Congestion Pricing and Alternate Side Parking

Where do you drive? In the city?

I no longer have a car, and garaged it when I did, so don't care, but wonder why you say alternate-side parking is a tax. Isn't it to allow street cleaning?

Trust me, alternate side parking helps you. Without it, the rich people who drive but once every few weeks would just street park like you do, and they'd never leave the space. The only thing keeping it available to you is that you're willing to deal with re-parking twice a week.

drive my kids around to their wknd activities--and drive to visit friends shop etc--and to leave city--often need to transport purchases etc--cant carry much on the subway back from ikea--park in a garage at great expense beacause of alt side parking--would have to if we ran things like london--street cleaning is a joke and could be done properly bi-weekly--since the advent of poop-scooping and relative dignity re littering it's just a non event--works fine in london--and the stretcleaning truck do shlt anyway--ever seen em--they move the trash around is all

next item: cops hiding at intersections like 124 and third ave, that spring out to write tickets for those stuck in"the box" or making illegal turns--both nearly impossible to avoid, esp given that the cops engaging this are causing the worst traffic jams seen ever at this intersection..i yelled at four cops yesterday (on way to watch a child's soccer game on randall's isle yesterday, you know middle class shit) that it would take only one to direct traffic and that would fix the problem..i ended up apologizing when the cop said they'd heard that from hundreds of people and had begged their supervisors to assign them otherwise...the cop said he felt terrible causing seriious traffic and then ticketing drivers as they dealt...

meant would NOT have to use garage if like london

and i disagree--the very wealthy would continue to use garages as they always have, even dating to days whencars were few and parking was plentiful in sopite of alt side--dating myself--and garage prices would at least disinflate as useable street supply would increase nearly twofold

Garage? You must be rich!

From what I read, congestion pricing is off the table for now given that it failed bberg's huge push last year. Agreed they should charge for resident parking permits - why they haven't is beyond me - easy way to raise revenue - 1st on the permits to residents, then on tkts for non-compliance. and they could charge commercial for hourly/daily placards too. I park my car on the street (use it several times a week so AS not a problem), and I don't understand why I don't have to pay for the right to take space. Truly one of NYC's great bargains.

You don't think that the only thing limiting the fraction of people owning cars is parking expense / hassle? You make parking easier, people start buying cars to leave you no better than when you started.

Printer, I think you are an example of the system working. People who truly use/need it get it for free by their natural behavior. The people who use it as a luxury pay. Ain't it great?

i am middle class, based on relative circumstances here in NYC

dont kno what you know but i do owe nada

the parking component of car ownership cost is relatively small--it isnt nearly the make or break item in car purchase decisions

the only point of alt side parking is as a device to raise revenues--and it comes outta "middle class" new yorkers

at great economic and qol cost

If Bloomberg were really interested in reducing traffic in Manhattan he would do two things. 1. Put tolls on the East River bridges. 2. Eliminate the placard on the dashboard entirely! If you need a spot in an emergency then drive a police car or a fire truck. The idea that 10,000 teachers (not sure of the exact number but it's ridiculously high) get placards is asinine - why can't teachers, cops, union members etc take the subway like everyone else? These two ideas alone would accomplish his goals.

If he wants to take it a step further then jack up the ticketing blitz and increase the fines for trucks who are double parked and unloading goods. Such actions would further encourage stores to unload their deliveries at night.

I also am a fan of neighborhood parking passes. As an UE sider it's been amazing to see how much more difficult it is to find a spot since we've lost some spots due to 2nd Ave subway construction. The majority of street parking (at night only) should be reserved for people who register their cars in NY, who pay NY insurance rates, and who actually live in the neighborhood.

unonada: much more of a luxury pay for printer who, by virtue of his lucky work/lifestyle happens to be able to park on the street--us regular working folk don't have that free luxury--as long as you are positing this ridiculousness

This whole parking issue/cost of maintaining a car in Manhattan may be why Zipcars are gaining in popularity here.

Additionally - I think a fee of say $50/month should be charged to people with neighborhood parking passes.

Ubottom, are you rent controlled? Or do you pay market rent?

"increase the fines for trucks who are double parked and unloading goods. Such actions would further encourage stores to unload their deliveries at night."

how could this possibly work? how would people move in and move out? how much more do you think night time deliveries would cost? seems to me that commercial vehicles should have precedence over private ones.

People can move in an out on weekends or after 5pm - or they can get a street spot - easy on street cleaning days -
in today's market you can find nighttime workers for the same price as daytime workers - I drive a lot around 9 or 10 pm - it would be the perfect time to load and unload everything.

I don't disagree that commercial vehicles should have precedence over private ones (so I'm not opposed to congestion pricing in Midtown) but I just think that so much of the congestion is created by double parked commercial vehicles. If we just enforce those rules (especially between 59th and 34th St from 1st to 9th Ave) it would make a huge difference.

Jazzman: That suggestion about night/weekend moves is a non-starter. Most buildings only allow moving between 9 AM and 5 PM, Monday through Friday. And with good reason! Movers hog elevators and leave building residents with virtually no access. Most buildings I have lived in have only one elevator. It is annoying enough to deprive a building of an elevator when people are (presumably) at work during the week day, and unreasonable during nights and weekends.

Besides, my last move took a good 8 hours. What time do you propose starting and finishing?

"Eliminate the placard on the dashboard entirely! If you need a spot in an emergency then drive a police car or a fire truck. The idea that 10,000 teachers (not sure of the exact number but it's ridiculously high) get placards is asinine - why can't teachers, cops, union members etc take the subway like everyone else?"

the horror! going against beloved teachers... it's not gonna happen imho as unions have whatever they want both from nyc and albany

"The majority of street parking (at night only) should be reserved for people who register their cars in NY, who pay NY insurance rates, and who actually live in the neighborhood."

do you see a lot of cars from out of state parked? i see an amazing amount of big SUVs that are not appropriate for city driving. those should be limited too. lol, where does it end?

OnTheMove -- you don't get it. This is the Selfish All About Me Disregard The Obvious Impact of What I Say I Want thread.

"If Bloomberg were really interested in reducing traffic in Manhattan he would do two things. 1. Put tolls on the East River bridges. 2. Eliminate the placard on the dashboard entirely!"

How about limiting the number of yellow cabs?

They are the #1 cause of traffic and congestion.
They are discourteous and dangerous drivers who account for a vast majority of the accidents.

I have owned a car in Manhattan for many years and basically use it on weekends. I understand that it is a luxury and I don't mind paying for it. It is worth it to me.

But I also agree with Jazzman that: "The majority of street parking (at night only) should be reserved for people who register their cars in NY, who pay NY insurance rates, and who actually live in the neighborhood."

"This is the Selfish All About Me Disregard The Obvious Impact of What I Say I Want thread."

alahhart: This thread is just a microcosm of America, then, no?

no, that would be "This is the Selfish All About Me Disregard The Obvious Impact of What I am obviously Entitled to thread."

Residential London neighborhoods are so low-density that you're practically talking eastern Queens as a comparison. In the slightly denser, more central London neighborhoods, street parking is virtually impossible, and offstreet is many times the cost of even the most expensive Manhattan parking.

A friend who lived in Chicago, in a neighborhood that was by no means very densely built -- I think nothing was more than three stories -- and their neighborhood parking permits amounted (at best) to hunting licenses. If you weren't home by 10pm, you were out of luck, and that was that. You could circle around for three hours and not find anything. So people in NYC who yearn for those are seriously deluding themselves.

Ubottom, your logic is way off even in the first sentence. You'd save money by relying on taxis and car rentals on an adhoc basis. Having a car in Manhattan never passes the financially-justifiable test ... it's a pleasure item. And government policy should only consider the pleasure purchases of a small number of individuals to a small extent.

Is it fair that congestion pricing (in London, let's say) is no hardship at all to the very wealthy, but a no-go to most people? Yes, but not tyranically so. Are there more appropriate ways to determine who gets to drive if you need to limit congestion? Maybe: you could allow driving on Monday if your license plate ends in a 1 or 4 or the letters A through whatever ... they did that in Athens, if I'm not mistaken; richer people have more cars, and can arrange to have license plates that give them more 'in' days. You could restrict by a driver's age, or height, or weight, or how good-looking or ugly he or she is, or only let people with hazel eyes drive there.

Jazzman, the congestion isn't caused by double-parked vehicles -- it's caused by the parked vehicles that force double-parking. Street parking was illegal in Manhattan until (I think) 1947. If you see old photos of NY streets, you'll notice no (or virtually no) parked cars. If you couldn't afford to garage, both at home and elsewhere in Manhattan, you had no business using a car to get there.

That's the way it should have remained. Word has it that City workers who, increasingly, lived in Queens at that time suddenly started to demand that they be able to drive to work and park ... City Hall was a PITA to get to otherwise.

Deliveries, on the other hand, have been made since the first store opened in Manhattan, and take as long as they take. I'm sure the drivers aren't hanging out for the fun of it.

"car rentals"

agree! preferential parking to those that use zipcar and the like (like ikea has) will go a long way towards sending the efficiency message.

making biking less of a dangerous endeavor also will help for the locals imho.

Get rid of alternate side of the street parking and you will have people living in their cars. Just check out Leroy Street by the WSH on weekends.

alanhart - "This is the Selfish All About Me Disregard The Obvious Impact of What I Say I Want thread."
I couldn't disagree more with you. I drive to work everyday and I have a placard (which I paid good money for) - I have suggested on this thread that we eliminate placards - I drive home at 9 to 10 pm every night yet I suggest we make more trucks use the roads at 9 to 10 pm - I park on the street for free yet I suggested we charge for street parking - you couldn't be more wrong. Why must you think everyone will only lobby for their own interests? You must be a Republican or a Democrat. I'm making suggestions about what will help the city not what will help me.

RE the moving in and out - very valid point (I've never lived in a building like that as they've either been too small to bother or large enough that they had a freight elevator). But again I say that with street cleaning it's very easy to find parking on those days (so 2 weekdays per week). But I'm not proposing any changes to the rules about moving trucks - simply saying enforce more rigorously the rule that says you can't double park a moving van. It's already illegal and it seems to work fine.

RE: parking from out of staters - yes I see plenty of them and it's not only them who shouldn't be able to street park in people's neighborhoods at night it's anyone who doesn't live in that neighborhood. (But again I think we should pay a fee for this privilege).

"RE: parking from out of staters - yes I see plenty of them and it's not only them who shouldn't be able to street park in people's neighborhoods at night it's anyone who doesn't live in that neighborhood. (But again I think we should pay a fee for this privilege)."

wow, that sounds too much like a parking nazi to me. if people at the end of the day suffer so much parking their cars... then more will switch from ownership towards rentals like zipcar. which is not a bad thing.

admin -street parking is not terrible - but if the city can collect $50/month per car then why not?

Great idea, alanhart. I've got hazel eyes.

Seriously, though, I think they should ban anybody whose household gross income $250K (plus or minus $50-100K) from Manhattan. Then, the cost of living for the real middle class would go down, and we'd no longer have to hear all the bitching and moaning. In their eyes, being middle class consists of "scraping by" with the ability to live in Manhattan, having a car, sending kids to private school, having a nanny for some years to help with the youngins, taking cabs when necessary, enrolling their kids in programs, having an iPhone, having Starbucks when they feel like it, eating out on a weekly basis, etc. Guess what: the real middle class get to pick 0-2 of those same luxuries (yes, that's what they are) and compromises on all the rest.

have 2 friends this past week, one in carroll gardens switched from owning a car to zipcar due to having to move the car for street cleaning and parking tickets. the other one lives in a project with parking and just got her first car. with parking (like many projects have and i've seen many times not even half full)... the whole issue of parking and having to move the car for street cleaning is gone. not bad!

but like my other friend, when parking is a pain... zipcar wins (if you use it only for weekends that is).

Bikes are not the answer. Excellent exercise,good recreation Commute option if the weather cooperates and if you don't particularly care what you look like when you get there and absolutely worthless in terms of bringing home groceries, Ikea, home depot, target, etc. (I've gotten three invites to join Costco, what good is buying in bulk if I have to schlepp it home on the 6 train?) For me, a car is a coveted luxury that would never work from a financial perspectives, unless I get a reverse commute job in which case it would be as much a necessity as it is in 95% of the US. As for placards, recall that cops, teachers, firefighters etc don't necessarily control where they are posted, and subways don't always take you from point A to B with ease. Or would you like to travel from Bayside to Sheepshead Bay by train/bus? Notice that when you pass a school, precinct, firehouse your see a lot of beatup Hondas and few BMS...versus the residential streets in some neighborhoods. Also, it may not be as true now, but 20 years ago it was very difficult to get teachers to work in many neighborhoods (cops always had the advantage of gusn). Guaranteed parking was one way to at least insure some safety for their commute.

"Also, it may not be as true now, but 20 years ago it was very difficult to get teachers to work in many neighborhoods (cops always had the advantage of gusn). Guaranteed parking was one way to at least insure some safety for their commute."

great point!

about costco, you could use zipcar. it's convenient and time and money efficient. bloomberg's idea of trying to benefit pedestrians and bikers appeals a lot to me.

When you write your mortgage and maintenance checks, calculate how much you're paying to store those 4,500 rolls of toilet paper for another month. Costco is even less financially sensible for Manhattan apartment dwellers than owning a car here. And I own a car here (half of each year, anyway).

And no, the big-ticket items at Costco (LCDs, etc.) aren't such great deals either, compared to online sellers who deliver.

alan, some lucky people have pantries and walking closets. anyway, they are coming to east harlem (opening next month i've been told)

So what if city workers get free parking? It's something like a $2K-$3K fringe benefit. Go be a teacher if it makes a difference for you. My bigger problem is that it's an wasteful allocation of resources: it might not be worth that kind of money, but because it's "free", it's used anyways. I think they should be able to get the placard, or if they would rather have cash, they can have the city sell their placard for the year.

I actually belong to a zipcar like program. At first it was a PITA because the car options were not that convenient. Now they have cars across the street from me and around the corner. Gotta love it. A bit pricey but a lot cheaper than owning/parking. Only problem is reserving in advance.

If you live on the UES AND have a car AND park it in a garage, you are NOT middle class. So please don't attack Bloomberg for not caring about the middle class.

My main objection to the placards is that they should be limited (as I believe they technically are) to parking where and when they're intended to allow. So schooldays in front of that particular school, ONLY, for example, and only issued in the same number as there are schoolday parking spots in front of the school.

Unfortunately, professional courtesy among police and parking officers means they become carte blanche -- virtually everywhere, including too close to fire hydrants, virtually all the time, and often by family member, not the City employee.

What's the expression ... 'wolves guarding the chicken coop'?

is this in the news again or something?

and lol @ "If you live on the UES AND have a car AND park it in a garage, you are NOT middle class. So please don't attack Bloomberg for not caring about the middle class."

I know TONS of people, mostly in their early 30's who live on the UES, park in garages, and make 80-200K HHI. Are they lower class or upper according to your generalization? In fact, most people I know on the UES have cars and park them in garages...

Bourgeois pigs!

petti-bourgeois liberal!

What alanhart & lizyank said. Ubottom: have you been to the areas of London where residential street parking works? Very low-density and also just the right mix of demographics & housing (think a smallish # of families in rowhouses, coupled with a large # of singles with no cars in shared flats in rowhouses). Also, a fair number of houses in London have off-street parking (front yards are big enough to be torn up and there is a small driveway).

And your bottom line: forget the empirical studies on congestion pricing, gas taxes and other traffic control measures. The city should roll over and give YOU the perfect setup so that you can continue to leave your car in the street all week and use it for errands on weekends? What about me? I guarantee Bloomberg will like my proposal better. Give me a 20yr lease on a parking space on the street for say, 100k (re-assignable should we sell our place). I will take care of all street cleaning & sidewalk cleaning with my neighbors who have the same deal (lots of building mtce people who'll take this on for a small monthly fee). In fact, I was thinking about writing a letter to City Hall with this proposal.

oink

great idea...should do it as an auction with a floor price but make it shorter term.

CC: yep. I was tossing around this idea with a few people. Better yet, if the city could deed to me but complicated from legal standpoint.

There is no alt side in london and nearly all spots are only allowed for use by taxpaying residents of respective neighborhoods. If this were done in NYC, there would be more spots for residents, regardless of the circumstances. I spend time in London regularly and have many friends there who park near their homes and do not use garages. My wealthiest friends there have cars that they have judged to be too valuable to park on the street where damage is a risk.
In Greenwich, if you have a town sticker you can go to the town beach and park for free. If you don't it'll cost you 20 bux to park and use the beach.
NYC needs to prioritize its residents in similar ways. There is too much concern that commerce be accomodated. Ive always thought like alanh that the best place to control congestion would be at the tolls: free for taxpaying NYC residents, expensive for those who don't live here and choose not to do park and ride. And I'd be happy if parking spots were auctioned to those who live and pay taxes in specific neighborhoods. Obviously if you chose to live on Fifth Ave you'd end up paying more than you would in Brownsville, but the parking would go to the residents, not to shoppers and other supporters of commerce.
Park and ride is a wonderful way for those who don't pay taxes here to come visit and enjoy the city we live in. For those who are too good for this, let them use the garages, and pay dearly at our tolls. We roll out the red carpet for non-residents at the behest of the merchant and commerce lobbies, all at the expense of residents' qol.
My use of "middle class" is in ref to lifestyle, not income. Middle class status throughout the US includes ownership of at least one car per household, decent shelter, health care (soon, I hope), reasonable education, food etc. Such a lifestyle is very expensive here in NYC, but it is noetheless a middle-class lifestyle. You wanna talk income there is essentially no middle class in NYC. Minumum rent for a smal two bdrm apt in which to cram a family is 3000 per month. That's 50K a year pretax before eating a single meal.

And alpo wtf would you know about any reasonable lifestyle in NYC? Youre a toxic swamp dweller.

Cheap parking is much of the cause of the parking... there is a serious academic study on this called "the high cost of free parking"

1) Folks riding around looking for spots represent a huge chunk of traffic (one measurement in park slope said something like 20-30%
2) Folks who get cheap / subsidized / illegal parking are much more likely to drive. They figured out that bridge traffic was 25% government employees when they did a survey last year. All the cops who park with permits or illegally, all the real and fake permits, all the judges, bla bla.... they're a huge cause of the traffic.

If it is impossible to get a spot, then parking is too cheap. On street parking should vary by time of day. Sundays should not be free (besides the fact that it is to support one particular religion).... you get municipal lots in FLushing where fights break out.

Parking needs to be more expensive, so folks cover the true cost, not the subsidized cost which creates more problems.

BTW, the reason that congestion pricing didn't pass is mainly the idiot assembly people whose districts are filled with folks who take public transportation, but they themselves don't want to lose their perk of free ezpasses and parking. Scum.

And, oh yeah, Sheldon Silver. Scumbag.

"Also, it may not be as true now, but 20 years ago it was very difficult to get teachers to work in many neighborhoods (cops always had the advantage of gusn). Guaranteed parking was one way to at least insure some safety for their commute."

Great. But now that the neigborhoods are better and teacher salaries have been raised 43% (yes 43%) in 7 years, rediculous perks that noone else gets (including pensions where teachers can retire on $150k forever, no joke) should be eliminated.

If these things were to "make up" for something else, then when the other item is fixed, the "make-ups" should be removed.

"If Bloomberg were really interested in reducing traffic in Manhattan he would do two things. 1. Put tolls on the East River bridges. 2. Eliminate the placard on the dashboard entirely!"

Agreed... and he tried...

on 1) the senate/assembly scumbags didn't want to pay tolls themselves, so they went against the people. Bloomberg's own transportation chair was the person who actually called for it first years bck.

2) he got some done... but the unions have pushed back, and he seems to have lost all balls in dealing with them.

Ubottom: you are ignoring the single biggest difference - density in London vs. NYC. If residents-only parking permits became more common, it is not too hard to figure out that parking spots would remain just as scarce, because there is a significant number of people who would pay for the permit & garage, with the off-chance that they might score a spot on their block. There are at least 100X as many households on my block than a typical non-project-y block in Fulham.

I am not against residential-permit parking. I just doubt that this will help you land a parking spot.

Nyc10022: agree with you 100%.

"If this were done in NYC, there would be more spots for residents, regardless of the circumstances."
Absolutely not. There'd be fewer spots for residents, because 3 times more of your neighbors would suddenly think they have places to park, when they don't. Get rid of alt-side and they'd be there forever.

"Ive always thought like alanh that the best place to control congestion would be at the tolls: free for taxpaying NYC residents"
Did I say that? I think the tolls should be free if you're walking, and should cost the same to drive over regardless of where you live.

By the way, I'm waiting to see how Costco in East Harlem does with its parking ... if I understand correctly, it's $4 for the first 2 hours, and $9 beyond that! If you have enough pylons, you can hold some street spots and rent them out to bulk shoppers.

I also look forward to time-of-day charging for all parking, and all tolls, on all bridges and tunnels, except that one on the Henry Hudson betw. Manhattan and the Bronx, which is about the length of a car. If you drive fast enough, you could just leap that gap without a bridge at all. Don't try this at home.

Silver still has plenty of goodwill credit for killing off Boston Bloomberg, Detroit Dan Doctoroff and Jersey Johnson's midtown stadium. Chumbucket.

I'm in nyc10023/alanhart... but CAN I park my pink unicorn?

> Nyc10022: agree with you 100%.

Thanks.

The problem with residential parking permits (much of this I read from folks who study this) is that it makes it easier for folks to park at home. Great. Problem with this... makes those folks more likely to HAVE a car, and that car then drives somewhere, often to the more congested downtown. If you give even more folks an excuse to drive into the busy sections, it makes things worse.

Now, caveat, I get it for border zones in congestion pricing schemes, but in that case the congestion pricing would undo at least some of the extra traffic from the new parkers.

But res parking permits alone... not a particularly sound idea.

Alan, good posts... we agree on a lot here.

> "If this were done in NYC, there would be more spots for residents, regardless of the
> circumstances."

> Absolutely not. There'd be fewer spots for residents, because 3 times more of your neighbors would
> suddenly think they have places to park, when they don't. Get rid of alt-side and they'd be there
> forever.

Bingo. Folks always seem to miss that while you might have an improvement for 5 minutes, you incenting the thing that cause the problem in the first place.

Its like what happened with EVERY SINGLE new bridge they built up the east river. Traffic improved. For 3-6 months. Then, within a couple years, just as much traffic on each. Traffic will expand to meet whatever space you give it. Its actually part of why FEWER lanes in times square has helped flow (plus fewer turns).

> "Ive always thought like alanh that the best place to control congestion would be at the tolls: free
> for taxpaying NYC residents"
> Did I say that? I think the tolls should be free if you're walking, and should cost the same to
> drive over regardless of where you live.

Exactly. You are causing traffic either way, you are creating more cost for the city and residents. That you live here doesn't make that any less costly... you should still pay... even if only to incent you to STOP DOING IT.

> I also look forward to time-of-day charging for all parking, and all tolls, on all bridges and
> tunnels, except that one on the Henry Hudson betw. Manhattan and the Bronx, which is about the
> length of a car. If you drive fast enough, you could just leap that gap without a bridge at all.
> Don't try this at home.

lol, and agreed.

> Silver still has plenty of goodwill credit for killing off Boston Bloomberg, Detroit Dan Doctoroff
> and Jersey Johnson's midtown stadium. Chumbucket.

I would have liked the stadium, granted I'm being selfish. Would love to be able to walk to games, and get wasted on sundays and stumble around. I love the feel in the Inner Harbor and places like that.

Would it be a great financial move? Probably not.

But Central Park is technically a money-loser, too.

But I figure we need to spend on the things that make NYC awesome.

And drunk fat people are part of that!

Seriously, imagine U2 on the waterfront...

My favorite is "no parking on the street for anyone ever".

If for no other reason than for the opportunity to tell my favorite Jimmy Walker (the Jazz Mayor) story:

During Prohibition, which New Yorkers (Irish, German, Italian) wanted no part of, the Feds barged in on a few speakeasies in a coordinated set of raids. And while they were busy doing that, their cars and paddywagons were busily towed away by the NYPD at Jimmy Walker's behest. Poetry!

Congestion pricing/tolls should apply to NYC residents as well, no bones about it.

Only a minority drive and clog up the city, there is no reason every single other city resident should be subsidizing them.

Ubottom: I get the sense that you don't see congestion as an issue, and if it were an issue, then get reduce the out-of-town traffic first. Congestion is a way more complicated problem than that. The gist of the problem is that if you incentivise driving as opposed to mass transportation in any way (be it availability of spots, tolls), driving seems to increase to a certain choking point.

They have draconian congestion laws in Singapore. Seems to have helped, the last time I visited, traffic wasn't bad at all.

"Its like what happened with EVERY SINGLE new bridge they built up the east river. Traffic improved. For 3-6 months. Then, within a couple years, just as much traffic on each. Traffic will expand to meet whatever space you give it. Its actually part of why FEWER lanes in times square has helped flow (plus fewer turns)."

This was pointed out in the must-read Robert Moses biography "The Powerbroker", which among other things covers the car-obsessed public-transit-loathing master builder who ruled supreme from the late 1920s through the mid-1960s. But the very best part of that book was the photo of Robert Moses in a 1950s fatmobile at a toll booth. The caption explained that it was taken as a publicity photo ... but that in fact he never learned how to drive a car, and never did drive. If only someone had shoved his nose in the shit!

Duh, silly me. Congestion doesn't affect you at all, ubottom because you typically don't drive when it's congested, just on weekends. So yes, it makes absolute sense on a personal level for you to oppose reduction of congestion, if it means you don't have a cheap/free spot all week. Hmmm.

"The gist of the problem is that if you incentivise driving as opposed to mass transportation in any way (be it availability of spots, tolls), driving seems to increase to a certain choking point. "

Exactly. Change whatever you want, congestion will increase until the point where the "cost" of driving equals out the cost of public transportation.

So, to stop the congestion - which hurts the things that NEED to drive and are willing to pay because of the value, say a huge delivery - you either have to increase the cost of the driving, or decrease the cost of the alternative.

I've always thought about just making subways free..... some cons pop up, but a lot of pros. The city benefits when more people take it, plain and simple.

The one thing that stops me from taking subways everywhere and all the time is the dirt & grime & lack of elevators. Today, I schlepped crosstown on the bus, downtown on the subway, and was only thwarted taking the subway bag because of 4 bags of shopping and no elevators/escalators.

Someone actually said "get rid of all the yellow cabs"

Now that's the stupidest thing I've heard all day. No, get rid of all the dickwads who get in their SUVs on the UES or UWS to drive to the Village for dinner. Or the B&T dickwads who drive in from NJ or LI.

There should ONLY be yellow cabs and delivery vehicles driving around core Manhattan. If you live here and keep a car here, you should pay a sizable fee to enter AND leave! And I've owned vehicles here. The more I drove around, the more out of shape and smug I was. Now I'm fit and humble!

parking expense is tiny compared to the very high cost of car owership esp here in NYC--
if non-nyers were tolled heavily, any added congestion resulting from increase in car ownership by nyers (which I believe would be small) would be offset by visitors who would choose to park and ride rather than drive
and yes there would be some increase in car ownership among residents, but there would be many more spots restricted for their use

"Duh, silly me. Congestion doesn't affect you at all, ubottom because you typically don't drive when it's congested, just on weekends. So yes, it makes absolute sense on a personal level for you to oppose reduction of congestion, if it means you don't have a cheap/free spot all week. Hmmm."

Thats why we have this problem. The politicians who are subsidized with their cars, parking, and tolls won't do the right thing because their needs are above the city's

"The one thing that stops me from taking subways everywhere and all the time is the dirt & grime & lack of elevators. Today, I schlepped crosstown on the bus, downtown on the subway, and was only thwarted taking the subway bag because of 4 bags of shopping and no elevators/escalators. "

More reason for congestion pricing paying for MTA capital improvements.... we're certainly paying enough to fix all the roads and bridges.

> Someone actually said "get rid of all the yellow cabs"
> Now that's the stupidest thing I've heard all day.

I agree. The plethora of cabs available means aotbe, there will be less personal cars in the city. Now, if we want to raise prices some so 3 people taking a cab is, uh, more expensive than subway.... now we have something!

and i support wholeheartedlt that the city attend to cngestion, but not on the backs of ny'ers when most of the congestion is anything but a result of ny'ers driving around at any time, whether a paticularly congested time or not

youre too focued on proving that this is "all about me" when it aint

i love the subway filth and all--

and we have incented that non-nyers drive into our city and congest
let's disincent them before we punish residents

I know this isn't a huge population but what about reverse commuters? I do think there should be an exemption from congestion pricing or other "anti-traffic" measures for people whose job requires them to drive out of Manhattan every day.

I reverse-commuted many years ago when gas was 90 cents/gallon and tolls were $4. I never had too much difficulty finding street parking, except on Thursdays and Fridays (I'd take the train back to NYC). Not surprisingly, there is heavy-ish traffic leaving Manhattan in the mornings after 7:30am.

Being somewhat young and lazy, I got my car towed a few times because I woke up too late to move it by 8am.

I think a really lot of the reverse traffic on Manhattan crossings is actually cross-traffic between LI/Brookqueens and NJ/US.

"I know this isn't a huge population but what about reverse commuters? I do think there should be an exemption from congestion pricing or other "anti-traffic" measures for people whose job requires them to drive out of Manhattan every day. "

I've been a reverse commuter. We still cause traffic most of the time. In the end, we're still driving the streets of Manhattan, looking for the highway the bridges.

Same reason folks driving from Manhattan to Manhattan should pay.

> and we have incented that non-nyers drive into our city and congest
> let's disincent them before we punish residents

Makes no sense. Why disincent the former, and then incent the latter? You'll just trade one for the other.

Makes 0 sense.

You have to fix both leaks, or you'll have an empty bottle.

"I think a really lot of the reverse traffic on Manhattan crossings is actually cross-traffic between LI/Brookqueens and NJ/US."

I don't think so actually. The study they did showed 25% was government, mostly inter-NYC (so no jersey). Trucks and deliveries were not huge (and most are not intentionally through).

I did this myself, and didn't see people on my path very often. Most BK or Manhattan bridge folks hop up the FDR. For the midtown tunnel, even worse. Almost impossible to cross over.

There are better ways (staten island, or avoiding city altogether).

Remember the whole debate about the freight tunnel from Jersey to Brooklyn. Turns out they were wrong, wouldn't save a lot.

"Give me a 20yr lease on a parking space on the street for say, 100k (re-assignable should we sell our place). I will take care of all street cleaning & sidewalk cleaning with my neighbors who have the same deal (lots of building mtce people who'll take this on for a small monthly fee). In fact, I was thinking about writing a letter to City Hall with this proposal. "

Wow, what an idea! Aren't you the one who wants to castrate anybody who doesn't conform to your personal standards of behavior and morality? I think you should share *that* plan with Der Fuhrer at City Hall, too. Funny you should mention Singapore, because they cane people there, publicly. Just your cup of tea.

Fortunately, streets are owned by and for the people collectively and are not for personal ownership-- especially when the end result would undoubtedly be ownership by the elitist snobs who are most likely to be able to afford them. Where I live in the city, we have no alternate side parking but we clean the streets so DOT doesn't have to do it. Anyone can park anywhere they like on the street that I clean (but they can't block the driveway of my garage!).

Sometimes when I read these posts, I shake my head in amazement. I used to think they were jokes or parodies, but I realize now they're not. So many of you seem blissfully oblivious of your entitlement issues and clueless about how out of touch you are with most of the people who live in this city. And by "this city", I mean New York City, not just Manhattan.

I have to stand up for my fellow "B&T dickwads" who pay taxes here and are supposed to have the same rights that Manhattan residents do. Congestion pricing and tolls on East River bridges are taxes on citizens of NYC. Those lame ideas were defeated by representatives of New Yorkers in other boroughs, who saw them for what they really were. There are tolls on most bridges and tunnels already. There should be a few free bridges left for folks who can't afford to pay tolls. BTW, high tolls haven't seemed to keep the "B&T dickwads from NJ & LI" out of the city, so maybe they aren't an effective deterrent?

Civil servants who have been priced out of home ownership in the city are given parking placards so they don't have to commute three hours each way every day to work for you. Which of you would prefer to do that work at their salaries? Or would it interfere with shopping all day?

Your fellow New Yorkers from the Fabulous Four boroughs don't have the options you all have if their work life is centered on Manhattan. It's ridiculous to expect them all to bike to work. (And I have zero sympathy for bike riders and will continue to have none until they start obeying traffic laws.)

Like most of the people who live in my area, I stopped shopping in Manhattan when Our Leader made it impossible to park and drive there. The equation for shopping in Nassau is: big free parking lots + the same stores and merchandise + lower sales tax = zero sales tax revenue for NYC. I don't miss it in the least.

There are possible solutions to these problems that have to do with the real source of congestion, which is daytime truck deliveries. But I think those of you who say you want to do something about congestion and go green should all step up the plate first -- stop taking cabs and get rid of your cars -- before you tell everyone else how to live. I know you never will.

Errr, lots of city-owned property has been sold off in the past even when it didn't make sense. Why not auction off leases to parking spots on the street? Keeps taxes low on those SFHs in the other 4 boroughs :)

Can you point me to a reliable source that says that the #1 source of congestion is daytime truck delivery?

Say what you will about the merits of a free-wheeling democracy and a non-caning society, but if you have ever, EVER, been on a subway train in Tokyo or Singapore, you will come back home to NYC deeply ashamed of your fellow citizens.

much rather ride on a dirty subway than live in a place where drug users are executed and public gum-chewers are caned--if that's your ideal, were going to have to differ...

Drug traffickers are executed, btw. Have you ever ridden the subways in Tokyo or Singapore? One could certainly get used to clean subways mighty quickly.

BTW, you haven't mentioned if you like the congestion pricing model (in Central London) & heavy gas taxes.

The best idea is to eliminate free parking on side streets. That will get rid of plenty of cars of residents commuters, and day trippers who rely on them, not to mention generate all the revenue

With muni-meters, this is now possible.

No one is entitled to be able to park a car for free, and it is only a matter of time before it is taken away...

my primary memories of the tokyo subways: they stopped at midnight and there were pornographic comics being read everywhere.

The cengestion pricing model in Central London is a disaster. Emperor Bloomerg should stop using that as an example of a "success". I agree that the central problem in Manhattan is truck deliveries along with the stupid traffic-causing initiatives of this administration.

I don't think I've seen this yet in this discussion so I'll bring it in: there can be not discussion about traffic in Manhattan without bringing the lobbying group "Transportation Alternatives". I equate them somewhat to PITA, in that in the same way that PITA puts a public face of cruelty to fur bearing animals go get public sympathy, but they don' tell you their ultimate goal includes things like not even raising and eating beef, TA doesn't tell you that they are a group of bicyclists who's real goal is to eliminate all cars from Manhattan.

They have become a VERY powerful force in shaping what is going on with the changing traffic patterns, all of which to my mind are disasters. Only a bout 2 years ago, I remember walking home from a friends loft a couple of times a week on Canal and Broadway and watching them build all these new islands for people to stand and wait for buses going down Broadway and saying to myself "what a fucking disaster. now going down Broadway at rush hour you'll be down to one lane between Houston and Canal". And as far as I can see, I was right.

But you have to listen carefully when TA speaks: they like the phrase "traffic calming measures". It sounds so nice; who could object to "calm"? What it really mean is creating congestion to slow the flow of traffic. read their agenda here:

http://www.transalt.org/about

But this isn't the way they talk in public when they are trying to get traffic re-routed: they act as if they are trying to "smooth" traffic flow, and have been very effective at getting people to sign on for their projects by pointing out all the "green spaces" (no matter how ludicrous they really are) and other niceties which will be created. Well, if you look at the real results of almost all of the traffic pattern changes under the current administration, they have resulted in MORE congestion.

Some ideas to really improve things:

Ban large truck deliveries during the day time and make them at night. Much of the congestion we see is from trucks double parked (or triple parked). Banning trucks from the daytime for the "congestion pricing area" would have a MUCH great effect than congestion pricing, AND would substantially cut down on pollution since these diesel rigs often idle for hours in mid-town spewing forth all sorts of grimy, soot-y poisonous gases.

Lift the extreme limitations on garage spaces in residential buildings. I forget what the limit is, but one of the reasons many residential buildings have many fewer spots than apartments is because they aren't allowed to build any more. Let builders build as many spots as they want, and use the "neighborhood permit" concept for whom they can lease the spots to on a monthly basis. I think the original concept was that if you limited the amount of parking spaces, you would also limit the amount of traffic in Manhattan. I think the concept is flawed. Think about how much pollution is caused SOLELY from people moving their cars around on alternate side of the street parking issues. The reason indoor parking is so expensive in Manhattan is due to the shortage of it. Build a LARGE amount of indoor parking spots for the sole use of people in that neighborhood you'll see affordable parking. one of the reasons is that the parking will be built in space that is currently unused for anything: under ground.

30 Years, another very quiet item on the PETA agenda is discouraging and eventually eliminating people keeping animals as pets. (They have been known to pick up pets from people or vets offices that need to give them away saying they will be put up for adoption and then euthanizing them.) Now Mayor Mike the great white nanny, he of the "no smoking in bars" and calorie counts at Crumbs (what did someone think their stuff was healthy or not fattening?) has decided that cars have no place in the life of this city or its residents. Lets cut off traffic lanes, not build garages and charge more money and then people won't drive...no more likely they'll drive as much, curse more and spend less other places in the local economy. I agree that its great that NY is one of the very places in the US where it is possible, and perfectly pleasant, to live without a car doesn't mean it should be municipal policy to make life miserable for people to own them. (I'd venture to guess there as many people with incomes under $100K owning cars in NYC as over btw).

Generalogoun, you are my hero. Even though you're a "B&T dickwad". So tell me, my Fab Four boughrite, what does it take to lead a middle-class lifestyle in your NYC. You know, decent shelter, a car for the household, decent edumacation, food, etc.? Do you lead such a lifestyle? How much does it take? No need for specifics, just the nearest $100K. Are you scraping by on $300K as well? Is your $500 per month parking but a small fraction of the cost of your middle-class car?

I'm with you on most of what you're saying, but I'd still rather encourage less driving from the boroughs and more public transportation. But I really don't care that much: every time I get out of the subway and see B&T-mobiles jammed in traffic, I think "serves them right". Just try not to honk so much.

"You wanna talk income there is essentially no middle class in NYC. Minumum rent for a smal two bdrm apt in which to cram a family is 3000 per month. That's 50K a year pretax before eating a single meal."

You realize there's more to NYC than just Manhattan, yes?

Here's a nice family-sized three bedroom in NYC for less than $1800/month: http://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/abo/1432308732.html

And if you must stay in Manhattan, three bedrooms for only $1650/month: http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/nfb/1431674482.html

PITA = PETA.... is that Freudian or what?

"Some ideas to really improve things:

Ban large truck deliveries during the day time and make them at night. Much of the congestion we see is from trucks double parked (or triple parked). Banning trucks from the daytime for the "congestion pricing area" would have a MUCH great effect than congestion pricing, AND would substantially cut down on pollution since these diesel rigs often idle for hours in mid-town spewing forth all sorts of grimy, soot-y poisonous gases.

Lift the extreme limitations on garage spaces in residential buildings."

***********

First of all, banning daytime deliveries for stores would result in widespread business closings, as all stores would have to immediately hire night-shift workers to accept and process these deliveries. Most retail establishments in Manhattan are barely scraping by -- I doubt they could all afford to hire an entire "third shift" of workers.

Second, there's a reason for those "extreme limitations" on garage spaces in residential buildings, the most important of which are chemical and fire hazards of having too many vehicles under the same roof as apartments.

"Second, there's a reason for those "extreme limitations" on garage spaces in residential buildings, the most important of which are chemical and fire hazards of having too many vehicles under the same roof as apartments."

Total unadulterated bullshit.

Right. The FD does have to sign off on garages, but the *number* of spaces has always been a political issue, having to be approved by lots of agencies, the community board, and so on.

West34:
"Someone actually said get rid of all the yellow cabs...Now that's the stupidest thing I've heard all day"

No one said that. Do you know how to read? I said limit the number of cabs.

West 34: "...There should ONLY be yellow cabs and delivery vehicles driving around core Manhattan."

Now THAT is something stupid to say. Maybe you live in Jersey and haven't noticed how taxis never pull over to the curb to pick up/drop off passengers causing major back ups.

Maybe you haven't noticed that they are the worst drivers and are the #1 cause of accidents in Manhattan both with other cars and with bikes.

And I guess you've never seen a cab cut off tons of cars and crossover multiple lanes to pick up a passenger.

so...now matt is up at 1 in the morning reposting CL scam listings?

gas tax a good thing--incents less consumption, better efficiency and and reduces attendant costs like pollution
alt side parking incents driving for no reason, and prevents access to parking by those who work normal hours
in fact posession (not trafficking) of certtain illegal drug in certain quantities is an executable offense in singapore--and caning is an incredibly inhumane punishment for chewing gum on the subway--i cant get used to that, clean subway or not--just me i guess