NEW YORK | Congestion Pricing

1 Like

Typical Post drivel.

1 Like

So essentially the author claims that parking garages help subsidize the cost of housing in NYC and (without them) housing will become more expensive.

If these parking garages go out of business maybe we can replace them with more housing? That would still be more tenants who can help spread out costs. It’s not like a parking garage is the ONLY thing that can exist there.

The core of NYC should house people, not cars.


Lawsuits galore!

Small business owners and elected officials announced an expanded class action lawsuit on the steps of City Hall.

The amended suit includes nearly 50 plaintiffs demanding a thorough environmental and economic impact study.

Congestion pricing would charge a $15 daytime fee for non-commercial passenger vehicles that use E-ZPass and $22.50 for non-E-ZPass drivers to enter Manhattan south of 60th Street.

The plaintiffs say the fee will slash business for restaurants by discouraging patrons and forcing small business owners to cut back on staff and hours.

1 Like

These people are such short-sighted, reactionary morons. Not only does this obviously ignore any other benefit from improved air quality, public transit effectiveness, and GHG reduction, but where the effect on ‘business’ has been studied, no such economic impact has been found.

Congestion Pricing: Long-Term Economic and Land-Use Effects (

Finally, we find that while retail production in the cordoned area decreases slightly
(0.008 percent), the effect is not significant for three reasons. First, customers like to shop near
home, so the density of residents in and near the cordoned area protects retail activity. Second,
retail firms in the core benefit from the lower costs of shopping travel resulting from decreased
congestion. Third, people primarily shop during the off-peak and the afternoon peak hours, when
the cordon is not in effect. The first and second reasons corroborate the arguments of proponents
of the London cordon, though the third suggests that the concern over the time window of the toll
was justified.

Central London Congestion Charging Impacts Monitoring, Sixth Annual Report (

The business and economic impacts of the original central London scheme have
been assessed in previous annual monitoring reports, leading TfL to conclude that
there had been no discernible effect on the central London economy.

General economic trends were seen to have been the predominant influence on
the performance of central London businesses over recent years, and the central
London economy had actually performed particularly strongly since the
introduction of congestion charging in 2003, which itself coincided with an
economic upturn.


Completely agree!

Whenever there’s an effort like this, there’s always a handful of business owners who start panicking because they think people can only physically reach their businesses by car. PEOPLE spend money at your stores, NOT CARS.

I can’t remember which town it was, but I remember reading about a small American city a few years back that instituted a pedestrian plaza type situation (I think it was one of those covid open streets programs). Anyway, businesses along the pedestrian friendly street saw an exponential increase in business, while stores on adjacent “car friendly” streets saw no change. The business owners on the car streets sued the town for the program because they claimed it was giving the other businesses an unfair advantage.

In other words, pedestrianizing the street worked TOO WELL so they had to get rid of it :roll_eyes:

1 Like

Question: If commuters exit from one of the tunnels or bridges and plan to go immediately to the FDR or West Street, can they avoid the toll if they follow the signage along the most direct route to do so? Of necessity, they will have to use streets in the congestion zone at times because direct ramps to the FDR and West Street do not exist for many routes.

So said the disgraced, former politician…

1 Like

Grasping at straws to appear even remotely popular -

1 Like

More people in support of congestion pricing showed up in the final public input session than opposers. Makes sense since this is something the city needs.


That ratio is meaningless.

The anti-congestion pricing people are the loudest most obnoxious group of crybabies the world has ever seen.

And policy is dictated by whoever is the loudest, not whoever has the most numbers.


Boo hoo.

1 Like