With federal approval of New York’s environmental assessment, most of the federal, state, and local obstacles to New York City’s cordon pricing plan — which almost everyone erroneously calls a congestion pricing plan — have been removed. But there is still one more: New Jersey is suing to stop the plan because New Jersey residents would pay a large share of the costs yet get few of the benefits. As several New Jersey legislators have accurately pointed out, the plan “is nothing more than a cash grab” aimed at helping to close the deficit of the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and specifically the subway system, which New Jersey drivers would rarely use.
Save money by staying out of the orange zone.
The plan calls for charging anyone who drives into Manhattan south of 60th street between 6 am and 10 pm to pay $23. This is expected to earn $1 billion a year, all of which would go to the MTA to help cover its $2.5 billion annual deficit. Low-income people would be able to use the amount they pay as a tax credit, but if they are low income they probably aren’t paying much in taxes. New Jersey residents would pay the $23 instead of, not on top of, existing tolls, which effectively increases their cost of entry into Manhattan by 56 percent. Taxi and other for-hire drivers would pay the fee just once a day even if they recross the cordon several times.
This is not a true congestion pricing plan. True congestion pricing varies the fee by the amount of congestion. While the cordon pricing plan calls for lower fees at night, Manhattan, like other places, has more congestion in the early morning and early evening hours than mid-day or, say, 8 pm to 10 pm. A more variable fee would lead some people to travel earlier or later in order to avoid the peak fees, thus spreading out traffic. Fees should also vary by roadway, not for an entire district.
While the MTA points to London’s cordon pricing as a great success, the New York Post calls London’s program a “disaster.” The Post points out that, several years after adopting the plan, London now is rated at having worse congestion than New York City. In fact, INRIX rates London’s as the worst in the world as it costs the average motorist 155 hours of wasted time per year, compared with 117 for New York.
Cordon pricing may produce a one-time-only reduction in traffic. But in an area where traffic is growing, cordon pricing won’t stop it from becoming congested again. Research has found that cordon pricing will persuade some employers to move out of a cordoned district, while it may encourage some residents to move in. If this happens, then New York subway riders from the outer boroughs into Manhattan will decline, thus defeating the purpose of propping up the subway system.
While New Jersey officials fret about the impacts of the cordon pricing plan on New Jersey commuters, I suspect the state wouldn’t have objected to increased tolls if they had been cut in on a share of the revenues. MTA really doesn’t have any money to share, but if New Jersey’s lawsuit proves to have any traction in court, it will probably agree to give New Jersey a portion of the increased tolls from the Holland and Lincoln tunnels.
NJ shouldn’t be too upset about this. It serves as a huge disincentive for businesses to operate in Manhattan, hopefully pushing some of them into office parks in NJ instead. I have no idea why businesses continue to agglomerate in Manhattan anyway, which is costly in terms of congestion.
How is any of the information you presented useful? You state that congestion in London post congestion pricing is worse than NYC and quote a dome newspaper articles. Wouldn’t the common sense approach be to compare congestion in London pre and post congestion pricing?
Sketter,
Good point. According to INRIX, New York congestion was much worse than London’s before 2020. London overtook New York in 2021 and is much worse today. Was this due to differences in COVID responses? Or did the cordon pricing have anything to do with it? It is hard to say, but my prediction is that cordon pricing has a one-time reduction in congestion but does nothing to curtail congestion growth, while true congestion price does prevent congestion growth. The INRIX data seem to support that.
If you check twitter, a lot of “urbanist” already know this won’t fix congestion. It’s really just a cash grab to fund the MTA similar to the “congestion fee” the MTA applies to all Uber/ride sharing rides.
You still haven’t compared congestion in London before and after congestion pricing was implemented. That would make the most sense so you can predict congestion in lower Manhattan before and after the policy is implemented.
Here’s kicker Cordon Fee’s
It’s a charge for Existing in what you created.
Fee’s exist for lots of reasons.
Cordon fee will inevitably fail.
New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority has about $40 billion in debt; it has a $60 billion maintenance backlog; plus it has more than $20 billion in unfunded health care obligations….
Even a new Billion dollars a year wont accomplish anything to help alleviate that.The Congestion Charge in London is a £15 daily charge if you drive within the Congestion Charge zone 7:00- 6:00pm Monday-Friday and 12:00-6:00pm Sat-Sun and bank holidays. No charge between Christmas Day and New Year’s Day bank holiday (inclusive).
On the plus side, Nitrous emissions fell 15% (1/6th)
Particulate emissions fell 23%
https://www.thecity.nyc/manhattan/2023/8/9/23826175/congestion-pricing-scanners-broadway-lawsuit
This quote from the article is so sad – my heart is breaking for this man.
“If things keep going up like that and they start adding extra fees, I’ll just have to take the train some days,” said Nick Zaffuto, a Long Island motorist who was sitting in his parked car Tuesday along 59th Street. “I personally like to drive, but some days it just might be more feasible for me to take the train.”
Janehavisham,
You are right. Cordon fees are more about social engineering than relieving congestion because government planners know best how we should behave.
Antiplanner, it’s such a tragedy if someone has to switch from driving to taking the train. Oh the humanity!
Janehavisham,
Driving is far better than public transit. Having your movement controlled by transit agencies, government bureaucrats, and politicians is a sad reality. I once lived in Manhattan and I wouldn’t wish being transit-dependent on anyone.
https://nypost.com/2023/08/21/new-york-loses-1-trillion-in-wall-street-business-as-firms-flee-report/
WordPress_ anonymous, I heard that many cities these days are forcing drivers to stay on the right side of the road, is that true? Something about “two way” streets or some other urbanist fad that the government bureaucrats invented. I heard the UK is different, not sure if it’s better, though.
janehavisham,
I’m unable to decipher your response. But the reality is that driving is far better. When the MTA cut night service in 2020, night-time movement essentially ended in many parts of NYC. What’s also interesting is how much faster cars are than the MTA, despite the MTA receiving so much hype. The only time driving and the MTA travel time converge is at the peak of rush hour.