Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

gothamist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–228 of 228 posts

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#221

Post by Ajedi32 »

dottjt wrote: post #35
BenFranklin100 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is a good example of the type of narrow minded progressive thinking that has held back good public policy like congestion pricing and carbon taxes. Both of these programs are criticized as being regressive. The criticism neglects to take into consideration the society wide benefits like more efficient bus travel or cleaner air that preferentially help the less well off.

I agree with your rebuttal in response to that other person's comment, but ultimately I do think those programs are regressive for the poor, at this very point in time. I guess the question becomes, should those poorest suffer for the betterment of all future generations? I would personally say no.

Life is regressive. Charity is a good thing, but not every single conceivable public policy has to include a charity component. Charging citizens a reasonable price for the cost of services rendered is a perfectly fair thing to do. The fact that life itself isn't fair doesn't change that. I'd prefer we try to address that later problem separately through a centralized welfare program rather than by hamstringing good public policy.

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#222

Post by Ajedi32 »

nomel wrote: post #219
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key point is that traffic is basically exponential in number of cars. Roads have a capacity below which there's almost no traffic, and above which capacity stays constant (or goes down). The amount of traffic in a city without congestion charging is the amount caused by the last couple percent of drivers most willing to wait in traffic. By introducing a fee that switches the decision for that small group of peopl…

Yes, by dramatically increasing the commute time of the poor, we can reduce the commute time of the wealthier, and give the city revenue in the process. Morals aside, this is the desired function of the fee. Morals in place, I think making B39 free, funded by the fee, would have been a nice move.

> I think making B39 free, funded by the fee

Where exactly are these congestion fees going, if not to funding transit?

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#223

Post by HDThoreaun »

occz wrote: post #198
HDThoreaun wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That's a different topic than whether driving is absolutely safe or not. It's been proven that it's very much not. It's of course easy to be abstract and talk about the value of lives versus your favourite mode of transportation. Would you have the same opinion if the deaths were concentrated to your particular branch of the human family tree? Everyone else gets to drive. Is the value proposition still as clear to yo…

Would no longer be worth it for me but still would be for society at large.

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#224

Post by nomel »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #222
nomel wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, by dramatically increasing the commute time of the poor, we can reduce the commute time of the wealthier, and give the city revenue in the process. Morals aside, this is the desired function of the fee. Morals in place, I think making B39 free, funded by the fee, would have been a nice move.

> I think making B39 free, funded by the fee Where exactly are these congestion fees going, if not to funding transit?

> The MTA is using the revenue from the congestion pricing tolls to issue a $15 billion bond to buy new train cars, install accessible elevators at subway stations across the city and other transit infrastructure improvements.

It's funding hardware. My point is that a free (or discounted), short, B39 commute across the bridge would have been a nice bone to throw to the poorer people who made this traffic flow improvement possible for the wealthier.

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#225

Post by Twirrim »

teractiveodular wrote: post #53
Twirrim wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if NYC would do the same stunt, but London saw an amazing improvement in traffic flow after congestion charge was introduced. Turned out for several months prior to it they'd been slowly shifting the timing of lights to make things less optimal, and then reverted the day congestion charge went live.

Would you have a source for this?

This was over 20 years ago, not sure what I'll be able to find.

This one is a bit frothing at the teeth, but I do recall a few others from after the congestion charge was introduced. It ended up being a minor controversy, and I could have sworn I read confirmation from later on, after the Ken Livingstone was no longer Mayor.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/revealed-how...

And then from not long after it was introduced, you can see the AA blathering about it again: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2967852.stm

side note because I'm getting down votes: I'm one of those strongly in favour of congestion charges. I believe they made an improvement in London and not just because of these stunts. Of particular value was shifting a bunch of large vehicles to off-peak.

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#226

Post by throw0101a »

dexwiz wrote: post #63
jmward01 wrote: post #38

Roads in cities are such a waste of space. A long time ago I did a quick survey of SF and found something like 20% of the land was dedicated to cars. Some articles from people here that talk about this [1] [2] [3]. That is the most subsidized land on the planet but people don't think of it that way. They think roads are free so any tax to use them is wrong. That space could be helping out the city in so many ways but…

How do you propose we handle logistics or emergency vehicles? I’m all for more walkable cities but rip them all up and replace them with what? Rails which are more expensive and less flexible? Pneumatic tube? Even if you switched to single person cargo bikes you would still want dedicated areas for vehicles versus pedestrians.

> How do you propose we handle logistics or emergency vehicles?

Find the the width of said emergencies vehicles, and then build bike lanes that are a little wider than that: the emergencies vehicles can drive down them quite easily (and cyclists can get out of the way quite quickly).

Alternatively, if a city has trams, created segregated rights of way, and the emergency vehicles can use them.

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2dHFC31VtQ&t=18m47s

And less-car-centric areas ≠ no-vehicles-allowed-ever areas.

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#227

Post by throw0101a »

jefftk wrote: post #8

When I see things like: > Bus speeds also increased after the tolls were turned on. The Manhattan-bound B39 bus, which crosses the Williamsburg Bridge, ran 28% faster compared to a similar January week last year. Other buses like the SIM24 and and the M50 saw increases in speeds, as well. I wonder how much cherry picking there is. Did they give the B39 because it's the most improved? Or for some other reason (especia…

> I wonder how much cherry picking there is. Did they give the B39 because it's the most improved? Or for some other reason (especially busy?)

The allocation of bridge space to cars is entirely wasteful:

> If the job of the Brooklyn Bridge is to move people between the two boroughs, the reallocation of space from transit to cars has been disastrous. In 1902, one year before the photograph was taken, the Brooklyn Bridge moved roughly 341,000 people a day across all its modes, according to the Federal Highway Administration. It hit its peak capacity a few years later, with 426,000 people using it each day in 1907.

> Today, 125,000 motor vehicles cross the Brooklyn Bridge each day [PDF], as do roughly 4,000 pedestrians and 2,600 cyclists. For the bridge to carry as many people as it did at its peak, each of those cars would need to carry more than three people, but they do not. In 1989, when the city counted around 132,000 motor vehicles crossing, the FHWA estimated that 178,000 people crossed the bridge daily.

* https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2011/04/11/the-efficient-past-an...

Transport trucks, or folks in the trades, may necessary for commerce and logistics, may still be needed† but private car transportation?

† Or you could ship in goods via rail and do local distribution via smaller trucks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Line

Re: 43K fewer drivers on Manhattan roads after congestion pricing turned on

#228

Post by ethics13 »

I was skeptical that this would work (I still am), but I would love for this to be the trend and welcome it. My most considerable curiosity is we're talking 9 dollars. Were the people who opted out of driving in on the fence due to this breaking their bank?
Post reply on HN