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

NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

congestion-pricing-tracker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 653 posts

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#101

Post by hammock »

kmlx wrote: post #91
maxwellg wrote: post #11

I'm incredibly hopeful that NYC congestion pricing pays off in a big way - and that we start to see it in other cities across America. I really, really want congestion pricing in downtown SF. During rush hour, cars block the box and slow down busses, with cascading effects.

> During rush hour, cars block the box i got a fine in London for doing this by mistake. i didn’t even block traffic, i just went into the intersection without the cars in front moving. bam, fine. lesson learned.

What you did is the definition of blocking the box - stopping in the intersection (even if your light is green). Blocking traffic would be if your light was red.

It's better this way that the law penalizes what you can control (your own vehicle movement) as opposed to what you can't (the cars in front of you)

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#102

Post by hammock »

matthest wrote: post #7

Whether it's the government or corporations, big organizations are the problem. We need a small business revolution in this country. Side note: An economy made up of small businesses was Adam Smith's original vision (the godfather of capitalism). He also hated the idea of a corporation. What we have today really is very far from Adam Smith capitalism.

Surprised that on a forum for startups, this comment is the most downvoted. Have we lost all self-awareness?

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#103

Post by bubblethink »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #99
bubblethink wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I really, really want congestion pricing in downtown SF. But SF doesn't have public transport. This just makes driving expensive, without any real benefit. We already do this on 101.

SF has public transport. Here's the map: https://www.iliveinthebayarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12...

Yes, obviously every city has public transport. It is not a usable system like NYC. The recent central subway debacle stands as a testament to that.

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#104

Post by whimsicalism »

maxwellg wrote: post #75
taatof wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we get around? To get downtown I have to take two busses and then bart (or two busses but it takes longer because there are a lot more stops). The kicker: I'm not even in a suburb, I live in SF! All we do in SF is make car driving worse, we almost never make public transit better. At least NYC has a plenty good enough train system. I end up WFH anyway, largely because it's annoying to get to an office downtown…

> All we do in SF is make car driving worse, we almost never make public transit better. In the last half decade we've seen the opening of the Salesforce transit center, the Chinatown subway station, the Van Ness BRT, the Caltrain Electrification Project, BART expansion to Berryessa, 800 new BART cars, and hundreds of smaller projects. You can see a full list of SFMTA projects at https://www.sfmta.com/sfmta-projects

it's too bad SF did not build an underground railway system covering the city in the short window when the labor to do so was affordable

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#105

Post by whimsicalism »

fragmede wrote: post #93
taatof wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds right. Here in SF, instead of police pulling over people who speed and run stop signs, we're getting rid of parking spots within 20ft of intersections so people speeding and running stop signs can see if they're about to kill a pedestrian. Could raise a fortune for public transit if we enforced traffic laws and used that money.

SF put in 33 speed cameras in known locations, and are aiming to install 900 more by the end of this year. As a bonus to speeders, speeds in excess of 100 mph will incur a $500 speeding ticket, though that may have unintended consequences.

what unintended consequences?

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#106

Post by whimsicalism »

taatof wrote: post #53
maxwellg wrote: post #11

I'm incredibly hopeful that NYC congestion pricing pays off in a big way - and that we start to see it in other cities across America. I really, really want congestion pricing in downtown SF. During rush hour, cars block the box and slow down busses, with cascading effects.

How do we get around? To get downtown I have to take two busses and then bart (or two busses but it takes longer because there are a lot more stops). The kicker: I'm not even in a suburb, I live in SF! All we do in SF is make car driving worse, we almost never make public transit better. At least NYC has a plenty good enough train system. I end up WFH anyway, largely because it's annoying to get to an office downtown…

for a bus-centric system like SF, congestion pricing intrinsically makes public transit better

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#107

Post by cyberax »

maxwellg wrote: post #11

I'm incredibly hopeful that NYC congestion pricing pays off in a big way - and that we start to see it in other cities across America. I really, really want congestion pricing in downtown SF. During rush hour, cars block the box and slow down busses, with cascading effects.

> During rush hour, cars block the box and slow down busses, with cascading effects.

Then stop digging deeper and improve the car infrastructure instead of sabotaging it.

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#108

Post by scottbez1 »

potato3732842 wrote: post #78
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very hopeful that Boston commuter rail gets electrified with the associated speed and frequency improvements soonish. the inner half of the commuter rail network is absolutely dense enough to be worth running service every 15 minutes on peak and every 30 off peak

Top speed (mostly) comes from the tracks, not the method of motive power. As it stands they're already maxing out and exceeding (when they're late) the max speed for the class of rail they have. Some of the inner stops might get a few seconds faster with better acceleration but that's about it. The grade crossings are also kinda f'd. At full speed you can be in the middle of the train and see the arms still be in the…

Top speed, sure, but for typical commuter heavy-rail, a non-express train isn't running at top speed for all that long.

Diesel-electric trains take a LOT longer to accelerate compared to a modern EMU, so much so that Caltrain's electrification project shaved 23 minutes off the SF to San Jose local trip, from 100 to 77 minutes.

Videos [0] [1] make the acceleration improvement pretty clear.

[0] https://x.com/Caltrain/status/1804278237486588179

[1] https://x.com/eiioth/status/1822814729079009516

Re: NYC Congestion Pricing Tracker

#109

Post by tlogan »

leetcrew wrote: post #100
tlogan wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal is straightforward: make driving more pleasant for wealthy people. Rich Democrats will claim it’s beneficial for the environment, while rich Republicans will call it capitalism at work. In the end, improving public transit isn’t really on their radar. And they rule the world.

buses and cars compete for the same right of way. improving one mode necessarily comes at the cost of the other, but many more people can be moved with a bus. trains would be even better, but people don't like to see the price tag. almost not worth discussing honestly. this has become yet another factionalized holy war over the last decade.

One challenge with your 100% logical reasoning is that it assumes wealthy and powerful people share the same priorities you do. Unfortunately, this is rarely true, and it often takes time to realize just how different those priorities can be.

I’m all for public transit myself, but after 25 years in San Francisco, I’ve only seen it decline. That sentiment isn’t just mine—many longtime SF residents share this cynicism.

Post reply on HN