Tuesday, May 8, 2007

An opinion on congestion pricing

In a time where we are struggling, as a city and as an economy, with the issue of affordable housing, when dedicated middle class housing developments are being bought by speculators for billions of dollars and when the state is revaluating its role in subsidizing market-rate residential development, should we be codifying prejudice against our outer-borough neighbors? No.

Without Money in the City

New York City is in danger of losing itself. Our city is rich, almost beyond measure, but we're supposed to be rich in a "I still buy my coffee from the cart on the corner" and "I buy paper towels in bulk" sort of way. Congestion pricing just isn't us. It's a mistake.

Here's more from NY Press:

Congestion Question

Map from NY Press

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

It has become a sin, perhaps almost "illegal", to be of a poorer class in NYC! "Only the wealthy need apply" to become New York County (Manhattan) residents!

Imagine the "balls" of our imperial Mayor (S.P.Q.R.) Bloomberg's administration in trying to create an economic...... pricing "moat" around elite Manhattan....the playground for the wealthy!

Memo to Mayor Mike:

You can't penalize the less fortunate (in the outer boroughs) for being financially not up to snuff with your caliber of people. If you force them out of the city.....who's left to wipe your royal asses?

Anonymous said...

Maybe I'm not getting something, but I don't see how congestion pricing is such a bother for us outer borough folk. I don't own a car, I take public transportation when I go into Manhattan and frankly I would rather there be LESS car traffic in Manhattan so people aren't always running me over when I try to cross the street. Congestion pricing will mostly effect Jersey, Westchester, CT and Long Island people who drive into the city are too lazy/entitled to take public transit.

The more people that use public transit the better, for our city's (more investment in the MTA) and our environments sake.

Taxpayer said...

Anonymous said...
"You can't penalize the less fortunate (in the outer boroughs) for being financially not up to snuff with your caliber of people. If you force them out of the city.....who's left to wipe your royal asses?"

Excellent point, but for a single trifle. Bloomberg and his cocktail party "precious people" have no caliber. "Caliber" implies some capacity for quality.

Bloomberg is a small bore merchant without imagination or decency. He actually believes that possession of money is an indicator of superiority. This is a boor who surrounds himself with sycophants who laugh at him.

In his super-arrogance, Bloomberg will be unable to admit defeat and drop this moronic "congestion pricing plan".

We can inform him of our own plans by writing, or phoning out opinions to him. He'll have a yes-man read them to him.

Jeremy Kareken said...

Okay, as one of the "less fortunate" in Queens county (I disagree, natch), I think congestion pricing's a good idea. And it's an idea whose time may have come - IF AND ONLY IF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVES IN QUEENS. I'm lucky enough to live in Western Queens, near some nice trains, but even they are frequently down. Witness the 7 lately?! But those who live in less MTA served areas are going to be screwed by this, unless they build car-ports in LIC instead of more "Luxury Condos," improved bus service, and better access to ferries.

It's become a public safety issue in Manhattan, where ambulances and fire-engines can't move for gridlock, where Single-divorcee-SUVs take up valuable delivery-truck space.

I'd call Bloomy "imperial" on this, except the man doesn't drive, himself. I frequently see he and his coterie on the subway. I think that's pretty special, and I support the man, apart from his DUMBASS HANDLING OF THE CON-ED CRISIS LAST YEAR!!

Anonymous said...

The Economist last week came out with a review of the pricing for Central London and called it an unqualified success.

As long as we have a policty of open borders, and refuse the obvious by having only two kids per couple, you are going to get more and more pressure on housing and resources.

Tough. I have no sympathy for you. We all have the choice to grow up after finding out about the tooth fairy.

The earth and its resources are finite. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Zero population growth.

Anonymous said...

Belive me, if this did not have the potential to put a crimp on development it would not make a ripple in the press.

Make people pay through their nose for development. It is the only way we can stop it.

JK said...

If people started building UP, instead of OUT, they wouldn't live so damn far away from where they work and maybe would have a decent access to a subway line and the buses here in Queens wouldn't be so convoluted and slow. With less sprawl, more express buses and more frequent subways, this wouldn't have become a problem.

Here's a message to someone who wants to make some money. Build a 10 or so story spiral parking garage by one or two of the major stops, like Jamaica or Roosevelt Ave and ask the city for direct access to the station. You'll make a killing from all those who insist on living out in the boonies.

Anonymous said...

If people started building UP, instead of OUT, they wouldn't live so damn far away from where they work and maybe would have a decent access to a subway line and the buses here in Queens wouldn't be so convoluted and slow.

Yes, 2.2 million people will fit in LIC. Rolling on the floor laughing...

JK said...

You roll on the floor all you like while paying 8 bucks to drive to work (plus the daytime garage cost) or spend half an hour driving somewhere near the subway just so you can spend half an hour looking for a parking space so you can go commute for another half an hour. The rest of us who don't want to waste quite that much time or money will continue to hope that more tall buildings go up near a train (that we can afford, mind you) so we don't smack into you while you're lying on Northern Blvd in hysterics.

Anonymous said...

No everyone can afford to live near a train. Living near a train usually means higher rent.

Anonymous said...

Not only that, but people choose where to live based primarily on things such as liking the aesthetics of the neighborhood, the sense of community, the proximity of good schools nearby. Not because a certain number of items are checked off on a checklist like "parking garage," "subway stop," etc.

Anonymous said...

"First poster" says....you're missing the point. I'm not advocating for air pollution with increased traffic anywhere.

I'm sarcastically saying... let Manhattan-ites choke on the same fumes that some of our already congested Queens neighborhoods have to breathe!

Why should they get special treatment?

And, by the way, I haven't owned or driven a car since 1971.

I use the MTA exclusively.

Anonymous said...

"Jeremy" you're off base on a couple of things.

When Bloomberg travels he's got at least 2 bodyguards with him at all times. Try getting near him. I tried to say "hello" once and nearly got clobbered! That "subway bit"....strictly "noblese oblige"!

Similarly....Marie Antoinette (at Les Pettite Trianon....I hoped I spelled that right) dressed herself up like a milk maid in the finest silks .....carrying solid gold milk pails to her "model farm" in the pretext of "getting on down" to a "simpler form of life"! Bah! A "hobby" for the super-rich!

Put those car ports in Manhattan! Why even think of the LIC waterfront as one big "car park"?

Other than that...you're OK in my book. I hate gas guzzling fume spraying cars as well!

Anonymous said...

Maybe we need some "congestion pricing" in downtown Flushing to discourage over-building and clean up the air quality!