will rise when delivery prices increase when trucks are charged extra. This is just a bad idea all around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

You are 100 percent correct. If the answer were more investment in the system, how does someone explain why the new bus command center in East NY still isn’t operational? Yes there were some delays with Covid, but if the MTA were competent, they would have been addressed by now. What about other MTA inefficiencies, like the media revealed track workers had to wait four hours for supplies to arrive every day. Why didn’t they follow up, so riders would know if this problem was ever resolved or still exists? 

what about all the bond issues to build the Second Avenue Subway with the monies diverted? How can the MTA ever be trusted? And what percentage of congestion pricing funds will even go to MTA Capital Projects with the highest construction costs in the world? 

How much will go to slow traffic even more with construction of new medians and islands, extended intersections, and unnecessary new bus and bike lanes? In Sheepshead Bay, they started building a new bike lane. They started by ripping out a perfectly good short median to replace it with a new median of the same size. Total waste of money.

The average speed on local streets is 10 mph. We don’t need that reduced to 5 mph. The purpose of congestion pricing shouldn’t be to increase congestion more which is what will happen once congestion pricing goes into effect with projected reduction in congestion within the zone a measly 5 to 7 percent. Congestion outside the zone will increase by way more. If this were about reducing congestion, there would be no fees during the night. Someone whose shift ends at 1AM shouldn’t be expected to wait up to 75 minutes for a bus after getting off the subway and has no choice but to drive. They shouldn’t have to pay an extra fee. 

When the desired funding is not raised, the zone will be extended to 72 or 86 Street to include all the hospitals, and raise it every two years?  Then what? Add a toll to any congested highway like the BQE, XBronx,  Van Wyck and LIE? 

Don’t forget the prices of all goods will rise when delivery prices increase when trucks are charged extra. This is just a bad idea all around. 

Someone that has crap service now working say the hours you noted... They get nothing out of this plan. Their wait will be exactly the same or worse because the (MTA) is not proposing to increase service anywhere. A plan like this that wants to charge people at all hours to enter the CBD should absolutely include more bus and train service. It doesn't mean we're running insane amounts of additional service, but it should be enough that compensates for these fees. Years ago, they cut overnight bus service in a number of areas and they haven't added much back, which essentially forced people to wait long periods of time or drive. I'm looking at this from the perspective of not just peak ridership, but off-peak as well. With people traveling at various hours, especially now with work from home, they need to have this better thought out.

There is also the issue that you noted of how much congestion will be outside of the zone because of this plan. We both know that we have congestion all over the City, but some areas already are dealing with increased congestion. In my area (or shall I say down by the subway, since I live in that specific area, but it is still my neighborhood of Riverdale), we have people from Westchester taking up all of the parking because they don't want to pay for Metro-North, so they drive near to the (1) train to park and take the subway. There are no plans to lower the railroad fares aside from City Ticket. They should ensure that fare capping is available for the local bus, subway and express bus, as fewer people use passes, and fares should be lowered on the railroad to truly incentivize people to not drive to other areas and create congestion.

I think so far this has poorly thought out and it needs to go much further in being more transit-friendly given what they want to achieve by having the fee at all hours.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Someone that has crap service now working say the hours you noted... They get nothing out of this plan. Their wait will be exactly the same or worse because the (MTA) is not proposing to increase service anywhere. A plan like this that wants to charge people at all hours to enter the CBD should absolutely include more bus and train service. It doesn't mean we're running insane amounts of additional service, but it should be enough that compensates for these fees. Years ago, they cut overnight bus service in a number of areas and they haven't added much back, which essentially forced people to wait long periods of time or drive. I'm looking at this from the perspective of not just peak ridership, but off-peak as well. With people traveling at various hours, especially now with work from home, they need to have this better thought out.

There is also the issue that you noted of how much congestion will be outside of the zone because of this plan. We both know that we have congestion all over the City, but some areas already are dealing with increased congestion. In my area (or shall I say down by the subway, since I live in that specific area, but it is still my neighborhood of Riverdale), we have people from Westchester taking up all of the parking because they don't want to pay for Metro-North, so they drive near to the (1) train to park and take the subway. There are no plans to lower the railroad fares aside from City Ticket. They should ensure that fare capping is available for the local bus, subway and express bus, as fewer people use passes, and fares should be lowered on the railroad to truly incentivize people to not drive to other areas and create congestion.

I think so far this has poorly thought out and it needs to go much further in being more transit-friendly given what they want to achieve by having the fee at all hours.

A few weeks ago, I had to pick up my car from Long Island City and drive back to Brooklyn in mid afternoon. I don’t believe this BS regarding traffic being the worst in the Manhattan CBD. The BQE has been moving at 5 mph between 7 AM and 10 PM in parts since the closing of a lane beneath the promenade. Guess how my GPS told me the quickest way to get home was?

it routed me into Manhattan via the 59 St Bridge, the FDR, and Brooklyn Bridge, then the BQE, Gowanus, and Belt to get home. I was really skeptical about going into Manhattan when I didn’t have to. The GPS was correct. It took only 3 minutes to go over the 59 St bridge, another three minutes to get on the FDR, and a steady 30 mph on the FDR. The Brooklyn Bridge took about seven minutes because a lane was closed for roadwork. The trip was 15 minutes quicker than if I just took the BQE without going into Manhattan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Someone that has crap service now working say the hours you noted... They get nothing out of this plan. Their wait will be exactly the same or worse because the (MTA) is not proposing to increase service anywhere. A plan like this that wants to charge people at all hours to enter the CBD should absolutely include more bus and train service. It doesn't mean we're running insane amounts of additional service, but it should be enough that compensates for these fees. Years ago, they cut overnight bus service in a number of areas and they haven't added much back, which essentially forced people to wait long periods of time or drive. I'm looking at this from the perspective of not just peak ridership, but off-peak as well. With people traveling at various hours, especially now with work from home, they need to have this better thought out.

There is also the issue that you noted of how much congestion will be outside of the zone because of this plan. We both know that we have congestion all over the City, but some areas already are dealing with increased congestion. In my area (or shall I say down by the subway, since I live in that specific area, but it is still my neighborhood of Riverdale), we have people from Westchester taking up all of the parking because they don't want to pay for Metro-North, so they drive near to the (1) train to park and take the subway. There are no plans to lower the railroad fares aside from City Ticket. They should ensure that fare capping is available for the local bus, subway and express bus, as fewer people use passes, and fares should be lowered on the railroad to truly incentivize people to not drive to other areas and create congestion.

I think so far this has poorly thought out and it needs to go much further in being more transit-friendly given what they want to achieve by having the fee at all hours.

I hope you make these points at the MTA hearings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I hope you make these points at the MTA hearings.

I'm scheduled to speak next week via Zoom and have my comments prepared already. I spoke some months ago at the previous hearings as well via Zoom, and yes, my comments for the three minutes I'm allotted are very much aligned with what I said here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

A few weeks ago, I had to pick up my car from Long Island City and drive back to Brooklyn in mid afternoon. I don’t believe this BS regarding traffic being the worst in the Manhattan CBD. The BQE has been moving at 5 mph between 7 AM and 10 PM in parts since the closing of a lane beneath the promenade. Guess how my GPS told me the quickest way to get home was?

it routed me into Manhattan via the 59 St Bridge, the FDR, and Brooklyn Bridge, then the BQE, Gowanus, and Belt to get home. I was really skeptical about going into Manhattan when I didn’t have to. The GPS was correct. It took only 3 minutes to go over the 59 St bridge, another three minutes to get on the FDR, and a steady 30 mph on the FDR. The Brooklyn Bridge took about seven minutes because a lane was closed for roadwork. The trip was 15 minutes quicker than if I just took the BQE without going into Manhattan. 

Traffic has varied, though I only go into Manhattan now twice a week and will be moving back to work from home permanently soon. I'm not sure how often I will be driving into Manhattan when this is implemented, but likely not often, and if I do, above the congestion zone. That assumes that there will be the same service provided now of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/27/2022 at 9:20 AM, BrooklynBus said:

A few weeks ago, I had to pick up my car from Long Island City and drive back to Brooklyn in mid afternoon. I don’t believe this BS regarding traffic being the worst in the Manhattan CBD. The BQE has been moving at 5 mph between 7 AM and 10 PM in parts since the closing of a lane beneath the promenade. Guess how my GPS told me the quickest way to get home was?

it routed me into Manhattan via the 59 St Bridge, the FDR, and Brooklyn Bridge, then the BQE, Gowanus, and Belt to get home. I was really skeptical about going into Manhattan when I didn’t have to. The GPS was correct. It took only 3 minutes to go over the 59 St bridge, another three minutes to get on the FDR, and a steady 30 mph on the FDR. The Brooklyn Bridge took about seven minutes because a lane was closed for roadwork. The trip was 15 minutes quicker than if I just took the BQE without going into Manhattan. 

Now imagine how much more traffic the BQE (And FDR) would have as motorists avoid driving into the CBD.

Speaking of which, what if there is an accident or road work on the FDR/West St? Would Motorists would be charged to exit the highway, or would they waive tolls in that case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I listened the public hearing yesterday. One lady pointed out that this plan isn’t about congestion, nor the environment, etc. and provided valid examples why, and they promptly cut her off, asap when that timer was up ;). (Everyone else got to finish their sentence at least :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is so much wrong with the plans that they are proposing.

What really needs to happen is a wholesale review of all tolling in the Metropolitan area and improvise a system that charges for travel in the CBD, but no so much that no one would go there.

OK, the current one-way EZ-Pass toll on Port Authority crossings is $13.75, with discounts for off-peak usage.  (And premiums for buses and turcks and other heavy vehicles.)  For MTA crossings like Triboro and  Verrazano, the NY EZ-Pass toll is $6.55 each way or $13.10 round trip.   While this isn't cheap, it is a fair toll and should be the basis of a regional tolling system.  This means that a base toll at all crossing points should really be in the $6.50 range each leg, with a slight premium (maybe 20%) for crossing into the CBD.

Tolls on the MTA crossings (Verrazano, RFK, Whitestone, Throgs Neck): $6.55 each way.

Tolls on Midtown and Cary Tunnels: $8.05 each way.  6.55 toll and 1.50 congestion pricing charge.

General congestion charge: $8.05 each way.  This means that crossing 60th street or crossing Brookklyn.Manhattan/Williamsburg/Queensboro bridges (and not going directly onto FDR or from queensboro to north of 60th) would be subject to an $8.05 charge each time.  

The tolls of the RFK and Henry Hudson Bridges should be fully creditable with the congestion charge.  So if someone crosses from Bronx to Harlem on RFK and pays $6.55, and then they later drive down 2nd Ave to cross 60th street and head to Midtown, the charge that they pay when crossing into Midtown should be $1.50.  For the reverse trip, a driver from Midtown will pay $8.05 when crossing 60th and would then have a free crossing when reaching either the Henry Hudson or the RFK.

One immediate effect of the crediing, is that it will push more traffic onto the RFK and HH bridges and relieve some traffic from the free Broadway, Third Ave, and Willis Ave bridges.  People will take the more direct routing when there is no financial penalty.  The free bridges between Bronx and Upper Manhattan would be for more of the local traffic, not the traffic bound to Midtown.

I imagine something similar for the NJ crossings, adjusted for the fact that tolls are normally only charged in one direction.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^

WIth the one-way tolling of NJ, a little more thought has to be put into those crossings.

Tolls on Outerbridge, Goethals, Bayonne are $13.75 NY bound and free in the other direction.

Tolls on GWB are $13.75 NY bound and free in the other direction.

Tolls on Lincoln/Holland are $16.10 NY bound and $8.05 in the other direction.  These charges are partially creditable.  If one crosses from NJ to NY on Lincoln/Holland, their return trip on Lincoln/Holland would be fully creidted (or free) if done within 24 hours.  Likewise if one crosses from NY to NJ and pays $8.05, half of the return toll on the Lincoln/Holland would be credited if they make the return trip within 24 hours. 

But the payment of the toll at Lincoln/Holland should have no credit effect at all towards a charge for crossing 60th or the East River.  So if I start in NJ and take the Lincoln, I pay $16.10, and then I take the Midtown tunnel to Queens, I pay an additional $8.05 without credit.  If I then make the reverse trip back to NJ within 24 hours, I will pay an additional $8.05 on the Midtown tunnel, but my return trip on the Lincoln Tunnel would be free.  As a second example, if I start in Queens and take the Midtown, I pay $8.05 and then I take the Lincoln, I pay an additional $8.05.  If I make the return trip within 24 hours, my crossing of the Lincoln would be discounted at $8.05 and my crossing of the Midtown tunnel would also be $8.05.  So regardless of how I make the trip, if I make a roundrtip between Queens and NJ by way of Midtown in peak times within 24 hours my total toll would be $32.20.  If I do the same roundtrip by way of GWB and RFK bridges, my toll would be only 6.55+13.75+ 6.55 = $26.85, a savings of $5.35.

And for similar reasons, the toll at GWB should not allow for a credit toward a charge for crossing 60th or the East River.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2022 at 7:50 PM, N6 Limited said:

I listened the public hearing yesterday. One lady pointed out that this plan isn’t about congestion, nor the environment, etc. and provided valid examples why, and they promptly cut her off, asap when that timer was up ;). (Everyone else got to finish their sentence at least :lol:

Three minutes means three minutes.  People should have their speech prepared and timed. I'm against the plan as it is currently presented and finished in the allotted time.  There are hundreds of people waiting to speak and the majority of them are courteous of everyone else and finish before their time is up. Others think they can just keep speaking until whenever despite being told in advance that they have three minutes and have no intention of wrapping up, so yes, they should be cut off.

  

12 hours ago, mrsman said:

There is so much wrong with the plans that they are proposing.

What really needs to happen is a wholesale review of all tolling in the Metropolitan area and improvise a system that charges for travel in the CBD, but no so much that no one would go there.

OK, the current one-way EZ-Pass toll on Port Authority crossings is $13.75, with discounts for off-peak usage.  (And premiums for buses and turcks and other heavy vehicles.)  For MTA crossings like Triboro and  Verrazano, the NY EZ-Pass toll is $6.55 each way or $13.10 round trip.   While this isn't cheap, it is a fair toll and should be the basis of a regional tolling system.  This means that a base toll at all crossing points should really be in the $6.50 range each leg, with a slight premium (maybe 20%) for crossing into the CBD.

Tolls on the MTA crossings (Verrazano, RFK, Whitestone, Throgs Neck): $6.55 each way.

Tolls on Midtown and Cary Tunnels: $8.05 each way.  6.55 toll and 1.50 congestion pricing charge.

General congestion charge: $8.05 each way.  This means that crossing 60th street or crossing Brookklyn.Manhattan/Williamsburg/Queensboro bridges (and not going directly onto FDR or from queensboro to north of 60th) would be subject to an $8.05 charge each time.  

The tolls of the RFK and Henry Hudson Bridges should be fully creditable with the congestion charge.  So if someone crosses from Bronx to Harlem on RFK and pays $6.55, and then they later drive down 2nd Ave to cross 60th street and head to Midtown, the charge that they pay when crossing into Midtown should be $1.50.  For the reverse trip, a driver from Midtown will pay $8.05 when crossing 60th and would then have a free crossing when reaching either the Henry Hudson or the RFK.

One immediate effect of the crediing, is that it will push more traffic onto the RFK and HH bridges and relieve some traffic from the free Broadway, Third Ave, and Willis Ave bridges.  People will take the more direct routing when there is no financial penalty.  The free bridges between Bronx and Upper Manhattan would be for more of the local traffic, not the traffic bound to Midtown.

I imagine something similar for the NJ crossings, adjusted for the fact that tolls are normally only charged in one direction.

 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, mrsman said:

^^^^

WIth the one-way tolling of NJ, a little more thought has to be put into those crossings.

Tolls on Outerbridge, Goethals, Bayonne are $13.75 NY bound and free in the other direction.

Tolls on GWB are $13.75 NY bound and free in the other direction.

Tolls on Lincoln/Holland are $16.10 NY bound and $8.05 in the other direction.  These charges are partially creditable.  If one crosses from NJ to NY on Lincoln/Holland, their return trip on Lincoln/Holland would be fully creidted (or free) if done within 24 hours.  Likewise if one crosses from NY to NJ and pays $8.05, half of the return toll on the Lincoln/Holland would be credited if they make the return trip within 24 hours. 

But the payment of the toll at Lincoln/Holland should have no credit effect at all towards a charge for crossing 60th or the East River.  So if I start in NJ and take the Lincoln, I pay $16.10, and then I take the Midtown tunnel to Queens, I pay an additional $8.05 without credit.  If I then make the reverse trip back to NJ within 24 hours, I will pay an additional $8.05 on the Midtown tunnel, but my return trip on the Lincoln Tunnel would be free.  As a second example, if I start in Queens and take the Midtown, I pay $8.05 and then I take the Lincoln, I pay an additional $8.05.  If I make the return trip within 24 hours, my crossing of the Lincoln would be discounted at $8.05 and my crossing of the Midtown tunnel would also be $8.05.  So regardless of how I make the trip, if I make a roundrtip between Queens and NJ by way of Midtown in peak times within 24 hours my total toll would be $32.20.  If I do the same roundtrip by way of GWB and RFK bridges, my toll would be only 6.55+13.75+ 6.55 = $26.85, a savings of $5.35.

And for similar reasons, the toll at GWB should not allow for a credit toward a charge for crossing 60th or the East River.

Congestion Pricing was passed into law years ago.  The only question now is what the fee to enter the congestion zone will be and if there will be any exemptions.  The tolls/fees for the other bridges are what they are and are not changing. The only way that this plan will change is if it is repealed or modified in some way, but the fee will be $9 - 23.   

It seems that some people are coming up with all of these proposals about this and that when none of that is part of the plan.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/4/2022 at 5:56 PM, BrooklynBus said:

https://www.qchron.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/new-tolls-won-t-work/article_be49ca1c-13c7-5d39-83bf-e58335840a76.html

“Traffic congestion within the zone would only be reduced by 5 to 7 percent, which would have a negligible effect on bus speeds and air pollution. Congestion outside the congestion zone would certainly increase by more than that amount, negating any benefits.”

They don’t care, as long as they can dig into our pockets, notice how the speed cameras are 24/7 now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

They don’t care, as long as they can dig into our pockets, notice how the speed cameras are 24/7 now.

How about not speeding? Simple as that. Too many dolts on the road who think they're the Stig.

 

On 8/27/2022 at 9:20 AM, BrooklynBus said:

A few weeks ago, I had to pick up my car from Long Island City and drive back to Brooklyn in mid afternoon. I don’t believe this BS regarding traffic being the worst in the Manhattan CBD. The BQE has been moving at 5 mph between 7 AM and 10 PM in parts since the closing of a lane beneath the promenade. Guess how my GPS told me the quickest way to get home was?

it routed me into Manhattan via the 59 St Bridge, the FDR, and Brooklyn Bridge, then the BQE, Gowanus, and Belt to get home. I was really skeptical about going into Manhattan when I didn’t have to. The GPS was correct. It took only 3 minutes to go over the 59 St bridge, another three minutes to get on the FDR, and a steady 30 mph on the FDR. The Brooklyn Bridge took about seven minutes because a lane was closed for roadwork. The trip was 15 minutes quicker than if I just took the BQE without going into Manhattan. 

You never actually went into the heart of the CBD. All you did was skirt around on the FDR. That's BS on your part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The GPS never should have sent me into Manhattan. It did so because going into Manhattan was quicker than staying in Brooklyn. So my point is really the congestion on the BQE is worse than in Manhattan where they will be charging because traffic is supposedly so bad there. 

And yet there are no bike lanes or pedestrian plazas on the BQE. So what's the excuse for the congestion on the BQE?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, GojiMet86 said:

And yet there are no bike lanes or pedestrian plazas on the BQE. So what's the excuse for the congestion on the BQE?

 

You obviously don’t drive so you don’t know lanes were eliminated under the promenade by our former mayor as a way of extending its life rather than having it reconstructed because it’s falling apart from the weight of all the trucks that use it daily. Scott Stringer actually wanted two lanes in each direction to be a permanent solution so that the congestion never goes away. This has added at least 15 minutes to everyone’s trip daily for those who use it or no longer use it by having to take an alternate longer route. The new Kosciusko Bridge with the fourth lane actually saves about five to seven minutes, but the net is still a longer trip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

The GPS never should have sent me into Manhattan. It did so because going into Manhattan was quicker than staying in Brooklyn. So my point is really the congestion on the BQE is worse than in Manhattan where they will be charging because traffic is supposedly so bad there. 

I think everyone knows that congestion is bad all over. Why? Because more people started driving. There are a number of reasons why congestion has worsened. Yes, narrowing of streets doesn't help with Vision Zero, but the big one in my mind are the explosion of FVHs and how horrendous the (MTA) has become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

You obviously don’t drive so you don’t know lanes were eliminated under the promenade by our former mayor as a way of extending its life rather than having it reconstructed because it’s falling apart from the weight of all the trucks that use it daily. Scott Stringer actually wanted two lanes in each direction to be a permanent solution so that the congestion never goes away. This has added at least 15 minutes to everyone’s trip daily for those who use it or no longer use it by having to take an alternate longer route. The new Kosciusko Bridge with the fourth lane actually saves about five to seven minutes, but the net is still a longer trip.

Uh, I've been on cars on the BQE before and after they got rid of those lanes. Traffic is always shit. The elimination has had a marginal effect. It isn't the root cause.

If those lanes are returned and the BQE is repaired, congestion still wouldn't be solved. Within a short time, the traffic and congestion would return to being the same as it is today. Then what?

That's the way induced demand works. Making it easier to drive only encourages more drivers and thus more traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.