Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bloomberg proposes a fee for driving in Manhattan.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 06:52 PM
Original message
Bloomberg proposes a fee for driving in Manhattan.
Edited on Sun Apr-22-07 07:10 PM by NNadir
Saying that he would not spend his final term in office “pretending that all is fine,” Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg made a series of Earth Day proposals this afternoon to improve the environment of New York City, including charging a new congestion fee to drivers who come into parts of Manhattan during peak hours during weekdays.


The $8 congestion fee was one of 127 initiatives included in a sweeping plan by the mayor to help the city of currently 8.2 million people cope with an expected surge in population that he said is sure to put a strain on its transportation, housing and energy systems.

“Let’s face up to the fact that our population growth is putting our city on a collision course with the environment, which itself is growing more unstable and uncertain,” the mayor said...

...The mayor said congestion on the city’s streets is the source of many of the city’s health, environmental and economic problems.

“We can’t talk about reducing air pollution without talking about congestion,” he said.

“As our city continues to grow, the cost of congestion to our health, to our economy and to our environment are only going to get worse,” he said. “The question is not whether we want to pay, but how do we want to pay — with an increased asthma rate, with more greenhouse gases, with more wasted time, lost business and higher prices. Or do we charge a modest fee to encourage more people to take mass transit...”

...The fee would be deducted from the tolls commuters already pay to come into Manhattan via the bridges or tunnels.

There would be no toll booths, just a network of cameras that would capture license plate numbers and either charge a driver’s existing commuter account or generate a bill to be paid each time.

The mayor said that about half of the fees would be paid by New York City residents — and the other half by commuters from surrounding areas. But he pledged not to begin imposing the fee for at least a year, until city officials can upgrade mass transit service into parts of New York City that are currently not well served by the city’s subway or train system.



http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/nyregion/23mayorcnd.html?hp

I am generally suspicious of Repukes speaking about the environment, and I have been especially contemptuous of Governor Hydrogen Hummer's "Brazillion Solar Roofs" bill that will do next to <em>nothing</em> at all for the environment, although it has made California as safe as always for meaningless gestures.

However one should have the courage to say point out an instance where a Republican is right about something, and this is that case.

New York City releases more carbon dioxide than several prominent countries in the world, and a ban and/or restriction on cars should be welcome anywhere it is feasible.

The Mayor himself takes the subway to work.

New York City is part of a grid served by the Indian Point Nuclear Station as well as nuclear plants in New Jersey, my home state. This is an outstanding proposal to shift transportation from oil to nuclear energy and I fully endorse it.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. Congestion charges work in London, so why not?
Edited on Sun Apr-22-07 07:00 PM by depakid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. I was thinking the same thing. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
2. As a NYC dweller who takes public transportation to work every, I applaud this very loudly.
Edited on Sun Apr-22-07 07:07 PM by BrklynLiberal
I am amused by the objections of Garage Owners and those who say this is a problem for workers who are not close to public transportation.
Sorry, but I believe that is a crock of u-know-what.

Anyone who can afford to drive into Manhattan every day can afford to find their way to public transportation, or pay the access fee!!
I think the tolls for the Tunnels and Bridges should also be raised for those driving in/out during rush hours.

If someone MUST have their vehicle for their job, let there be permits, for a cost. It has been just too damn long that merely lip-service has been given to cutting down on the crowded traffic conditions, the added air-pollution and the general chaos that results from all the vehicular traffic that is in Manhattan every single day.

I am sick of sitting on an Express bus and watching all the single-passenger cars next to me. The drivers are usually drinking their coffee, READING THEIR PAPERS!!, gabbing on their handheld phones(totally illegal in NYC), or involved in some other distracting behavior while they are driving...if not simultaneously involved in more than one of the previously mentioned behaviours.

It is about time some very serious and meaningful action was taken to cut back on the horrendous traffic in Manhattan. I have no sympathy whatsoever for those who drive in every day. It is time to clear up the congestion, the pollution, and the wear-and-tear to the roads that is caused by the ridiculous volume of traffic every day.

The fees that are collected should go to the improvement of public transportation. There should be no excuse at all why someone would not prefer public transportation instead of driving.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Totally Agree
Also, NYC is doing a great job of going green. Already we create only one third of the pollution that the average American in this country contributes. We have 2.7% of the population but create 1% of the pollution. In addition, the Mayor said yesterday that they are going to introduce a tree planting program and put a tree in any place that can accommodate one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Moving in the right direction... I hope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smirkymonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Hear, hear! As a New Yorker, I am in complete agreement.
People are complaining that it's not fair to the "poor".

Newsflash: If you drive a car to Manhattan every day, you are not "poor". Take public transportation and quit whining.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
4. The problem with his proposal is it is elitist. Why not just put up a "full" sign at the
far end of the bridges when congestion gets bad and not allow in anymore auto traffic.

First come first serve and when the limit is reached, don't allow more cars in?

That would actually deal with congestion instead of just allowing congestion to continue as long as the congestors had the bucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Well, cars themselves are elitist.
Somehow I don't think people working in Manhattan at minimum wage are commuting to New York by car.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. I realize that. But charging and then allowing congestion anyway kind of defeats
the purpose, doesn't it?

If the full sign went up, everybody coming in would be doing so on public transportation, and that would relieve congestion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Not at all.
Edited on Sun Apr-22-07 08:13 PM by NNadir
This plan will clearly reduce congestion, since cars will become even more elitist than they already are.

Personally, if New York announced a plan to ban cars from midtown Manhattan, all cars, and to institute a system of trolleys, I would support it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Sounds great to me!!! Leave your cars at the door.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
21. That's a terribly impractical solution. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. It may be, but without saying why, it leaves me wondering why. The
problem with charging more is that if people pay it, there is just as much congestion.

If they want to do it just to extract more money, then it makes sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. It stands to reason that the revenue would be significant enough
to pay for Public Transportation upgrades. Kind of like 'carbon offsets'.

As for the shutting down of access to the city by car; the disruption would be profound. Imagine everyone trying to get in under the quota/deadline. It would certainly create all kinds of chaos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. The same would happen to a degree with the solution proposed in the OP.
People would try to get in before the "peak" hours, thus extending the "peak" hours.

Nothings perfect.

Private autos are going to be the death of this planet yet. Can you iomagine when eveyone in India and China have one or two?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. A book that will make you want to strangle someone: The Power Broker,
by Robert A. Caro, is the biography of Robert Moses, who was, among several other things, NYC Commissioner of Parks. Through his various official positions he was largely responsible for the shaping of modern NYC and its environs. Moses turned city planning away from mass transit, and did so in ways that will be almost impossible to reverse for a very long time (such as failing to acquire right-of-ways for rail lines, building bridges too low, etc.).

He was also profiled as "The Master Builder" on PBS's "The American Experience", which wasn't nearly long enough to cover the subject. Caro's book is a whopping 750,000 words (1100 pages), trimmed down from a million-word draft. And it is worth reading every word.

For those who will never find the time for all that reading, there's the Wiki entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Robert Moses was an elitist..if we are going to talk elitist.
Edited on Sun Apr-22-07 08:33 PM by BrklynLiberal
His ideas were totally aimed at automobiles and those with means. There were some very famous protests against his ideas in Manhattan. There were many neighborhoods he would have destroyed in order to make Manahaatan totally geared toward automobile traffic.

His plans used eminent domain to confiscate thousands fo good houses in order to fulfill his "dreams". Hundreds of good brick houses in Coney Island were condemned and their owners forced to take less than market value so he could build low income housing to move the people who would fill them, after they were moved out of the areas he wanted to develop.

His plans turned what should have been prime waterfront property in Coney Island and the Rockaways into desolate, bombed-out looking nieghborhoods. They ended up being used to build only low-income projects, or being left looking like a war had been fought there.

Now after decades on the decline, those areas are finally starting to come out of the ashes that were left by Robert Moses.

I heard that only one who could control him was Mayor LaGuardia, and after his death, Moses was uncontrollable.
He wanted a bridge where the Brklyn-Battery Tunnel is. Supposedly he had many enemies in the Federal govt. It was during WWII and his idea was killed with the excuse that a Bridge in that location would be a prime
target for the enemy...and perhaps be in the way if any of our ships had to go up the East River.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. I grew up on Long Island. All Long Islanders from my time know of Moses.
Many people in the 1950's thought him a great man, but really he irreversibly destroyed Long Island.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. His dreams became the nightmares of most other New Yorkers..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Sound Familiar
Edited on Sun Apr-22-07 09:14 PM by Me.
Moses. Cheney & * are cut from the same cloth

On edit: I love the fact that a woman took Moses down, may Nancy do the same with those other two
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Jane Jacobs is a heroine to many New Yorkers She was something else.
Edited on Sun Apr-22-07 10:00 PM by BrklynLiberal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobs%2C_Jane

As a tribute to Jacobs, the Rockefeller Foundation announced on February 9, 2007 the creation of the Jane Jacobs Medal, "to recognize individuals who have made a significant contribution to thinking about urban design, specifically in New York City."<6> From the mid 1950s to the mid 1960s, the foundation's Humanities Division sponsored an "Urban Design Studies" research program, of which Jacobs was the best known grantee.<7>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. And were exported to other cities as well.
The tangle of over- and underpasses in downtown Pittsburgh PA is the work of either Moses or engineers from his offices. He often served as a consultant to urban planners in other cities, which resulted in a sort of 'school' of urban planning where automobile traffic trumped all, and low-rent housing took the form of massive, cramped high-rises. It was mostly opposition from local protestors which turned the tide against this sort of "development".

According to the Wiki article, when Moses consulted on a project to build a freeway in New Orleans, he suggested an elevated expressway right through the French Quarter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-22-07 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
17. Paul Goodman proposed this -- and more -- in the late 1950s
Goodman, a major intellectual source of New Left ideas that would flower in the 1960s, proposed banning cars from Manhattan and building huge multi-level parking lots on unused land in north New Jersey, Long Island, etc. Public transit would complete the trip into the city.

Banning Cars from Manhattan was published in 1961 in Dissent.

Here is a link to the essay: Banning Cars from Manhattan

More about Paul Goodman on Wikipedia with links. Well worth reading. We would do well to rediscover his work in our coming era.

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YankeyMCC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
20. Maybe the idea will be revived for Boston too now nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
22. And charge according to vehicle size
The more road you take up, you more you have to pay. Service vehicles excluded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ramapo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-23-07 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
24. Fantastic but the fee s/b $20
Automobile use in much of Manhattan is absurd. Go sit in mid-town and just watch the futility of driving there. I often imagine how wonderful the place would be without private cars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ramapo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-24-07 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
27. Drivers are PO'd
Let the outrage begin...NJ & NY drivers are complaining loudly. I read that only the difference in the fee from the tolls would be collected (only a couple of dollars). The driving public is accustomed to massive subsidies that far exceed those given to mass transit. Ultimately there is no free lunch but just try convincing those who've been enjoying free eats for decades.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-24-07 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
28. "a network of cameras"
I was wondering where the catch was.

Anything in the name of "green" I guess.

The only entertainment you'll ever need; watching us come up with solutions to our problems, then trying to solve the consequences of those solutions. Around and around we go, never catching up, always chasing the tail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-24-07 11:20 AM
Response to Original message
29. Reaction in today's NYT letters section.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC