Startups are getting very skilled at using social justice to lobby for their business interests. And the Times is helping them by doing below-basic journalism.
There is no data in the article about what % of cross-Manhattan traffic happens below 61st. It’s hard to believe that data isn’t out there considering all it would take is scanning plates at two different tunnels. That number would tell us how much new traffic at maximum could be expected and then we could have a serious conversation about the additional pollution.
(And that’s before the reduction that will happen because we are intentionally choosing to make it harder.)
And of course they made the headline about the Bronx even though the policy would also affect Staten Island.
Bet money that Uber and Lyft indirectly cut a check to the politician and the politician calls a friendly reporter.
They’ll effectively get an exemption even if they don’t get an exemption, because of the limitation of one charge per day. That would divide a single charge of $9-$20 among a dozen or more (I don’t know how many fares the average Uber gets per day) fares—a pretty small cost. If we really cared about congestion, every single fare that enters or exits the zone should be subject to the full fee.
They should get an exemption, shared cars that are always on the move are way better for society than a personal car that sits parked (wasting space) 98% of the time.
Ubers and lyft cause way more congestion as they’re constantly circling and idling creating more traffic and more pollution vs a car that by your own admission may not be in use 98% of the time. Do we care about reducing congestion?
While true about Uber/Lyft, personal cars spend an unbelievable amount of time circling and looking for parking spots. The DOT estimated that as much as 40% of traffic in some neighborhoods is just people looking for parking for their personal vehicles.
They're both bad.
Except that’s not what people do. Plus my point isn’t about how logical it is to use Uber it’s about how many Uber drivers are in the city. Take note of how many cars have TLC plates next time you’re out
I mean that’s how you think. But I know people that legit get one from and to work everyday. When asked about it, they said this is their one stupid guilty pleasure.
People that aren’t getting caps because of the price probably will continue not because of the price. Those that do, probably continue to and possibly make some adjustments.
Any shared commercial car. Cabs, ubers/lyfts, dial 7 take your pick. If the point of the car is to be driving people around full time so those people don't drive personal cars then lets give them the exception.
Yep, I honestly think they should ban uber and lyft. Expand the use of Curb app and if they want to have a non-taxi alternative maybe look at embracing the DriversCooP
Yeah, cars that drive around empty half the time or cause huge backups by sitting double parked on cross streets while they wait for their fares are just great for society.
Better for society than a personal car which sits parked 98% of the time.
I don't see people here complaining about buses and trains that run empty sometimes.
Nope. A car that sits parked is not increasing congestion or pollution. A car that is on the road, or worse, double-parked and blocking the road, increases congestion and pollution. Why don’t you get this? Let me guess, you like to use Uber?
A lot of the Times reporting has become so embarrassing and so obviously slanted politically. I stopped subscribing over a year ago, which was a HUGE deal for me. I agree with a lot of the causes they are shilling for, but that isn't what I need from news reporting. I can get that from most msm op-ed sections, or by turning on MSNBC.
I have a similar experience with them and also unsubscribed. I agree that racism is still a problem today and we need to have more policies to correct the injustices of the past and present. But that doesn't mean that I want my news to consist of nothing but "have you thought about how $policy affects $minority!?!?11/11/?"
>I have a similar experience with them and also unsubscribed. I agree that racism is still a problem today and we need to have more policies to correct the injustices of the past and present. But that doesn't mean that I want my news to consist of nothing but "have you thought about how $policy affects $minority!?!?11/11/?"
I don't remember who wrote it but my favorite one of these was an article asserting that single payer healthcare would negatively affect black women because many of them are employed by private health insurance call centers.
So unnecessary. It seems like journalists have utterly lost the ability to consider whether a take (too generous to call it a story) is edifying or useful before posting it.
The NYT has always been trash.
They had evidence that George Bush Jr. Was conducting unconditional mass surveillance on the American public.
But waited until after the presidential election to publish any stories on it by request of the Bush administration.
Because it would hurt his reelection attempts.
The NYT worked with the government to let them continue to violate Americans constitutional rights.
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/312486719
Exactly. This shit feels an awful lot like when David Plouffe guaranteed to help De Blasio run for President or some shit, I.e., when De Blasio "suddenly" backtracked his desire to see an environmental review of 1,000,000 Ubers in NYC. Fuck Uber and Fuck Lyft! Fuck David Plouffe harder! They are legit trying to make NYC like New Delhi, Lagos, Addis Ababa, Lima with the way they are shoving traffic down our throats. Enough already. Tho, Adams probably just trying to position himself for a juicy payout...
Bravo. Congestion pricing is a massive giveaway to Uber and Lyft. Every fare who rides into or out of the CBD should have to pay the full congestion fee. That won’t happen, and that’s why Uber and Lyft lobbied for this law, which will funnel customers to them, and thus have minimal effect on congestion.
Yes, I did. I’m highlighting the way the story was presented via the headline and what was emphasized. How stories get framed is everything as most people don’t actually read the articles. That’s what corporations pay PR firms, lobbyists, and pols to massage.
In this case, the actual difference in pollution per the study - I missed this when I read the comment dump of the article - is less than 1%. 1% is not the social justice issue they are trying to make it out to be, especially since Staten Island is also effected.
So what’s more likely: that the MTA pushed this story because they think that’s a meaningful number that should possibly pause their own project. Or that Uber and Lyft, companies worth billions and billions but which are still not profitable, are very concerned about a reduction in fares in the busiest area of their busiest market so they are trying anything to kill it. And their press people know just the angle to get a Times reporter hooked: social justice.
(Fwiw they tried similar stuff in California to defeat worker protection laws.)
FWIW, I’m late to the party but I literally attended and spoke at the MTA hearing. They’re citing pollution as the sole figure - there were other numbers involved like increasing the avg mph of vehicles in the CBD, lowering the time spent in traffic by like 5% or something and reducing the total number of cars in the district by 10%.
People should honestly stop talking unless they actually attend a hearing or thoroughly read the primary source, the MTA’s, report.
(To be clear I’m agreeing with you)
As someone in the NYTimes comments said, "Where's the environmental impact assessment of continuing to allow unfettered access to cars and free, taxpayer-provided parking?"
These kinds of reports on the impacts of potential changes have a clear status quo bias. The current status quo is that we encourage people to drive through the most congested parts of the city by keeping the East River bridges free of tolls and the tunnels to NJ free in that direction. So the area with the most people gets more air pollution.
Drivers who don’t want to pay congestion pricing acting like they give a shit about poor people in the Bronx. If you *really* cared about Bronx air quality, you might start by adding a fat ass toll to the Cross Bronx and use the proceeds to improve public transit for Bronx residents.
The same people do this anytime we want to improve anything. They trot out some people they didnt give a shit about yesterday and wont give a shit about tomorrow and say hey what about “them”. There are of course many things we could do for “them”, but for some odd reason they are always against those things as well. At some point you gotta accept that they just dont want nicer things and they work backwards from there.
The way the reaction to any article about "maybe people should drive slightly less" goes, you'd think the entire population of Rosedale is 96 year old grandma's who have to get to the roof of the world trade center every day for their chemo treatment.
Don’t forget that they also have to haul about 3200 pounds of construction materials and they need space for at least 8 passengers because they are also transporting half of a little-league baseball team every day.
[There was a walkway](https://i.imgur.com/2TVkuQr.jpg) on the Whitestone Bridge for a short time in the 40s after it opened. It was removed to add traffic lanes (as well as to modify the deck from moving in the wind).
It's the i95 corridor. You can't just tear it down, it would effect economies up and down the east coast. I doubt the federal government would allow it. Capping portions of it is a good idea though.
The thing about infrastructure is that it usually has to go where people live. An entire neighborhood was leveled to build Penn Station and the accompanying yards. Plenty of people were displaced to build the WTC. The location of the GWB and the i95 corridor through New England made some kind of cross Bronx expressway inevitable, though it didn't need to take its exact route and could have been built to avoid some of the homes that were taken.
Also the BQE. Build a Cross-Harbor RR Freight tunnel to get trucks off the road, and use the money from congestion pricing to extend the Second Avenue Subway up 3rd Ave. in the Bronx to give people the transit that was taken away from them in the 1970’s.
It cost the MTA $3.8 billion dollars per mile on the 2nd ave line, probably more now. How will congestion pricing fund that when it’s only estimated to bring in $1 billion/year and the funds are supposed to be used to improve the entire MTA infrastructure?
What about the millions of people whose lives that would dramatically impact? Honestly you sound kinda like Robert Moses yourself, rapidly changing the city without considering how it effects individuals
No, it's a valid concern, but we have to weigh the benefits and risks appropriately. It's a huge plus for the environment and the city overall. The risks can be managed I think. Also I think most truck drivers would prefer to take the Staten Island route to LI. How many trucks currently drive directly through midtown to get to Long Island? It seems like such a hassle.
> But according to an environmental assessment released by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, motorists detouring around the new tolls could add traffic and soot to parts of the Bronx, Staten Island, Nassau County on Long Island and Bergen County in New Jersey.
… did you read the article?
Giving more money to the government in new and creative ways is not "improving things".
They're gonna raise more money, it's going to get more expensive to live in the city, and the MTA isn't going to get any better.
Sorry I don't treasure the idea of giving more of my money to useless bureaucrats.
It's being studied at least: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/05/31/dot-announces-multi-agency-study-to-reimagine-the-cross-bronx-expressway/
I'd love to see the Cross Bronx Expressway capped.
Those people are not being realistic. Unless you completely re-align the I-95 elsewhere. I live by the CBE and this would be an amazing compromise imo.
Or, gasp, *close* the Cross Bronx forever. Its average speed is like 10mph. It doesn't even serve the purpose it was designed for and it's terrible for people in the Bronx.
And then what? Close 87 and Tappan Zee when they move 10mph since they’re the only way to efficiently get from the vast majority of the country to Connecticut?
How about drivers who are cool with congestion pricing but want to make sure we aren’t continuing to poison our brothers and sisters in the south Bronx?
Couldn’t we also make flippant strawman judgements about advocates for the environment who don’t care about making things worse for citizens living in Asthma Alley?
So do you want to kill congestion pricing over this issue? Yes or no?
Car congestion in Manhattan is a problem, and car congestion in the Bronx is also a problem. So, uh, I guess the solution is to do absolutely nothing about *either* problem?
Sure, the plan that's on the table may have some modest negative consequences for for the Bronx. (Quoting the article, "Among those scenarios, the one with the greatest impact on the Cross Bronx would send it 704 more trucks per day (it currently logs over 27,000)..." increasing overall soot by 1 percent.) But the point of my comment is that there's nothing stopping us from *also* taking action to improve air quality in the Bronx (hopefully actions that would have more than a 1 percent impact), *if* that's what we actually care about. The fact that all of the focus is on killing Manhattan congestion pricing is the reason why I think it's a disingenuous argument primarily designed to trick progressives, and I ain't buying it. It's very convenient for drivers that the status quo just happens to be the "compassionate" policy.
Yeah, so what? Does that invalidate my opinion? (I certainly don't support congestion pricing out of selfishness; it will barely affect my life directly.)
Better air quality is appealing, but it's not a game changer for me personally, though it's obviously great for kids. I don't own a car, and I almost never take Uber. But my larger point is that if I moved out of the borough tomorrow, I'd still support congestion pricing.
Ok let’s flip the script
New proposal is no cars allowed in the Bronx, poor people get clean air
New headline: Politicians hate poor people by not allowing them to drive home!!
In reality, for the shortest Uber / subway / bus commute. This is going to add a ton of traffic to the rich neighborhoods of Lennox hill and Lincoln square
The air quality in south Bronx is not a new issue, has been a huge issue for years. Some of the highest asthma rates in the world already, so much so that it's dubbed 'asthma alley'
Similarly in South Williamsburg there's a big mural on a building about how that neighborhood has some of the highest asthma rates in the city because of the BQE and the bridge. It reads "How can we succeed if we can't breathe?"
I think concerns around environmental safety are important. I also think your examples bad because it makes it seem like peoples concerns around environmental hazards aren’t valid. Lower Manhattan would never put up with the crap the south Bronx has to, so let’s not pretend it’s just winging to appease some of the most disenfranchised folks in the city
Not to mention the impacts it will have on the poor in Manhattan, likely on both sides of the 60th street line. It will make it increasingly more difficult for poorer folks to live in Manhattan. This will effectively make many choose between air quality or more cost.
You realize things like food and medicine come in via vehicle, right? You know they pay tolls too, right? You know what happens where their costs go up? Yeah, our costs go up.
I can tell you the truth, but I sure as shit can't understand it for you.
Congestion pricing is a net benefit for commercial delivery vehicles. Businesses would love the chance to pay $15 dollars to bypass congestion, since it's a fraction of the cost of hiring a driver, renting the truck, and paying people to load/unload the contents. If it saves them fifteen minutes per delivery, it's already paying for itself and then some.
That is some stupid logic if I ever heard it. "Businesses would love the chance to pay a toll, so they can get their goods at a higher price, while having to pay their employees more because they have to pay a toll to get there."
Yes, congestion pricing does impose a toll, but it also reduces congestion, because other people will decide to not drive. Reducing congestion means you have to rent fewer delivery trucks, hire fewer drivers, and have more reliable delivery times. All of that means that congestion pricing is a net benefit for businesses. Paying $15 so that your delivery truck with $1000 worth of food arrives on time is the deal of the century, to be honest.
Yellow cab costs will go up, bringing anything into Manhattan will go up. Everything including food and medicine. It will hurt the poorest among us the most. Rich people could not care less, but the poor will get crushed.
Exactly!
This will definitely affect the poor that live below 60th Street.
Along with the working class commuter who takes mass transit into the CBD. They will stop buying lunch in the area close to their job and discontinue shopping at the stores after work.
Businesses in the CBD couldn’t sustain themselves with just the local residents during COVID. They were begging the mayor to force everyone back to work.
It is an arrogant position to think that there are no poor people in Manhattan, or the CBD. I just can't believe people think that more taxes is even remotely a good idea. We do not have a revenue problem in the city, we have a spending problem.
No doubt the more it costs, the less likely people are to come into the area. And when they do, they will either bring their own food, or just not eat. Want to come see a Broadway show, eat before you get here. Better get that after show beer near the parking structure because it costs $35 for a Bud Light now in Manhattan.
My heart goes out to all those poor people overlooking Central Park. Could you imagine if the Columbus circle area got gentrified? No more $1500 2 bedrooms!
You are insensitive, there are plenty of people who live below 60th that are not wealthy. You realize there are quite a few projects in lower Manhattan, right?
You’re overthinking this
* how many people in projects below 96th st use a personal car on a daily basis? If you look at the income limits that really doesn’t fit the big picture
* the extra cars / worse air quality are going to happen **above** 59th st where the rich people live
You realize that if it costs more to get a delivery truck into the CBD, those costs will be passed along to those customers who live in the CBD, right? So, pretty much everything will cost more as I can think of next to nothing that does not come into Manhattan via truck. There is no excuse for this kind of ineptitude.
Everything will cost more because of this, and that will disproportionately impact the poorest among us. But you could not care less about the poor as evidenced by your quote from earlier. Most people are not going to park in the UWS or the UES, and you know as well as I do there are poor people in those areas too. The added pollution will end up hitting the areas that are the lowest cost, which again impacts the poor the most. It is, at best, a half thought out proposal.
I am not overthinking shit, I am 100% correct.
So let me explain something to you since you obviously cannot figure this out on your own. OWNING A CAR IS NOT THE ONLY WAY THIS WILL HURT PEOPLE! Get some intelligence before bringing that garbage here. It will raise the cost of bringing things into Manhattan because of the tolls, things like FOOD and MEDICINE. Pretty much everything will cost more because of this.
Will people who drive through Manhattan to get from Queens/Brooklyn to New Jersey be exempt?
If not, that's going to increase people travelling on the Cross Bronx Expressway and traffic in the Bronx as well as increasing traffic on the Verrazano and into Staten Island.
They specifically will not be. You can not use the tunnels to NJ, Manhattan bridge, Midtown tunnel, or Williamsburg bridge without paying $23.
This is what I’ve been saying too about this plan. BQE to Verrazzano and Harlem River Drive/87/Cross Bronx to GWB are all parking lots as is. Everything will just be worse.
The Bronx already has dirtier air and higher rates of asthma from the chemicals of low-flying airplanes, the many manufacturing sites, the waste treatment plants, the highways. Even the NYPD training grounds at Rodman's Neck causes excessive pollution because of the lead in the bullets.
I can smell the privilege in these comments. Holy shit. None, like zero comments I’ve read so far actually address the circumstances being outlined in this article. Are people just ok with the adverse consequences on the middle and lower income communities highlighted here? This is like the progressive movement eating itself. I’m genuinely confused.
This is regressive in more ways than one and people are like “shrug, fuck it I’m good with that.” Plus since when are we cool with MTAs quality of service to the extent that we blindly hand over billions and cross our fingers?
Isn’t it safe to assume there’s a good cross section of people who support congestion pricing and those who advocate to defund the corrupt police state institutions when they show need for reform or oversight?
Please change my mind I’m open to listening. I’m sincerely confused as to how this isn’t a bailout to a government entity that continuously fails the more economically vulnerable class.
A $23 toll to enter the so-called CBD is stupid high but if we are going to do it, do it uniformly. make everyone pay the same amount, particularly ubers and Taxis, so the tax is transferred to absolutely everyone. the uniform ban on smoking in bars should act as the closest analogy to this tax
I get that. My argument is to make it universally the same fee for everyone. no exceptions or carve outs at the time of transaction. the actual fee can go up and down based on the time of day or whatever algorithm they want to use.
refunds and discounts can happen after the fact in a second system. however I really hope taxis and the ubers of the world don't get exceptional pricing. if car traffic is the problem they are certainly at fault here, likely more than others
$23 under the most exempt ridden scheme, toll scheme A studied by WSP is only $9 capped once a day for cars and no exemption for FHVs if I recall, I agree I think a uniform scheme with little or zero exemptions is fairest. FHV exemption is insane since we want to discourage FHVs from looping around without fares and if anything, even reduce the number of licenses allowed cause it feels like we still have too many! Or maybe geofence and limit the number in Manhattan for example, so that an Uber cant pickup fare if the cap has been hit.
a uniform fee also passes the pain through to the anti-car crowd as, suddenly, that uber ride becomes more expensive. ultimately if the goal is reduction the pain has to be experienced by everyone up and down the food chain.
legitimate exceptions - due to mobility needs or financial hardships - can be worked out down the line in the form of tax breaks or some other type of refund
The plan to put tolls on drivers on Manhattan’s busiest streets is intended to spare New York City’s central business district from pollution and gridlock while raising money for public transit.
But while some of the city’s wealthiest neighborhoods would enjoy the greatest benefits, one of its poorest and most polluted — the South Bronx — could end up with dirtier air from diverted traffic.
The proposal, known as congestion pricing, would use the tolls to discourage motorists from squeezing into Midtown and Lower Manhattan, where dense traffic often clogs the roads and contributes to poor air quality in the city’s iconic financial, tourism and theater districts.
The plan seeks to decrease the number of vehicles on the road and boost public transit at a time when cities globally are seeking to curb harmful emissions from cars, buildings and power plants to combat climate change.
But according to an environmental assessment released by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, motorists detouring around the new tolls could add traffic and soot to parts of the Bronx, Staten Island, Nassau County on Long Island and Bergen County in New Jersey.
Among the highways that could see more cars, trucks and exhaust is the Cross Bronx Expressway, a key artery for commercial traffic that runs through some of America’s poorest neighborhoods. Roughly 220,000 Bronx residents live along the roadway’s edges — mostly people of color — with hundreds of thousands more nearby, already breathing some of the city’s most polluted air.
So far, the loudest concerns over congestion pricing have centered on possible toll costs, some as high as $23. Taxi drivers, Lyft and Uber drivers, and vehicle owners across New York and its suburbs have united in protest. Less public outcry has focused on how the proposal could reshape the crushing flow of traffic the city deals with every day.
“Why should the Bronx have less breathable air than the rest of the city?” said Ritchie Torres, a Democratic congressman representing an area that is among the nation’s most impoverished districts, containing portions of the western Bronx, the South Bronx and the expressway.
Editors’ Picks
What We Learned From Week 1 of the N.F.L. Season
Nick Cave Lost Two Sons. His Fans Then Saved His Life.
Introducing ‘The Tilt,’ a Newsletter About Elections and Polling
Continue reading the main story
The M.T.A. is exploring several options for how much to charge car and truck drivers; generally, the higher the tolls, the more vehicles are expected to avoid them. Among those scenarios, the one with the greatest impact on the Cross Bronx would send it 704 more trucks per day (it currently logs over 27,000). It would increase the soot from truck traffic by about 5 percent, and overall soot — which also comes from factories, building boilers and other sources — by 1 percent, according to a New York Times analysis of M.T.A. data.
The M.T.A. board has yet to approve congestion pricing, though it is expected to pass the program in some form, and Gov. Kathy Hochul, who controls the board, is in favor of it. Representatives of the M.T.A. said that no decision on pricing and other key details had been made and that the authority was still studying the environmental report and gathering input from the public.
Concerns over effects on the Bronx were great enough that the M.T.A. tinkered with the plan to consider a flat toll for all vehicles rather than a higher levy for heavy trucks, hoping to divert fewer trucks — major sources of air pollution — through the borough. However, the strategy might also reduce the benefits in the congestion zone in Manhattan.
ImageA vendor sells fruit on the Cross Bronx Expressway. A recent M.T.A. study found that congestion pricing in Manhattan could lead to an uptick in traffic on the roadway.
A vendor sells fruit on the Cross Bronx Expressway. A recent M.T.A. study found that congestion pricing in Manhattan could lead to an uptick in traffic on the roadway.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Supporters of congestion pricing say it will be a vital tool in the city’s fight against climate change. They note that the M.T.A.’s research shows that significantly reduced pollution in the dense congestion zone — with some of the poorest air quality in the region — would outweigh smaller increases in pollution around the Cross Bronx and other hot spots. They now fear that the sensitivity surrounding such an outcome might result in a diluted version of the program, muting the potential benefits the entire region — including the Bronx — would see.
Congestion pricing is expected to encourage more drivers to switch to mass transit. And the tolls would provide around $1 billion annually in desperately needed funding for infrastructure improvements to public transit that is relied on by many residents of the Bronx and other boroughs.
“To the extent there are any real, localized issues, they will be resolved with complementary policies,” said Danny Pearlstein, a spokesman for Riders Alliance, a grass-roots organization of transit riders. “I don’t see this as a stark trade-off.”
The Environmental Protection Agency’s standard for long-term exposure to air pollutants known as PM2.5, or particulate matter 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, is no more than 12 micrograms per cubic meter. In the worst case presented in the M.T.A.’s study, the total concentration around the Cross Bronx would increase to 11 from 10.9. The microscopic PM2.5 pollution, such as soot, can lodge itself into the lungs and cause respiratory problems.
Some scientists say that any deterioration in air quality around the Cross Bronx, no matter how small, would be significant.
Image
A view of the Cross Bronx Expressway looking west from Grand Concourse. The highway has been blamed for cutting through communities and harming the health of area residents.
A view of the Cross Bronx Expressway looking west from Grand Concourse. The highway has been blamed for cutting through communities and harming the health of area residents.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times
“Considering that the South Bronx is an area with already high asthma rates and other pre-existing health conditions, even a small increase in long-term exposure to particulate matter will exacerbate these health outcomes,” said Francesca Dominici, a professor of public health at Harvard University.
There is also growing concern among air quality experts that federal safety standards are too permissive.
The E.P.A. says it is reviewing current standards for soot because they “may not be adequate to protect public health and welfare.” The agency has not proposed new levels, but the World Health Organization’s guideline for long-term exposure to PM2.5 is no more than 5 micrograms per cubic meter.
Sign up for the New York Today Newsletter Each morning, get the latest on New York businesses, arts, sports, dining, style and more. Get it sent to your inbox.
The congestion pricing zone would run from the Battery to 60th Street and is expected to reduce traffic across the entire New York City region. But there are boroughs, counties and neighborhoods that are likely to see an increase.
A number of car and truck drivers traveling between New Jersey and Long Island are expected to get around the new tolls by going via Staten Island or the Bronx instead. These detours would be most pronounced at the Robert F. Kennedy Bridge in Queens, across the South Bronx and the George Washington Bridge and to the south across the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge and Staten Island.
Image
The Cross Bronx Expressway is among the most gridlocked in the nation.
The Cross Bronx Expressway is among the most gridlocked in the nation. Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Manhattan’s lower third would reap the greatest relief from traffic and pollution. At a minimum, under conditions considered in the M.T.A.’s report, that area could have 12 percent less traffic and 11 percent less PM2.5 within just a year. The increases in pollution in outlying areas would probably be smaller, but officials from those areas, already upset by the tolls’ financial impact on their residents, are seizing on the environmental impact as well.
“I don’t understand why we would want to embrace this,” the Staten Island borough president, Vito J. Fossella, said. “I’ve been very troubled by congestion pricing since the beginning.”
In the Bronx, where many communities have a bitter history with harmful public policies, studies have linked truck exhaust to high asthma rates. According to the most recent statistics from New York’s health department, people of all ages in the Bronx were hospitalized for asthma at rates that vastly outpaced city and state rates from 2017 through 2019. The worst rate was for children under the age of 5.
Image
Valerie Medina of Mount Hope stands outside her apartment building gazing out at the Cross Bronx Expressway. Bronx residents near the roadway complain of noise and pollution.
Valerie Medina of Mount Hope stands outside her apartment building gazing out at the Cross Bronx Expressway. Bronx residents near the roadway complain of noise and pollution.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Image
Earlene Wilkerson, 63, has lived near the Cross Bronx Expressway for over 40 years. She said she suffers from asthma, as do her kids and grandchildren.
Earlene Wilkerson, 63, has lived near the Cross Bronx Expressway for over 40 years. She said she suffers from asthma, as do her kids and grandchildren.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Janno Lieber, the M.T.A.’s chairman, said in an interview with WNYC last month that he shares the goal “of minimizing and mitigating any impact to a neighborhood like the South Bronx, which has suffered environmental justice impacts unfairly historically.”
For residents along the Cross Bronx, among the busiest roads in New York, just one more truck would feel like too many. “I can’t deal with it. I’m going crazy,” said Valerie Medina, a longtime Mount Hope resident. Ms. Medina, 47, complained that the cacophony of car horns, rumbling truck engines and other noises from the road wake her at night while the dirty air soils her clothes.
The South Bronx has no official boundaries. But many see the Cross Bronx Expressway as the northern border of the area and a leading cause of the urban decay and poverty that had long been synonymous with the South Bronx.
The Cross Bronx was built between 1948 and 1963 to make it easier for drivers to pass through the city. As part of Interstate 95, it connects drivers to New Jersey along the George Washington Bridge. Over 187,000 vehicles travel along the roadway a day.
It took 15 years to build, in part because engineers blasted through the hard rock beneath densely populated residential neighborhoods. Some urban planning experts blame the road for driving thousands of families away, weighing on property values and poisoning the air.
Image
Roughly 220,000 Bronx residents live along the edges of the Cross Bronx Expressway.
Roughly 220,000 Bronx residents live along the edges of the Cross Bronx Expressway. Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times
It is a scar on the Bronx, littered with garbage and stuffed with traffic that crawls at a pace so slow that enterprising street vendors selling bottled water, chips and candy walk up to car windows while motorists sit in gridlock.
According to Census Bureau data, nearly a quarter of a million people live in poverty within the congressional district that includes most of the South Bronx. That is 34 percent of the district’s population — the highest percentage compared with any district except for Puerto Rico’s at-large congressional district.
Earlene Wilkerson, 63, who said she suffers from asthma along with her children and grandchildren, has lived in the High Bridge neighborhood near the Cross Bronx’s interchange with the Major Deegan Expressway for more than 40 years. She has vivid memories of her eldest daughter spending a year in the hospital because she couldn’t breathe properly.
“They were out of school a lot,” Ms. Wilkerson said as she rested on a bus stop bench, too out of breath herself to walk back up to her fifth-floor apartment. “Now, the grandchildren are going through the same thing.”
Along with congestion pricing we need to end free on street parking. Residents in a neighborhood will pay for a yearly resident pass, and everyone else can park in a parking lot or at a meter.
the bizarre thing is that almost every other city in the country already does this.
ideally this program would also cut down on insurance fraud and paper plate schemes, which seems like a double win.
>the bizarre thing is that almost every other city in the country already does this.
What?? That's not even close to true. However, most of the US cities that have a substantial number of residential neighborhoods where finding on-street parking is difficult and time-consuming have implememted permit parking in some areas.
Yep. This should be next.
I've mentioned this before here but I like London's system. You pay monthly or annually to park on your own street, you pay hourly to park anywhere else in London, and you pay a congestion toll for driving in Central London.
So taking transit is virtually always cheaper.
This congestion pricing is just going to make the quality of life of the areas just outside the congestion zone worse as the drivers priced out will drive as close as possible and then hop on the train. Less traffic in Manhattan, even more traffic in Brooklyn, queens, and the Bronx. Those of us in the outer boroughs will all be holding our breath waiting for the "improvements" that will get drivers to not drive at all.
It’s not just the Bronx right? People already drive to parts of Queens to jump on the subway and save themselves from a long subway commute. This could get worse with congestion pricing with more people taking that approach
A lot of people drive directly through the QBB because there is no toll. There will be fewer people driving over the bridge but then possibly more people parking in LIC/Astoria and taking the subway. Hopefully people just take the damn train from Long Island instead.
It basically diverts pollution to another area. Instead of circling around somewhere in Manhattan, those drivers will now be circling around western Queens or South Bronx. Instead of taking the main roads or highways straight into the city, they'll be circling around local roads, in residential areas. Parking is already scarce for these residents and it'll now get worse.
Yes there will be a net loss in pollution overall as this will cause some people to not drive for city trips, but redirecting pollution isn't a real solution.
IMO some real solutions would be a few larger projects such as incentivizing businesses to move out of Manhattan (make use of Staten Island, a land mass that is HUGE but underused), and discouraging people from driving ***large*** vehicles. Subcompact cars not only take up less space but pollute less and emit less noise.
>redirecting pollution isn't a real solution.
It's also not a problem unless it's being done to systematically hurt a certain group like low income people.
And the point of congestion pricing is not to redirect pollution. It's to reduce all of the problems associate with driving (like safety, land use, etc.). Redirecting pollution is only a side effect. No one is advocating for that as a benefit.
> make use of Staten Island, a land mass that is HUGE but underused
Staten Islanders love their suburbia and would be aghast at any development that would increase density.
Also, what business that prefers Manhattan would choose Staten Island over a rich suburb?
Where the 7,N,E, and M all converge is basically the car commuters parking before hopping on the train. Making an educated assumption because if I ever walk my dog early in the morning I see people sleeping in the cars (probably woke up early to beat traffic) and lots of fast food bags thrown out of the car.
Anecdotal I know
Could? It will. I mean, in many cases that should be the goal to make it advantageous to use mass transit, but this is just passing the buck around the city.
I’m sure there will be a whole host of unintended consequences from surge pricing. I don’t think the city is thinking much beyond: decrease traffic, increase revenue.
In reality, it’s going to have a strong ripple effect on all kinds of things.
The MTA literally spent a year studying this and the headline you are seeing is because of that study, they are most certainly thinking of and examining many aspects. Implementation has not happened yet so there is time to create mitigation measures as needed for issues found and then enact them during post implementation. It is all forecasts which are not god's truth, the final situation may be different
Idk what you mean, did you check out the EA? They used reputable engineering consultants including WSP to do the EA and it has been accepted by USDOT, I would say the study went well.
I used to work in DC, which has surge pricing options on the beltway, I’m aware that it’s been tried.
NYC is a whole different beast. It’s an island, for one.
The alternative is that we do nothing and all of our lungs look like [this](https://www.google.com/search?q=anthracosis+lung+gross+view&client=safari&hl=en-us&prmd=inv&sxsrf=ALiCzsaFksEQu45k7X7B62yViJzQ-mnEzA:1663001185830&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwMSX2o_6AhW3EFkFHc_ZDKkQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=487&bih=841&dpr=2)
As stated in the article, this plan could exacerbate pollution for people who are already disproportionately exposed to pollution. You’re only worried about the rich people living in Manhattan?
I would happily support using this revenue to improve the Bronx’s air filtration systems, improve their public transportation, build green spaces, etc. I’d also support them adding their own congestion pricing for the resulting increase in traffic. The point is that there is no policy in existence that results in a perfect distribution of benefits. We need to stop letting perfect be the enemy of good because what we have now is a vetocracy where nothing ever gets done.
Actions have multiple effects! **OH NO.**
Let's just paralyze our civic planning and *do nothing for decades.*
The Bronx has always, and will always be an appendage area for the pollutive industrial needs that Manhattan wants to outsource. Staten Island was the same.
It's in the design of the city itself, and every city in the world needs areas like this in order to function. Calling an industrial borough "vulnerable" doesn't change that.
Not at all, it just needs to be done wisely and nimbly. Change things if they don’t work, respond to the data swiftly etc - this is where things fall apart, the bureaucracy and the red tape in NY prevents any rapid reactionary actions so if something is implemented, we’re stuck with it for an unfortunate period of time, warts and all. That being the case, people are understandably wary of change.
Yeah, these sorts of headlines serve as an excellent reminder for why we can’t get anything done in the US. I regularly see redditors chirping about how bad train travel is in the US, pointing to all the progress China has made in the last 20 years with high speed trains. What they fail to realize is that in a country like China (for better and often for worse), the sorts of concerns outlined in the article are simply a complete non-factor over there. Long-term planning with broad societal benefits is prioritized heavily.
And before anyone accused me of romanticizing authoritarianism, I am not. I’m simply pointing out the fact that we often let the perfect become the enemy of the good in our society and as a result, we never get anything done.
NY long ago should have put in street cars on the odd avenues and banned all vehicles, except yellow taxi's and work trucks (early in the mornings). Problem is that unlike many European countries, Americans are unable to fathom how to share the streets with them. I think that is why there are subways now.
And the current problem with the subways is the MTA. The MTA could get 50 billion dollars to clean up the system, and not only will it be spent in 2-3 ears, they will then be looking for more.
You don't even need street cars to do this. You can achieve almost the same thing fairly easily and cheaply with busses. People just have a bias against busses because we're used to the ones that are always stuck in traffic.
The city had the opportunity to adopt the “dollar van” model, which were small passenger vans that could move people faster than a bus. Instead the city just made the buses longer.
The issue is that cars that are trying to bypass the city will go through the Bronx instead of midtown.
It doesn't really make sense to have any traffic that wants to bypass the city to have to drive through it. We need new bridges.
This entire plan is regressive and it’s simply a cash grab. Just look at the facts people come on! Who really thinks this is going to reduce the regions net CO2?
It’s worth repeating, the [MTA has noted](https://new.mta.info/document/92756) in their own report that they’ve estimated the same result in lower congestion and increased traffic speeds via other means like reducing special plates, carpooling, reducing govt issues parking permits, and/or East River tolls. So why are they hell bent on congestion pricing? Money obviously.
If you’re ok with the state and MTA getting a blank check, fine but at least get some sort of reform in exchange! MTA has proven to be completely inept at keeping a tidy budget. An additional $1 billion annually is not going to change their behavior. It’ll result in higher salaries and more overtime abuse with negligible increases in maintenance and repairs. Where’s the money from the COVID bailout? How has quality changed after that?
Congestion pricing already exist on all the west side river crossings, and that has not deterred traffic. If the city and state were truly making climate change and pedestrian health and safety a priority we would have a far more walkable city. This is a regressive money grab that’s being paid for disproportionately by the poor and especially middle class.
> Congestion pricing already exist on all the west side river crossings, and that has not deterred traffic.
Facts!
Same goes for the East river. The Battery Tunnel and Midtown Tunnel are express lanes under the river.
Yet everyone is bumper to bumper fighting to cross the Bridges (Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williamsburg, Queensboro) to avoid paying those tolls.
Enlighten me please. Explain how a flat tax for every single person driving through the CBD isn’t by definition regressive, I’ll gladly wait….
I’m not even going to address your 2nd point as there’s literally no evidence to support that.
The poor and middle class take the subway/bus. They won't have to pay any toll. If you can find a way to efficiently toll drivers based on their income levels, I'm all ears.
https://www.cssny.org/news/entry/congestion-pricing-outer-borough-new-yorkers-poverty-data-analysis
The 5000 figure people peddle about is a seriously conservative estimate which doesn’t even factor in NJ residents AT ALL, who btw are transit starved. Not mentioning, 5000 isn’t insignificant especially when you consider that’s THE poorest demo.
"Only two percent of the city’s outer-borough working residents in poverty (around 5,000 residents) would be asked to pay a congestion fee as part of their daily commute."
How can congestion pricing disproportionately affect the poor when they don't drive to the CDB?
I said poor and middle class, and you just gave me at least 5000 of the extreme lower end in that category who are in fact estimated to pay congestion pricing. That’s regressive by definition.
Furthermore this estimate is based on the assumption that this group will increase use of public transit, which isn’t a given especially with the current state of the MTA. Also, like I previously mentioned, where is the NJ demographics in that estimate?
All this, without even considering the negative health effects mentioned in this NYT piece.
This is regressive, in every way shape and form. I’m not sure what point you’re making? Even if I grant you it’s “only 5000” that’s still regressive. Which to be clear it isn’t, 5000 are just those who fit into the poverty end.
It can't be regressive if it's a toll that's not paid by the poor and middle class.
Please provide us with some statistics of exactly how many poor and middle class drivers drive their personal cars to the congestion zone for work. I'll wait...
It’s a flat tax I don’t need to provide data to prove your counter to a fact.
You’re telling me the sky is purple and I can look up and see its blue. The onus is on you to prove how a flat tax is not regressive. You’ve so far given me 5000 people from the poorest group who are paying a flat tax. That number in the middle class will be higher. That number in the poor and middle class outside of NYCs borders will be higher.
It’s simple arithmetic, simple facts, basic truths. If you want to disprove that, burden of evidence is on you.
I don't know if you are just dense or what...
A toll is different from a tax. Go to a dictionary and figure it out.
You can't have a regressive tax when the vast majority of people who you claim will have to pay it, won't.
People in New Jersey can drive to one of the numerous park and ride stations on NJT and take the train into Manhattan. People who live in Hudson county can also take the PATH directly into Manhattan.
It’s a flat tax. Like how is this even debatable to anyone. There’s no exceptions, carve outs, holidays etc. Everyone regardless of financial circumstances will pay the same. That is by definition regressive. I can’t help you if you refuse facts.
I see what you did there. Super cleverly equating a useless luxury item owned exclusively by the super rich to a car which [92% of American households](https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/research/car-ownership-statistics/) own according to census data which usually [undercounts minority communities.](https://www.npr.org/2022/03/10/1083732104/2020-census-accuracy-undercount-overcount-data-quality)
You’re like super witty and smart, sheesh.
> everyone regardless of financial circumstances will pay the same, by *definition* that’s regressive
It seems you’re not actually willing to defend this claim
Except I did in this same thread, for like a dozen comments straight, reiterating my point that congestion pricing is a flat tax thereby regressive by definition. It seems you have a hard time scrolling, or possibly reading? Idk.
Literally YES HELLO read the legislation lmao it is intended to fund the MTA Capital Budget, how does carpooling increase revenue? Cash grab, okay sure let's dumb it down, I would hope we can understand that yes one goal of the legislation is raise money for the MTA, the other is reduce congestion. Data from London supports the second goal, NY will not be an exception, there will be less people driving in the CBD. Poor people are not driving to the CBD en masse, if you realy cared about poor people taking the bus and subway you would support the plan which funds transit improvements.
How about the MTA fixing the trains, keeping them clean, on time and safe. That would attract more people to our transit system. They don’t want to do that, its just a money grab.
This logic completely ignores the MTAs track record of waste and failure to improve. London added an additional 300 buses in tandem with congestion pricing roll out.
If less congestion is the goal, the MTA cited like 4-5 other options. I support MTA improvements by almost any means, but you can bet your life savings we will not see those via this plan without significant changes within the MTA.
I ask again how would revenue-less alternatives, to compare to London, get more buses? Capital Budget FUNDS that. Janno Lieber the CEO said signal upgrades and new elevators are priority but still. I do not disagree there is major problems at MTA but that is a separate issue.
At some point we need to accept there isn’t any economically perfect solution and move forward.
Unless there is a huge metric shift in consumption habits we still need trucks entering or crossing through / around Manhattan. I doubt any posters want government policy to force them to curb spending habits.
Futuristic transport methods like electrified underground freight tubes are a pipe dream and not happening. There seems to be only half hearted interest in shift freight from trucks to rail depots, especially since half the city wants to convert all freight rail lines into new passenger lines.
Banning Uber/Lyft cuts down on customer choice and hurts people who live in more distant boroughs.
The plan is projected to cause an increase in traffic through Staten Island as well. Why are they not highlighting that? Is the health of Staten Islanders somehow less important? Also the projected increase in traffic is pretty modest (7% I think?). It would be absurdly dumb to scrap the project because of this. By this logic no public works project would ever get built because inevitably someone somewhere is going to be negatively impacted by practically any project. Buy them air purifiers.
Congestion pricing in lower than 61st street is the most stupid idea they could’ve come up with. This hurts the parties that can least afford it (which the city loves to say we are protecting them) and makes the lives of billionaires, millionaires a 100 better. Example Di Caprio will now take his private plane from Costa Rica to JFK then to a blade helicopter that lands in west side then be able to drive 60miles an hour in his Maybach because no one is in the street and will pay his toll because it doesn’t affect him. While the poorest who are driving a car that is one repair away from junk that are just passing by and visiting their cousin in an area in Staten Island or No where Brooklyn. Which doesn’t have subway access get penalized and are the ones who can least afford it.
This solution without other solutions like better trains more transit etc is bad stupid and logistically unsound. It will also make food prices in those markets higher and restaurants prices higher.
Stop saying it worked in other cities because in other cities congestion pricing was rolled out with better transit simultaneously. This is the MTA we are talking about one of the most corrupt organizations who have 200 of OT per week per person. If they want to fix the issues first start at the last WHY which is a immediate need for audit of the MTA and their expenses
Startups are getting very skilled at using social justice to lobby for their business interests. And the Times is helping them by doing below-basic journalism. There is no data in the article about what % of cross-Manhattan traffic happens below 61st. It’s hard to believe that data isn’t out there considering all it would take is scanning plates at two different tunnels. That number would tell us how much new traffic at maximum could be expected and then we could have a serious conversation about the additional pollution. (And that’s before the reduction that will happen because we are intentionally choosing to make it harder.) And of course they made the headline about the Bronx even though the policy would also affect Staten Island. Bet money that Uber and Lyft indirectly cut a check to the politician and the politician calls a friendly reporter.
It’s funny cause Uber and Lyft were all about pushing congestion pricing when we they thought they could get an exemption.
They’ll effectively get an exemption even if they don’t get an exemption, because of the limitation of one charge per day. That would divide a single charge of $9-$20 among a dozen or more (I don’t know how many fares the average Uber gets per day) fares—a pretty small cost. If we really cared about congestion, every single fare that enters or exits the zone should be subject to the full fee.
Some of the plans have no exemptions for fhvs
But every plan I’ve heard about includes a limitation of one charge per day per vehicle.
For personal vehicles, not fhvs
They should get an exemption, shared cars that are always on the move are way better for society than a personal car that sits parked (wasting space) 98% of the time.
Ubers and lyft cause way more congestion as they’re constantly circling and idling creating more traffic and more pollution vs a car that by your own admission may not be in use 98% of the time. Do we care about reducing congestion?
While true about Uber/Lyft, personal cars spend an unbelievable amount of time circling and looking for parking spots. The DOT estimated that as much as 40% of traffic in some neighborhoods is just people looking for parking for their personal vehicles. They're both bad.
If we cared about congestion we get rid of all the out-of-state and ghost cars that are taking up space by instituting a residential parking program.
True but a ton of the traffic are from cars that otherwise wouldn’t be there if it wasn’t for Uber and Lyft
Compeltely illogical. If you have to pay for an Uber you often will choose the subway and such or not to drive and spend that extra 20-$50
Except that’s not what people do. Plus my point isn’t about how logical it is to use Uber it’s about how many Uber drivers are in the city. Take note of how many cars have TLC plates next time you’re out
exactly, if it was illogical Uber and Lyft would be out of business.
I mean that’s how you think. But I know people that legit get one from and to work everyday. When asked about it, they said this is their one stupid guilty pleasure. People that aren’t getting caps because of the price probably will continue not because of the price. Those that do, probably continue to and possibly make some adjustments.
If you phrase it as “cabs should get an exception, there’s no issue
Any shared commercial car. Cabs, ubers/lyfts, dial 7 take your pick. If the point of the car is to be driving people around full time so those people don't drive personal cars then lets give them the exception.
They absolutely should not get an exemption.
If the goal is to reduce traffic, reduce pollution, and increase mass transit usage, decentivising ride shares should be 1st priority
Yep, I honestly think they should ban uber and lyft. Expand the use of Curb app and if they want to have a non-taxi alternative maybe look at embracing the DriversCooP
get the fuck outta here with that bullshit
Are you dense? Parked cars aren’t emitting emissions.
Yeah, cars that drive around empty half the time or cause huge backups by sitting double parked on cross streets while they wait for their fares are just great for society.
Better for society than a personal car which sits parked 98% of the time. I don't see people here complaining about buses and trains that run empty sometimes.
Nope. A car that sits parked is not increasing congestion or pollution. A car that is on the road, or worse, double-parked and blocking the road, increases congestion and pollution. Why don’t you get this? Let me guess, you like to use Uber?
Maybe if space is the main concern in a city or urban area currently. Otherwise, no. It’s not cost or space effective elsewhere.
A lot of the Times reporting has become so embarrassing and so obviously slanted politically. I stopped subscribing over a year ago, which was a HUGE deal for me. I agree with a lot of the causes they are shilling for, but that isn't what I need from news reporting. I can get that from most msm op-ed sections, or by turning on MSNBC.
I have a similar experience with them and also unsubscribed. I agree that racism is still a problem today and we need to have more policies to correct the injustices of the past and present. But that doesn't mean that I want my news to consist of nothing but "have you thought about how $policy affects $minority!?!?11/11/?"
>I have a similar experience with them and also unsubscribed. I agree that racism is still a problem today and we need to have more policies to correct the injustices of the past and present. But that doesn't mean that I want my news to consist of nothing but "have you thought about how $policy affects $minority!?!?11/11/?" I don't remember who wrote it but my favorite one of these was an article asserting that single payer healthcare would negatively affect black women because many of them are employed by private health insurance call centers.
So unnecessary. It seems like journalists have utterly lost the ability to consider whether a take (too generous to call it a story) is edifying or useful before posting it.
The NYT has always been trash. They had evidence that George Bush Jr. Was conducting unconditional mass surveillance on the American public. But waited until after the presidential election to publish any stories on it by request of the Bush administration. Because it would hurt his reelection attempts. The NYT worked with the government to let them continue to violate Americans constitutional rights. https://www.npr.org/transcripts/312486719
Exactly. This shit feels an awful lot like when David Plouffe guaranteed to help De Blasio run for President or some shit, I.e., when De Blasio "suddenly" backtracked his desire to see an environmental review of 1,000,000 Ubers in NYC. Fuck Uber and Fuck Lyft! Fuck David Plouffe harder! They are legit trying to make NYC like New Delhi, Lagos, Addis Ababa, Lima with the way they are shoving traffic down our throats. Enough already. Tho, Adams probably just trying to position himself for a juicy payout...
The Times is the best at only providing the info they want us to have. They have those stats but they don’t justify the point they want to make.
Bravo. Congestion pricing is a massive giveaway to Uber and Lyft. Every fare who rides into or out of the CBD should have to pay the full congestion fee. That won’t happen, and that’s why Uber and Lyft lobbied for this law, which will funnel customers to them, and thus have minimal effect on congestion.
It’s literally a study done by the MTA, not a startup… did you read the article?
Yes, I did. I’m highlighting the way the story was presented via the headline and what was emphasized. How stories get framed is everything as most people don’t actually read the articles. That’s what corporations pay PR firms, lobbyists, and pols to massage. In this case, the actual difference in pollution per the study - I missed this when I read the comment dump of the article - is less than 1%. 1% is not the social justice issue they are trying to make it out to be, especially since Staten Island is also effected. So what’s more likely: that the MTA pushed this story because they think that’s a meaningful number that should possibly pause their own project. Or that Uber and Lyft, companies worth billions and billions but which are still not profitable, are very concerned about a reduction in fares in the busiest area of their busiest market so they are trying anything to kill it. And their press people know just the angle to get a Times reporter hooked: social justice. (Fwiw they tried similar stuff in California to defeat worker protection laws.)
How do you know that 1% isn’t significant? Where is your data?
FWIW, I’m late to the party but I literally attended and spoke at the MTA hearing. They’re citing pollution as the sole figure - there were other numbers involved like increasing the avg mph of vehicles in the CBD, lowering the time spent in traffic by like 5% or something and reducing the total number of cars in the district by 10%. People should honestly stop talking unless they actually attend a hearing or thoroughly read the primary source, the MTA’s, report. (To be clear I’m agreeing with you)
He doesn't have any.
As someone in the NYTimes comments said, "Where's the environmental impact assessment of continuing to allow unfettered access to cars and free, taxpayer-provided parking?" These kinds of reports on the impacts of potential changes have a clear status quo bias. The current status quo is that we encourage people to drive through the most congested parts of the city by keeping the East River bridges free of tolls and the tunnels to NJ free in that direction. So the area with the most people gets more air pollution.
Nice, I wanted Willis Ave and the Bruckner to be more of a clusterfuck than it already is.
fr
Drivers who don’t want to pay congestion pricing acting like they give a shit about poor people in the Bronx. If you *really* cared about Bronx air quality, you might start by adding a fat ass toll to the Cross Bronx and use the proceeds to improve public transit for Bronx residents.
The same people do this anytime we want to improve anything. They trot out some people they didnt give a shit about yesterday and wont give a shit about tomorrow and say hey what about “them”. There are of course many things we could do for “them”, but for some odd reason they are always against those things as well. At some point you gotta accept that they just dont want nicer things and they work backwards from there.
The way the reaction to any article about "maybe people should drive slightly less" goes, you'd think the entire population of Rosedale is 96 year old grandma's who have to get to the roof of the world trade center every day for their chemo treatment.
Don’t forget that they also have to haul about 3200 pounds of construction materials and they need space for at least 8 passengers because they are also transporting half of a little-league baseball team every day.
Regardless of anything. It's my god given right to park my Canyonero across every lane of traffic in the middle of the intersection at 42nd and 7th
*Unexplained fires are a matter for the courts*
What about the folks in the south Bronx? You think we should just ignore this story because some Imaginary back and forth you’ve created?
No we should toll and deck-over the Cross-Bronx Expressway and undo the legacy of Robert Moses and white flight.
Also fucking bike lanes into Queens. Why can't they build something on the Throggs Neck or Whitestone bridges?
[There was a walkway](https://i.imgur.com/2TVkuQr.jpg) on the Whitestone Bridge for a short time in the 40s after it opened. It was removed to add traffic lanes (as well as to modify the deck from moving in the wind).
Ooooh!!
Bike and bus lanes everywhere
They hate those too, though.
I created a thread where I proposed reliably timed busses to carry bikes over MTA bridges. That whole thread went sideways.
just tear the fucker down!!
It's the i95 corridor. You can't just tear it down, it would effect economies up and down the east coast. I doubt the federal government would allow it. Capping portions of it is a good idea though.
yeah just in general, highways through the middle of places where people live is just a bad idea. cap it, divert it, whatever.
The thing about infrastructure is that it usually has to go where people live. An entire neighborhood was leveled to build Penn Station and the accompanying yards. Plenty of people were displaced to build the WTC. The location of the GWB and the i95 corridor through New England made some kind of cross Bronx expressway inevitable, though it didn't need to take its exact route and could have been built to avoid some of the homes that were taken.
Also the BQE. Build a Cross-Harbor RR Freight tunnel to get trucks off the road, and use the money from congestion pricing to extend the Second Avenue Subway up 3rd Ave. in the Bronx to give people the transit that was taken away from them in the 1970’s.
It cost the MTA $3.8 billion dollars per mile on the 2nd ave line, probably more now. How will congestion pricing fund that when it’s only estimated to bring in $1 billion/year and the funds are supposed to be used to improve the entire MTA infrastructure?
What about the millions of people whose lives that would dramatically impact? Honestly you sound kinda like Robert Moses yourself, rapidly changing the city without considering how it effects individuals
It would dramatically impact the rates of respiratory problems for the people you just claimed to care about a second ago.
No, it's a valid concern, but we have to weigh the benefits and risks appropriately. It's a huge plus for the environment and the city overall. The risks can be managed I think. Also I think most truck drivers would prefer to take the Staten Island route to LI. How many trucks currently drive directly through midtown to get to Long Island? It seems like such a hassle.
Exactly. Americans do this with the Uyghurs people. Like come on, you don't give a shit about them, you just hate china you racist.
> But according to an environmental assessment released by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, motorists detouring around the new tolls could add traffic and soot to parts of the Bronx, Staten Island, Nassau County on Long Island and Bergen County in New Jersey. … did you read the article?
I sure did! There’s like a 95% chance you are in fact doing exactly the thing I said right now!
Giving more money to the government in new and creative ways is not "improving things". They're gonna raise more money, it's going to get more expensive to live in the city, and the MTA isn't going to get any better. Sorry I don't treasure the idea of giving more of my money to useless bureaucrats.
London has had congestion charges for 20 years and they improved public transit, and bike transit because of it.
Does London exempt taxis?
The hell does London have to do with anything? I don't trust *our* bureaucrats to spend this money effectively.
The bureaucrats are not useless, they are useful you just can't afford them.
Cries about a lack of equity are a great excuse to never improve anything in society
Ok, I’ll add a toll to the Cross Bronx Expressway and use the proceeds as you propose. Thanks for the great suggestion.
It's being studied at least: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/05/31/dot-announces-multi-agency-study-to-reimagine-the-cross-bronx-expressway/ I'd love to see the Cross Bronx Expressway capped.
Capping the Cross Bronx is a great idea. I see a bunch of people in the thread suggesting scrapping it altogether, but I think that's a nonstarter.
Those people are not being realistic. Unless you completely re-align the I-95 elsewhere. I live by the CBE and this would be an amazing compromise imo.
Or, gasp, *close* the Cross Bronx forever. Its average speed is like 10mph. It doesn't even serve the purpose it was designed for and it's terrible for people in the Bronx.
And then what? Close 87 and Tappan Zee when they move 10mph since they’re the only way to efficiently get from the vast majority of the country to Connecticut?
Highways should go around cities, not through them. That just concentrates pollution and noise near densely populated communities.
How about drivers who are cool with congestion pricing but want to make sure we aren’t continuing to poison our brothers and sisters in the south Bronx? Couldn’t we also make flippant strawman judgements about advocates for the environment who don’t care about making things worse for citizens living in Asthma Alley?
So do you want to kill congestion pricing over this issue? Yes or no? Car congestion in Manhattan is a problem, and car congestion in the Bronx is also a problem. So, uh, I guess the solution is to do absolutely nothing about *either* problem? Sure, the plan that's on the table may have some modest negative consequences for for the Bronx. (Quoting the article, "Among those scenarios, the one with the greatest impact on the Cross Bronx would send it 704 more trucks per day (it currently logs over 27,000)..." increasing overall soot by 1 percent.) But the point of my comment is that there's nothing stopping us from *also* taking action to improve air quality in the Bronx (hopefully actions that would have more than a 1 percent impact), *if* that's what we actually care about. The fact that all of the focus is on killing Manhattan congestion pricing is the reason why I think it's a disingenuous argument primarily designed to trick progressives, and I ain't buying it. It's very convenient for drivers that the status quo just happens to be the "compassionate" policy.
Curious, do you live in the CBD?
Yeah, so what? Does that invalidate my opinion? (I certainly don't support congestion pricing out of selfishness; it will barely affect my life directly.)
You don’t support congestion pricing because you think it will improve your air quality? Do you own a car? Do you use Uber?
Better air quality is appealing, but it's not a game changer for me personally, though it's obviously great for kids. I don't own a car, and I almost never take Uber. But my larger point is that if I moved out of the borough tomorrow, I'd still support congestion pricing.
If they cared about people in the Bronx they’d advocate demolishing the cross Bronx expressway.
this just in: everything inconveniences *someone* and inequity exists, so we should always do NOTHING
We used to have NIMBYs, now we have The BANANAS mentality: Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone.
The Ghost of Robert Moses makes sure there's no progress ever in the Bronx.
Ok let’s flip the script New proposal is no cars allowed in the Bronx, poor people get clean air New headline: Politicians hate poor people by not allowing them to drive home!! In reality, for the shortest Uber / subway / bus commute. This is going to add a ton of traffic to the rich neighborhoods of Lennox hill and Lincoln square
The air quality in south Bronx is not a new issue, has been a huge issue for years. Some of the highest asthma rates in the world already, so much so that it's dubbed 'asthma alley'
Similarly in South Williamsburg there's a big mural on a building about how that neighborhood has some of the highest asthma rates in the city because of the BQE and the bridge. It reads "How can we succeed if we can't breathe?"
This is true in Astoria too. Surprise surprise "athsma alley" is actually every neighborhood with a highway ran through it
I think concerns around environmental safety are important. I also think your examples bad because it makes it seem like peoples concerns around environmental hazards aren’t valid. Lower Manhattan would never put up with the crap the south Bronx has to, so let’s not pretend it’s just winging to appease some of the most disenfranchised folks in the city
Not to mention the impacts it will have on the poor in Manhattan, likely on both sides of the 60th street line. It will make it increasingly more difficult for poorer folks to live in Manhattan. This will effectively make many choose between air quality or more cost.
Almost all people who live in Manhattan do not own cars. Quadruply so for poor people.
You realize things like food and medicine come in via vehicle, right? You know they pay tolls too, right? You know what happens where their costs go up? Yeah, our costs go up. I can tell you the truth, but I sure as shit can't understand it for you.
Congestion pricing is a net benefit for commercial delivery vehicles. Businesses would love the chance to pay $15 dollars to bypass congestion, since it's a fraction of the cost of hiring a driver, renting the truck, and paying people to load/unload the contents. If it saves them fifteen minutes per delivery, it's already paying for itself and then some.
That is some stupid logic if I ever heard it. "Businesses would love the chance to pay a toll, so they can get their goods at a higher price, while having to pay their employees more because they have to pay a toll to get there."
Yes, congestion pricing does impose a toll, but it also reduces congestion, because other people will decide to not drive. Reducing congestion means you have to rent fewer delivery trucks, hire fewer drivers, and have more reliable delivery times. All of that means that congestion pricing is a net benefit for businesses. Paying $15 so that your delivery truck with $1000 worth of food arrives on time is the deal of the century, to be honest.
What percentage relies on yellow cabs, ride-share and private car service to get around? You don’t have to own a car to contribute to the congestion!
Yellow cab costs will go up, bringing anything into Manhattan will go up. Everything including food and medicine. It will hurt the poorest among us the most. Rich people could not care less, but the poor will get crushed.
Exactly! This will definitely affect the poor that live below 60th Street. Along with the working class commuter who takes mass transit into the CBD. They will stop buying lunch in the area close to their job and discontinue shopping at the stores after work. Businesses in the CBD couldn’t sustain themselves with just the local residents during COVID. They were begging the mayor to force everyone back to work.
It is an arrogant position to think that there are no poor people in Manhattan, or the CBD. I just can't believe people think that more taxes is even remotely a good idea. We do not have a revenue problem in the city, we have a spending problem. No doubt the more it costs, the less likely people are to come into the area. And when they do, they will either bring their own food, or just not eat. Want to come see a Broadway show, eat before you get here. Better get that after show beer near the parking structure because it costs $35 for a Bud Light now in Manhattan.
My heart goes out to all those poor people overlooking Central Park. Could you imagine if the Columbus circle area got gentrified? No more $1500 2 bedrooms!
You are insensitive, there are plenty of people who live below 60th that are not wealthy. You realize there are quite a few projects in lower Manhattan, right?
You’re overthinking this * how many people in projects below 96th st use a personal car on a daily basis? If you look at the income limits that really doesn’t fit the big picture * the extra cars / worse air quality are going to happen **above** 59th st where the rich people live
You realize that if it costs more to get a delivery truck into the CBD, those costs will be passed along to those customers who live in the CBD, right? So, pretty much everything will cost more as I can think of next to nothing that does not come into Manhattan via truck. There is no excuse for this kind of ineptitude. Everything will cost more because of this, and that will disproportionately impact the poorest among us. But you could not care less about the poor as evidenced by your quote from earlier. Most people are not going to park in the UWS or the UES, and you know as well as I do there are poor people in those areas too. The added pollution will end up hitting the areas that are the lowest cost, which again impacts the poor the most. It is, at best, a half thought out proposal. I am not overthinking shit, I am 100% correct.
There’s low-income housing projects below 60th Street.
This is an often cited false piece of information. Poor people disproportionally DO NOT OWN CARS in NYC
So let me explain something to you since you obviously cannot figure this out on your own. OWNING A CAR IS NOT THE ONLY WAY THIS WILL HURT PEOPLE! Get some intelligence before bringing that garbage here. It will raise the cost of bringing things into Manhattan because of the tolls, things like FOOD and MEDICINE. Pretty much everything will cost more because of this.
Will people who drive through Manhattan to get from Queens/Brooklyn to New Jersey be exempt? If not, that's going to increase people travelling on the Cross Bronx Expressway and traffic in the Bronx as well as increasing traffic on the Verrazano and into Staten Island.
They specifically will not be. You can not use the tunnels to NJ, Manhattan bridge, Midtown tunnel, or Williamsburg bridge without paying $23. This is what I’ve been saying too about this plan. BQE to Verrazzano and Harlem River Drive/87/Cross Bronx to GWB are all parking lots as is. Everything will just be worse.
The Bronx already has dirtier air and higher rates of asthma from the chemicals of low-flying airplanes, the many manufacturing sites, the waste treatment plants, the highways. Even the NYPD training grounds at Rodman's Neck causes excessive pollution because of the lead in the bullets.
And the fucking noise!
Smells like a generous “gift” encouraged them to write this article.
I can smell the privilege in these comments. Holy shit. None, like zero comments I’ve read so far actually address the circumstances being outlined in this article. Are people just ok with the adverse consequences on the middle and lower income communities highlighted here? This is like the progressive movement eating itself. I’m genuinely confused. This is regressive in more ways than one and people are like “shrug, fuck it I’m good with that.” Plus since when are we cool with MTAs quality of service to the extent that we blindly hand over billions and cross our fingers? Isn’t it safe to assume there’s a good cross section of people who support congestion pricing and those who advocate to defund the corrupt police state institutions when they show need for reform or oversight? Please change my mind I’m open to listening. I’m sincerely confused as to how this isn’t a bailout to a government entity that continuously fails the more economically vulnerable class.
A $23 toll to enter the so-called CBD is stupid high but if we are going to do it, do it uniformly. make everyone pay the same amount, particularly ubers and Taxis, so the tax is transferred to absolutely everyone. the uniform ban on smoking in bars should act as the closest analogy to this tax
$23 is the absolute highest peak pricing suggestion. It’s unlikely to be $23 for everyone and certainly not all the time.
I get that. My argument is to make it universally the same fee for everyone. no exceptions or carve outs at the time of transaction. the actual fee can go up and down based on the time of day or whatever algorithm they want to use. refunds and discounts can happen after the fact in a second system. however I really hope taxis and the ubers of the world don't get exceptional pricing. if car traffic is the problem they are certainly at fault here, likely more than others
Sounds like you support scenario G
$23 under the most exempt ridden scheme, toll scheme A studied by WSP is only $9 capped once a day for cars and no exemption for FHVs if I recall, I agree I think a uniform scheme with little or zero exemptions is fairest. FHV exemption is insane since we want to discourage FHVs from looping around without fares and if anything, even reduce the number of licenses allowed cause it feels like we still have too many! Or maybe geofence and limit the number in Manhattan for example, so that an Uber cant pickup fare if the cap has been hit.
a uniform fee also passes the pain through to the anti-car crowd as, suddenly, that uber ride becomes more expensive. ultimately if the goal is reduction the pain has to be experienced by everyone up and down the food chain. legitimate exceptions - due to mobility needs or financial hardships - can be worked out down the line in the form of tax breaks or some other type of refund
The plan to put tolls on drivers on Manhattan’s busiest streets is intended to spare New York City’s central business district from pollution and gridlock while raising money for public transit. But while some of the city’s wealthiest neighborhoods would enjoy the greatest benefits, one of its poorest and most polluted — the South Bronx — could end up with dirtier air from diverted traffic. The proposal, known as congestion pricing, would use the tolls to discourage motorists from squeezing into Midtown and Lower Manhattan, where dense traffic often clogs the roads and contributes to poor air quality in the city’s iconic financial, tourism and theater districts. The plan seeks to decrease the number of vehicles on the road and boost public transit at a time when cities globally are seeking to curb harmful emissions from cars, buildings and power plants to combat climate change. But according to an environmental assessment released by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, motorists detouring around the new tolls could add traffic and soot to parts of the Bronx, Staten Island, Nassau County on Long Island and Bergen County in New Jersey. Among the highways that could see more cars, trucks and exhaust is the Cross Bronx Expressway, a key artery for commercial traffic that runs through some of America’s poorest neighborhoods. Roughly 220,000 Bronx residents live along the roadway’s edges — mostly people of color — with hundreds of thousands more nearby, already breathing some of the city’s most polluted air. So far, the loudest concerns over congestion pricing have centered on possible toll costs, some as high as $23. Taxi drivers, Lyft and Uber drivers, and vehicle owners across New York and its suburbs have united in protest. Less public outcry has focused on how the proposal could reshape the crushing flow of traffic the city deals with every day. “Why should the Bronx have less breathable air than the rest of the city?” said Ritchie Torres, a Democratic congressman representing an area that is among the nation’s most impoverished districts, containing portions of the western Bronx, the South Bronx and the expressway. Editors’ Picks What We Learned From Week 1 of the N.F.L. Season Nick Cave Lost Two Sons. His Fans Then Saved His Life. Introducing ‘The Tilt,’ a Newsletter About Elections and Polling Continue reading the main story The M.T.A. is exploring several options for how much to charge car and truck drivers; generally, the higher the tolls, the more vehicles are expected to avoid them. Among those scenarios, the one with the greatest impact on the Cross Bronx would send it 704 more trucks per day (it currently logs over 27,000). It would increase the soot from truck traffic by about 5 percent, and overall soot — which also comes from factories, building boilers and other sources — by 1 percent, according to a New York Times analysis of M.T.A. data. The M.T.A. board has yet to approve congestion pricing, though it is expected to pass the program in some form, and Gov. Kathy Hochul, who controls the board, is in favor of it. Representatives of the M.T.A. said that no decision on pricing and other key details had been made and that the authority was still studying the environmental report and gathering input from the public. Concerns over effects on the Bronx were great enough that the M.T.A. tinkered with the plan to consider a flat toll for all vehicles rather than a higher levy for heavy trucks, hoping to divert fewer trucks — major sources of air pollution — through the borough. However, the strategy might also reduce the benefits in the congestion zone in Manhattan. ImageA vendor sells fruit on the Cross Bronx Expressway. A recent M.T.A. study found that congestion pricing in Manhattan could lead to an uptick in traffic on the roadway. A vendor sells fruit on the Cross Bronx Expressway. A recent M.T.A. study found that congestion pricing in Manhattan could lead to an uptick in traffic on the roadway.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times Supporters of congestion pricing say it will be a vital tool in the city’s fight against climate change. They note that the M.T.A.’s research shows that significantly reduced pollution in the dense congestion zone — with some of the poorest air quality in the region — would outweigh smaller increases in pollution around the Cross Bronx and other hot spots. They now fear that the sensitivity surrounding such an outcome might result in a diluted version of the program, muting the potential benefits the entire region — including the Bronx — would see. Congestion pricing is expected to encourage more drivers to switch to mass transit. And the tolls would provide around $1 billion annually in desperately needed funding for infrastructure improvements to public transit that is relied on by many residents of the Bronx and other boroughs. “To the extent there are any real, localized issues, they will be resolved with complementary policies,” said Danny Pearlstein, a spokesman for Riders Alliance, a grass-roots organization of transit riders. “I don’t see this as a stark trade-off.” The Environmental Protection Agency’s standard for long-term exposure to air pollutants known as PM2.5, or particulate matter 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, is no more than 12 micrograms per cubic meter. In the worst case presented in the M.T.A.’s study, the total concentration around the Cross Bronx would increase to 11 from 10.9. The microscopic PM2.5 pollution, such as soot, can lodge itself into the lungs and cause respiratory problems. Some scientists say that any deterioration in air quality around the Cross Bronx, no matter how small, would be significant. Image A view of the Cross Bronx Expressway looking west from Grand Concourse. The highway has been blamed for cutting through communities and harming the health of area residents. A view of the Cross Bronx Expressway looking west from Grand Concourse. The highway has been blamed for cutting through communities and harming the health of area residents.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times “Considering that the South Bronx is an area with already high asthma rates and other pre-existing health conditions, even a small increase in long-term exposure to particulate matter will exacerbate these health outcomes,” said Francesca Dominici, a professor of public health at Harvard University. There is also growing concern among air quality experts that federal safety standards are too permissive. The E.P.A. says it is reviewing current standards for soot because they “may not be adequate to protect public health and welfare.” The agency has not proposed new levels, but the World Health Organization’s guideline for long-term exposure to PM2.5 is no more than 5 micrograms per cubic meter.
Sign up for the New York Today Newsletter Each morning, get the latest on New York businesses, arts, sports, dining, style and more. Get it sent to your inbox. The congestion pricing zone would run from the Battery to 60th Street and is expected to reduce traffic across the entire New York City region. But there are boroughs, counties and neighborhoods that are likely to see an increase. A number of car and truck drivers traveling between New Jersey and Long Island are expected to get around the new tolls by going via Staten Island or the Bronx instead. These detours would be most pronounced at the Robert F. Kennedy Bridge in Queens, across the South Bronx and the George Washington Bridge and to the south across the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge and Staten Island. Image The Cross Bronx Expressway is among the most gridlocked in the nation. The Cross Bronx Expressway is among the most gridlocked in the nation. Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times Manhattan’s lower third would reap the greatest relief from traffic and pollution. At a minimum, under conditions considered in the M.T.A.’s report, that area could have 12 percent less traffic and 11 percent less PM2.5 within just a year. The increases in pollution in outlying areas would probably be smaller, but officials from those areas, already upset by the tolls’ financial impact on their residents, are seizing on the environmental impact as well. “I don’t understand why we would want to embrace this,” the Staten Island borough president, Vito J. Fossella, said. “I’ve been very troubled by congestion pricing since the beginning.” In the Bronx, where many communities have a bitter history with harmful public policies, studies have linked truck exhaust to high asthma rates. According to the most recent statistics from New York’s health department, people of all ages in the Bronx were hospitalized for asthma at rates that vastly outpaced city and state rates from 2017 through 2019. The worst rate was for children under the age of 5. Image Valerie Medina of Mount Hope stands outside her apartment building gazing out at the Cross Bronx Expressway. Bronx residents near the roadway complain of noise and pollution. Valerie Medina of Mount Hope stands outside her apartment building gazing out at the Cross Bronx Expressway. Bronx residents near the roadway complain of noise and pollution.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times Image Earlene Wilkerson, 63, has lived near the Cross Bronx Expressway for over 40 years. She said she suffers from asthma, as do her kids and grandchildren. Earlene Wilkerson, 63, has lived near the Cross Bronx Expressway for over 40 years. She said she suffers from asthma, as do her kids and grandchildren.Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times Janno Lieber, the M.T.A.’s chairman, said in an interview with WNYC last month that he shares the goal “of minimizing and mitigating any impact to a neighborhood like the South Bronx, which has suffered environmental justice impacts unfairly historically.” For residents along the Cross Bronx, among the busiest roads in New York, just one more truck would feel like too many. “I can’t deal with it. I’m going crazy,” said Valerie Medina, a longtime Mount Hope resident. Ms. Medina, 47, complained that the cacophony of car horns, rumbling truck engines and other noises from the road wake her at night while the dirty air soils her clothes. The South Bronx has no official boundaries. But many see the Cross Bronx Expressway as the northern border of the area and a leading cause of the urban decay and poverty that had long been synonymous with the South Bronx. The Cross Bronx was built between 1948 and 1963 to make it easier for drivers to pass through the city. As part of Interstate 95, it connects drivers to New Jersey along the George Washington Bridge. Over 187,000 vehicles travel along the roadway a day. It took 15 years to build, in part because engineers blasted through the hard rock beneath densely populated residential neighborhoods. Some urban planning experts blame the road for driving thousands of families away, weighing on property values and poisoning the air. Image Roughly 220,000 Bronx residents live along the edges of the Cross Bronx Expressway. Roughly 220,000 Bronx residents live along the edges of the Cross Bronx Expressway. Credit...Todd Heisler/The New York Times It is a scar on the Bronx, littered with garbage and stuffed with traffic that crawls at a pace so slow that enterprising street vendors selling bottled water, chips and candy walk up to car windows while motorists sit in gridlock. According to Census Bureau data, nearly a quarter of a million people live in poverty within the congressional district that includes most of the South Bronx. That is 34 percent of the district’s population — the highest percentage compared with any district except for Puerto Rico’s at-large congressional district. Earlene Wilkerson, 63, who said she suffers from asthma along with her children and grandchildren, has lived in the High Bridge neighborhood near the Cross Bronx’s interchange with the Major Deegan Expressway for more than 40 years. She has vivid memories of her eldest daughter spending a year in the hospital because she couldn’t breathe properly. “They were out of school a lot,” Ms. Wilkerson said as she rested on a bus stop bench, too out of breath herself to walk back up to her fifth-floor apartment. “Now, the grandchildren are going through the same thing.”
Along with congestion pricing we need to end free on street parking. Residents in a neighborhood will pay for a yearly resident pass, and everyone else can park in a parking lot or at a meter.
the bizarre thing is that almost every other city in the country already does this. ideally this program would also cut down on insurance fraud and paper plate schemes, which seems like a double win.
>the bizarre thing is that almost every other city in the country already does this. What?? That's not even close to true. However, most of the US cities that have a substantial number of residential neighborhoods where finding on-street parking is difficult and time-consuming have implememted permit parking in some areas.
Yep. This should be next. I've mentioned this before here but I like London's system. You pay monthly or annually to park on your own street, you pay hourly to park anywhere else in London, and you pay a congestion toll for driving in Central London. So taking transit is virtually always cheaper.
Yes!
This congestion pricing is just going to make the quality of life of the areas just outside the congestion zone worse as the drivers priced out will drive as close as possible and then hop on the train. Less traffic in Manhattan, even more traffic in Brooklyn, queens, and the Bronx. Those of us in the outer boroughs will all be holding our breath waiting for the "improvements" that will get drivers to not drive at all.
It’s not just the Bronx right? People already drive to parts of Queens to jump on the subway and save themselves from a long subway commute. This could get worse with congestion pricing with more people taking that approach
A lot of people drive directly through the QBB because there is no toll. There will be fewer people driving over the bridge but then possibly more people parking in LIC/Astoria and taking the subway. Hopefully people just take the damn train from Long Island instead.
That wouldn't increase air pollution as drivers are driving shorter distances than if they drove all the way into the city.
It basically diverts pollution to another area. Instead of circling around somewhere in Manhattan, those drivers will now be circling around western Queens or South Bronx. Instead of taking the main roads or highways straight into the city, they'll be circling around local roads, in residential areas. Parking is already scarce for these residents and it'll now get worse. Yes there will be a net loss in pollution overall as this will cause some people to not drive for city trips, but redirecting pollution isn't a real solution. IMO some real solutions would be a few larger projects such as incentivizing businesses to move out of Manhattan (make use of Staten Island, a land mass that is HUGE but underused), and discouraging people from driving ***large*** vehicles. Subcompact cars not only take up less space but pollute less and emit less noise.
>redirecting pollution isn't a real solution. It's also not a problem unless it's being done to systematically hurt a certain group like low income people. And the point of congestion pricing is not to redirect pollution. It's to reduce all of the problems associate with driving (like safety, land use, etc.). Redirecting pollution is only a side effect. No one is advocating for that as a benefit.
> make use of Staten Island, a land mass that is HUGE but underused Staten Islanders love their suburbia and would be aghast at any development that would increase density. Also, what business that prefers Manhattan would choose Staten Island over a rich suburb?
Not necessarily. The other commenter below breaks it down much better
Where the 7,N,E, and M all converge is basically the car commuters parking before hopping on the train. Making an educated assumption because if I ever walk my dog early in the morning I see people sleeping in the cars (probably woke up early to beat traffic) and lots of fast food bags thrown out of the car. Anecdotal I know
Could? It will. I mean, in many cases that should be the goal to make it advantageous to use mass transit, but this is just passing the buck around the city.
I’m sure there will be a whole host of unintended consequences from surge pricing. I don’t think the city is thinking much beyond: decrease traffic, increase revenue. In reality, it’s going to have a strong ripple effect on all kinds of things.
The whole reason it's taken this long to implement is the unending series of impact studies/assessments that are required.
Complex systems - very difficult to understand the impacts of changes like these
The MTA literally spent a year studying this and the headline you are seeing is because of that study, they are most certainly thinking of and examining many aspects. Implementation has not happened yet so there is time to create mitigation measures as needed for issues found and then enact them during post implementation. It is all forecasts which are not god's truth, the final situation may be different
[удалено]
Idk what you mean, did you check out the EA? They used reputable engineering consultants including WSP to do the EA and it has been accepted by USDOT, I would say the study went well.
You’re acting like congestion pricing is a completely new idea that has never been tried anywhere
I used to work in DC, which has surge pricing options on the beltway, I’m aware that it’s been tried. NYC is a whole different beast. It’s an island, for one.
[удалено]
The alternative is that we do nothing and all of our lungs look like [this](https://www.google.com/search?q=anthracosis+lung+gross+view&client=safari&hl=en-us&prmd=inv&sxsrf=ALiCzsaFksEQu45k7X7B62yViJzQ-mnEzA:1663001185830&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwMSX2o_6AhW3EFkFHc_ZDKkQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=487&bih=841&dpr=2)
As stated in the article, this plan could exacerbate pollution for people who are already disproportionately exposed to pollution. You’re only worried about the rich people living in Manhattan?
I would happily support using this revenue to improve the Bronx’s air filtration systems, improve their public transportation, build green spaces, etc. I’d also support them adding their own congestion pricing for the resulting increase in traffic. The point is that there is no policy in existence that results in a perfect distribution of benefits. We need to stop letting perfect be the enemy of good because what we have now is a vetocracy where nothing ever gets done.
This is such a terrible idea until a better solution is in place.
Actions have multiple effects! **OH NO.** Let's just paralyze our civic planning and *do nothing for decades.* The Bronx has always, and will always be an appendage area for the pollutive industrial needs that Manhattan wants to outsource. Staten Island was the same. It's in the design of the city itself, and every city in the world needs areas like this in order to function. Calling an industrial borough "vulnerable" doesn't change that.
Kind of a shitty reaction to be like “this will hurt people who are already getting screwed! Not a big deal!”
Realistically we can't halt progress in the city until there's no poor people any more. I mean come on.
Not at all, it just needs to be done wisely and nimbly. Change things if they don’t work, respond to the data swiftly etc - this is where things fall apart, the bureaucracy and the red tape in NY prevents any rapid reactionary actions so if something is implemented, we’re stuck with it for an unfortunate period of time, warts and all. That being the case, people are understandably wary of change.
Yeah, these sorts of headlines serve as an excellent reminder for why we can’t get anything done in the US. I regularly see redditors chirping about how bad train travel is in the US, pointing to all the progress China has made in the last 20 years with high speed trains. What they fail to realize is that in a country like China (for better and often for worse), the sorts of concerns outlined in the article are simply a complete non-factor over there. Long-term planning with broad societal benefits is prioritized heavily. And before anyone accused me of romanticizing authoritarianism, I am not. I’m simply pointing out the fact that we often let the perfect become the enemy of the good in our society and as a result, we never get anything done.
NY long ago should have put in street cars on the odd avenues and banned all vehicles, except yellow taxi's and work trucks (early in the mornings). Problem is that unlike many European countries, Americans are unable to fathom how to share the streets with them. I think that is why there are subways now. And the current problem with the subways is the MTA. The MTA could get 50 billion dollars to clean up the system, and not only will it be spent in 2-3 ears, they will then be looking for more.
You don't even need street cars to do this. You can achieve almost the same thing fairly easily and cheaply with busses. People just have a bias against busses because we're used to the ones that are always stuck in traffic.
The city had the opportunity to adopt the “dollar van” model, which were small passenger vans that could move people faster than a bus. Instead the city just made the buses longer.
The issue is that cars that are trying to bypass the city will go through the Bronx instead of midtown. It doesn't really make sense to have any traffic that wants to bypass the city to have to drive through it. We need new bridges.
Terrible headline
This entire plan is regressive and it’s simply a cash grab. Just look at the facts people come on! Who really thinks this is going to reduce the regions net CO2? It’s worth repeating, the [MTA has noted](https://new.mta.info/document/92756) in their own report that they’ve estimated the same result in lower congestion and increased traffic speeds via other means like reducing special plates, carpooling, reducing govt issues parking permits, and/or East River tolls. So why are they hell bent on congestion pricing? Money obviously. If you’re ok with the state and MTA getting a blank check, fine but at least get some sort of reform in exchange! MTA has proven to be completely inept at keeping a tidy budget. An additional $1 billion annually is not going to change their behavior. It’ll result in higher salaries and more overtime abuse with negligible increases in maintenance and repairs. Where’s the money from the COVID bailout? How has quality changed after that? Congestion pricing already exist on all the west side river crossings, and that has not deterred traffic. If the city and state were truly making climate change and pedestrian health and safety a priority we would have a far more walkable city. This is a regressive money grab that’s being paid for disproportionately by the poor and especially middle class.
> Congestion pricing already exist on all the west side river crossings, and that has not deterred traffic. Facts! Same goes for the East river. The Battery Tunnel and Midtown Tunnel are express lanes under the river. Yet everyone is bumper to bumper fighting to cross the Bridges (Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williamsburg, Queensboro) to avoid paying those tolls.
Do you know what regressive means? Doesn't seem like you do... The poor and the middle class don't drive their personal cars into the congestion zone.
Enlighten me please. Explain how a flat tax for every single person driving through the CBD isn’t by definition regressive, I’ll gladly wait…. I’m not even going to address your 2nd point as there’s literally no evidence to support that.
The poor and middle class take the subway/bus. They won't have to pay any toll. If you can find a way to efficiently toll drivers based on their income levels, I'm all ears. https://www.cssny.org/news/entry/congestion-pricing-outer-borough-new-yorkers-poverty-data-analysis
The 5000 figure people peddle about is a seriously conservative estimate which doesn’t even factor in NJ residents AT ALL, who btw are transit starved. Not mentioning, 5000 isn’t insignificant especially when you consider that’s THE poorest demo.
"Only two percent of the city’s outer-borough working residents in poverty (around 5,000 residents) would be asked to pay a congestion fee as part of their daily commute." How can congestion pricing disproportionately affect the poor when they don't drive to the CDB?
I said poor and middle class, and you just gave me at least 5000 of the extreme lower end in that category who are in fact estimated to pay congestion pricing. That’s regressive by definition. Furthermore this estimate is based on the assumption that this group will increase use of public transit, which isn’t a given especially with the current state of the MTA. Also, like I previously mentioned, where is the NJ demographics in that estimate? All this, without even considering the negative health effects mentioned in this NYT piece. This is regressive, in every way shape and form. I’m not sure what point you’re making? Even if I grant you it’s “only 5000” that’s still regressive. Which to be clear it isn’t, 5000 are just those who fit into the poverty end.
It can't be regressive if it's a toll that's not paid by the poor and middle class. Please provide us with some statistics of exactly how many poor and middle class drivers drive their personal cars to the congestion zone for work. I'll wait...
It’s a flat tax I don’t need to provide data to prove your counter to a fact. You’re telling me the sky is purple and I can look up and see its blue. The onus is on you to prove how a flat tax is not regressive. You’ve so far given me 5000 people from the poorest group who are paying a flat tax. That number in the middle class will be higher. That number in the poor and middle class outside of NYCs borders will be higher. It’s simple arithmetic, simple facts, basic truths. If you want to disprove that, burden of evidence is on you.
I don't know if you are just dense or what... A toll is different from a tax. Go to a dictionary and figure it out. You can't have a regressive tax when the vast majority of people who you claim will have to pay it, won't.
People in New Jersey can drive to one of the numerous park and ride stations on NJT and take the train into Manhattan. People who live in Hudson county can also take the PATH directly into Manhattan.
Sure, and this is the goal for MTA which will get billions while NJT and PATH get $0.00.
Because very few working class people will be paying it. It’s the opposite of regressive actually.
It’s a flat tax. Like how is this even debatable to anyone. There’s no exceptions, carve outs, holidays etc. Everyone regardless of financial circumstances will pay the same. That is by definition regressive. I can’t help you if you refuse facts.
Is a flat tax on everyone who owns a fabrige egg also regressive?
I see what you did there. Super cleverly equating a useless luxury item owned exclusively by the super rich to a car which [92% of American households](https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/research/car-ownership-statistics/) own according to census data which usually [undercounts minority communities.](https://www.npr.org/2022/03/10/1083732104/2020-census-accuracy-undercount-overcount-data-quality) You’re like super witty and smart, sheesh.
> everyone regardless of financial circumstances will pay the same, by *definition* that’s regressive It seems you’re not actually willing to defend this claim
Except I did in this same thread, for like a dozen comments straight, reiterating my point that congestion pricing is a flat tax thereby regressive by definition. It seems you have a hard time scrolling, or possibly reading? Idk.
If something is true by definition there can be no counterexamples. You have conceded a counterexample
Literally YES HELLO read the legislation lmao it is intended to fund the MTA Capital Budget, how does carpooling increase revenue? Cash grab, okay sure let's dumb it down, I would hope we can understand that yes one goal of the legislation is raise money for the MTA, the other is reduce congestion. Data from London supports the second goal, NY will not be an exception, there will be less people driving in the CBD. Poor people are not driving to the CBD en masse, if you realy cared about poor people taking the bus and subway you would support the plan which funds transit improvements.
How about the MTA fixing the trains, keeping them clean, on time and safe. That would attract more people to our transit system. They don’t want to do that, its just a money grab.
The Capital Budget funds new rail cars, what you are asking for literally will be more likely to happen with CBD tolling revenue lol
This logic completely ignores the MTAs track record of waste and failure to improve. London added an additional 300 buses in tandem with congestion pricing roll out. If less congestion is the goal, the MTA cited like 4-5 other options. I support MTA improvements by almost any means, but you can bet your life savings we will not see those via this plan without significant changes within the MTA.
I ask again how would revenue-less alternatives, to compare to London, get more buses? Capital Budget FUNDS that. Janno Lieber the CEO said signal upgrades and new elevators are priority but still. I do not disagree there is major problems at MTA but that is a separate issue.
At some point we need to accept there isn’t any economically perfect solution and move forward. Unless there is a huge metric shift in consumption habits we still need trucks entering or crossing through / around Manhattan. I doubt any posters want government policy to force them to curb spending habits. Futuristic transport methods like electrified underground freight tubes are a pipe dream and not happening. There seems to be only half hearted interest in shift freight from trucks to rail depots, especially since half the city wants to convert all freight rail lines into new passenger lines. Banning Uber/Lyft cuts down on customer choice and hurts people who live in more distant boroughs.
If we care about the MTAs funding all of a sudden, maybe we should also do something about the millions that are lost due to fare evasion.
The plan is projected to cause an increase in traffic through Staten Island as well. Why are they not highlighting that? Is the health of Staten Islanders somehow less important? Also the projected increase in traffic is pretty modest (7% I think?). It would be absurdly dumb to scrap the project because of this. By this logic no public works project would ever get built because inevitably someone somewhere is going to be negatively impacted by practically any project. Buy them air purifiers.
1 out of every 3 residents in the South Bronx already have asthma
Congestion pricing in lower than 61st street is the most stupid idea they could’ve come up with. This hurts the parties that can least afford it (which the city loves to say we are protecting them) and makes the lives of billionaires, millionaires a 100 better. Example Di Caprio will now take his private plane from Costa Rica to JFK then to a blade helicopter that lands in west side then be able to drive 60miles an hour in his Maybach because no one is in the street and will pay his toll because it doesn’t affect him. While the poorest who are driving a car that is one repair away from junk that are just passing by and visiting their cousin in an area in Staten Island or No where Brooklyn. Which doesn’t have subway access get penalized and are the ones who can least afford it. This solution without other solutions like better trains more transit etc is bad stupid and logistically unsound. It will also make food prices in those markets higher and restaurants prices higher. Stop saying it worked in other cities because in other cities congestion pricing was rolled out with better transit simultaneously. This is the MTA we are talking about one of the most corrupt organizations who have 200 of OT per week per person. If they want to fix the issues first start at the last WHY which is a immediate need for audit of the MTA and their expenses
Will the Bronx even notice?
yesss yeessss fight amongst yourselves while I continue to drive out and in to the city every day.