Ughh. This is the first visual image I’ve seen of what CP might LOOK like. All of these overhead structures?? Now I’m praying for two things: (1) the commission in its brilliance comes up with a less intrusive plan, and (2) the firm selected for the design includes landscape architects and is judged for its aesthetic sensitivity.

will more 7-Eleven’s be included in the plan? the city has far too few of them.

Did you give a DNA sample when you signed up for EZ-Pass? Metrocard? Absolute privacy is an illusion. I’m willing to let go of that illusion if it means less traffic.

Yes these will look ugly across 86th street. Put them instead on the free Harlem and East River bridges where they belong….and while you’re at it use the same devices to put back two-way tolls at all crossings to avoid toll-avoidance.

I’m not sure I get your points, #5 and #6. Are you actually saying that because privacy has been compromised in some parts of our lives that we should be complacent when it creeps into other parts?

Maybe that didn’t come out quite right. I probably should have said “…we should be complacent when it’s compromised in other parts?”

You probably understood that already, but just clarifying.

Spud: There is NO reason for your privacy to be compromised. You can have an anonymous meter for road use, just as you can purchase an anonymous pre-paid cell phone. Our 407 in Canada provides an anonymous meter at motorist’s election. What you should do, since congestion pricing is unavoidable, is to be sure your payment service provider provides this option. You can protect your privacy and your auto-mobility at the same time. Protecting the environment comes as a nice perk, as well.

Angus: in some jurisdictions (e.g. my country) it is illegal to be forced to pay extra for privacy. Hence we could not charge an extra 5 anything for that protection. We don’t think you should pay for privacy. We think it should be guaranteed.

I used to take your position “what do YOU have to hide”. I abandoned that because a significant portion of people are genuinely concerned. And we need to solve congestion, not people’s distrust of government. The latter being a difficult and often well-placed emotion.

Pay what you use. Drive private. These are not mutually exclusive.

(Also, sometimes packing 2 pounds of steel is far worse than piloting two tons…

Hilary:
There is no on-street infrastructure required. There is an EZPass-sized meter on your windscreen. All telecommunication to the pricing center is encrypted and either private (if you opted to save money with pay-as-you-drive insurance) or anonymous (if you opted to pre-pay).

Enforcement is via random, mobile, moveable, or handheld license plate recognition. If your meter’s green light is on (paid-up and working) your plate number is not required. If not (no meter, not paid, broken), then your plate number is used to bill you (citation) through the mail. Guests (tourists) purchase a guess pass by the day/week so that their plate is passed without citation.

And, yes, we can park vehicles by the minute and if you overstay an on-street time limit you can pay an escalated per-minute fee RATHER than get a parking ticket. How much nicer is that? IN fact we can GIVE you a parking credit for NOT driving during rush hour. So go earlier, later, car-pool, telework or transit and get free parking to shop on the weekend. Lots of benefits.

I’d probably be willing to fight for your privacy too, Angus, if I just knew what the heck you’re talking about.

Motorists already have a close eye being kept on them — they’re licensed, their cars are registered and have to display license tags and registration stickers, their cars are inspected annually, and detailed histories of their driving records are maintained by government and insurance companies alike. But that’s a far cry from monitoring their actual whereabouts from minute to minute. I can voluntarily choose to use EZ Pass at a bridge or tunnel knowing that my travel will be recorded in some database somewhere, but I can also choose not to use EZ Pass. But drive into the CP zone and you’re recorded no matter what.

Bern, congestion pricing is “unavoidable????” HA! That’s funny. Are you familiar with how these things work in New York State?

Angus: thanks for clarification (#18). I also have privacy concerns, hence the design/use of anonymous methods. Thanks also for writing under a real name. I am always amused at the correlation of people who alarmed by privacy re road pricing and the use of apparent pseudonyms. My belief is that more people are concerned about loss of free roads than they are of privacy. When people can have lower insurance rates (which cannot be anonymous), they generally settle for “mere” privacy. It’s all about money.

An aside to my congestion pricing comments:
Car pooling is one of those old silver bullets that doesn’t do much in NYC beyond our already high vehicle occupancy rate, because we’re not a big company town with a large pool of people with similar hours, lifestyles and origins. If we’re looking for alternatives, stringent parking controls and parking pricing could probably cut auto use as much as the Mayor’s plan–and, in any case, is a necessaary commapnion.

The main issue is that the Mayor’s twin goals of reducing congestion and improving transit can best be accomplished by taking advantage (as Stockholm has done) of our limited portals to Manhattan below 60th Street (48 inbound lanes vs 1,020 under the Mayor’s plan). Installing E-ZPass readers on the 16 untolled bridge lanes is a cinch. Limit high tech monitors to the 32 lanes along a 60th Street cordon (river to river). This could be done for less than the $10.1 million in federal funds. The simpler, easy-to-understand system would not only reduce congestion in Manhattan–it would cut wasted travel time citywide by nearly 10%. Most of all, avoiding the high cost of operating and enforcing a system 20 times more complex system would at least double net revenues for transit. We cannot squander this last untapped source of transit funds because the initial lure of keeping up with other cities high tech networks seemed the easy way out of the perceived bridge toll taboo.

I think the idea of congestion pricing is OK.. I think mayor Bloombergs plan is horrible.

If he wants to eliminate cars during the day.. he should do the following..

The City sould institute a HOV system like they have on highways.. Either three or four passengers to a car.

People could buy monthy passes like they do with metro cards or easy pass.

Violators could be fined anywhere from $250 -1,000. They can post signs prominently on all river crossings… and in the Bronx, Queens & Staten Island… for those coming in from Jersey. .there can be signs by the Holland & Lincoln tunnel..

I don’t think you should disrupt truck traffic.. we have to have commerce…

Not to mention that I secretly dream it will be possible to expand the congestion-charging zone to include downtown Brooklyn and Atlantic Yards some day. This would also stop the problems with Court, Smith and Henry Streets being used for overflow from the BQE (which would presumably be free).

Oh, does this diagram mean that they are going to build more Seven Elevens too?

Hopefully this thing goes through. Hopefully it get old real quick and new initiatives are started.