Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Bloomberg Memorial Tunnel, $8 Manhattan Toll

1 view
Skip to first unread message

JG

unread,
Apr 21, 2007, 2:15:43 PM4/21/07
to
This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8
congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.
On the city's traffic-clogged arteries Friday, Bloomberg was not a
popular guy.

"Next thing he's gonna charge us to cross the street," one driver
said.
....the mayor is expected to outline an ambitious agenda for his final
32 months in office. He'll propose a new $7.5 billion freight tunnel
under the Hudson River, and call for the construction of 250,000 new
homes.

TCB, unlike Rudy Clintiounni...JG

Scott M. Kozel

unread,
Apr 21, 2007, 2:36:11 PM4/21/07
to
JG <jgro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8
> congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.

Not unless the state government in Albany approves the scheme.


--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

Free Lunch

unread,
Apr 21, 2007, 2:37:52 PM4/21/07
to
On 21 Apr 2007 11:15:43 -0700, in misc.transport.road
JG <jgro...@hotmail.com> wrote in
<1177179343.1...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:

I wonder if Brooklyn will be allowed to secede if that happens.

Stephane Dumas

unread,
Apr 22, 2007, 10:27:02 AM4/22/07
to

"JG" <jgro...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
1177179343.1...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Maybe we should take a new look on the proposed Lomdex and Mid-Manhattan
expressways
http://www.nycroads.com/roads/lower-manhattan/
http://www.nycroads.com/roads/mid-manhattan/

Stéphane Dumas


dougwi...@yahoo.com

unread,
Apr 22, 2007, 1:49:31 PM4/22/07
to
On Apr 22, 10:27 am, "Stephane Dumas" <stephdu...@NOSPAMvideotron.ca>
wrote:
> "JG" <jgrov...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> 1177179343.156354.164...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...> This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8

> > congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.
> > On the city's traffic-clogged arteries Friday, Bloomberg was not a
> > popular guy.
>
> > "Next thing he's gonna charge us to cross the street," one driver
> > said.
> > ....the mayor is expected to outline an ambitious agenda for his final
> > 32 months in office. He'll propose a new $7.5 billion freight tunnel
> > under the Hudson River, and call for the construction of 250,000 new
> > homes.
>
> > TCB, unlike Rudy Clintiounni...JG
>
> Maybe we should take a new look on the proposed Lomdex and Mid-Manhattan
> expresswayshttp://www.nycroads.com/roads/lower-manhattan/http://www.nycroads.com/roads/mid-manhattan/
>
> Stéphane Dumas

Alas, his proposal contains NOTHING of the sort, despite the advances
in tunnelng technology.

It's not about environmentalism, but rather the political funding-
e.g. with the highest concentration of such donars living alongside
Central Park.

It's doctrine is that to push the problem away, so that the policy-
maker elitists (including Wall Street) do not have to smell the
concentrated pollution at a tunnel portal that would otherwise serve
as a great advertisement and inducement for electric automobiles, at
least with serial hybrids.

Think about the security debacle of the outright cancellation of the
9A West Street Tunnel, which was to protect the WTC area from truck
bombs, owing to Goldman Sachs opposition to spending $1 billion to
extend it north by a block or so, though which gave $16 billion in the
last fiscal year to its executives.

One can only come to a very unfortunate conclusion about the nature of
planning in Manhattan.

Douglas A. Willinger
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com


rsh...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 22, 2007, 1:58:30 PM4/22/07
to
On Apr 21, 2:36 pm, "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:

> JG <jgrov...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8
> > congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.
>
> Not unless the state government in Albany approves the scheme.
>
> --


So Scott,

Tell me how you really feel.

I think $8 is not nearly enough. $50 for each and every car and
light truck and $1000 for semis. It is time to get serious about
Manhattan congestion, and the use of the streets esp by commercial
vehicle FOR FREE.

And it is time to end the Canal Street FREEWAY bet Brooklyn and the
Holland Tun.

No business rents a store in Manhattan for nothing. Look at the way
rents have been escalating for the last 50 years.

Why should trucks and comm veh have a free ride?

NYC has to operate and maintain the streets and traffic systems. Plus
there are other costs. As I said it is time to get serious.

I know you are going to say, oh, look at the costs on those poor
trucks, etc.

Let me explain something to you. There is plenty of business in
Manhattan, plenty of consumers. But the bottom line is there is a
huge amount of money in Manhattan and NYC in general. That is the
reason it is the number one market in the USA. As I said, look at
rents. Do you know anything about what comm rent is in Manhattan?

Why would a business pay that sort of rent? Do you have any idea what
those stores in Penn Station or Grand Central pay for rent? Because
there are thousands of consumers feet passing through there. I can
assure you that even with super high rents, they make money because
they are there month after month.

Now, let's have at it.

Take care, Randy in S Dade, FL


Free Lunch

unread,
Apr 22, 2007, 5:32:59 PM4/22/07
to
On 22 Apr 2007 10:58:30 -0700, in misc.transport.road
"pigst...@yahoo.com" <rsh...@gmail.com> wrote in
<1177264710.3...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:

>On Apr 21, 2:36 pm, "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> JG <jgrov...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8
>> > congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.
>>
>> Not unless the state government in Albany approves the scheme.
>>
>> --
>
>
>So Scott,
>
>Tell me how you really feel.
>
>I think $8 is not nearly enough. $50 for each and every car and
>light truck and $1000 for semis. It is time to get serious about
>Manhattan congestion, and the use of the streets esp by commercial
>vehicle FOR FREE.
>
>And it is time to end the Canal Street FREEWAY bet Brooklyn and the
>Holland Tun.
>
>No business rents a store in Manhattan for nothing. Look at the way
>rents have been escalating for the last 50 years.
>
>Why should trucks and comm veh have a free ride?

Because landlords prefer to get the money. If vehicles had to pay more,
the value of the property, particularly retail property, to the
landlords would decrease.

Free Lunch

unread,
Apr 22, 2007, 5:35:46 PM4/22/07
to
On 22 Apr 2007 10:49:31 -0700, in misc.transport.road
"dougwi...@yahoo.com" <dougwi...@yahoo.com> wrote in
<1177264171.2...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>:

In most cities, if your mayor was a billionaire, he would be the richest
man in town. In NYC, he's just another wannabe.

I'd love to see a Brooklyn-Jersey tunnel, but I don't expect it to
happen.

rsh...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 22, 2007, 6:45:52 PM4/22/07
to
On Apr 22, 5:32 pm, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On 22 Apr 2007 10:58:30 -0700, in misc.transport.road
> "pigsty1...@yahoo.com" <rshe...@gmail.com> wrote in
> <1177264710.376708.114...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:

>
>
>
> >On Apr 21, 2:36 pm, "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> JG <jgrov...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8
> >> > congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.
>
> >> Not unless the state government in Albany approves the scheme.
>
> >> --
>
> >So Scott,
>
> >Tell me how you really feel.
>
> >I think $8 is not nearly enough. $50 for each and every car and
> >light truck and $1000 for semis. It is time to get serious about
> >Manhattan congestion, and the use of the streets esp by commercial
> >vehicle FOR FREE.
>
> >And it is time to end the Canal Street FREEWAY bet Brooklyn and the
> >Holland Tun.
>
> >No business rents a store in Manhattan for nothing. Look at the way
> >rents have been escalating for the last 50 years.
>
> >Why should trucks and comm veh have a free ride?
>
> Because landlords prefer to get the money. If vehicles had to pay more,
> the value of the property, particularly retail property, to the
> landlords would decrease.
>

Do you really believe that? Manhattan land values DECREASING. It
takes a stock market crash for that to happen,
see Oct 1987. And if you look over the last 20 years, what a comeback
they have made.

As long as there are millions and millions of people with millions of
dollars to spend in Manhattan, that is what makes real estate so
valuable. The amounts I have mentioned are so teeny tiny. Again I
say, why should comm veh, or any vehicles have free rent on the cities
streets.


Take care, Randy in S dade, FL

rsh...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 22, 2007, 7:03:53 PM4/22/07
to
On Apr 22, 1:49 pm, "dougwill2...@yahoo.com" <dougwill2...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> On Apr 22, 10:27 am, "Stephane Dumas" <stephdu...@NOSPAMvideotron.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > ....the mayor is expected to outline an ambitious agenda for his final
> > > 32 months in office. He'll propose a new $7.5 billion freight tunnel
> > > under the Hudson River,

It is NOT happening. There is no neighborhood that will accept it and
the associated trucks, plus the Port Auth will not finance it, and the
city and MTA with the 2nd ave subway are tied up. Again, it is not
happening.

and call for the construction of 250,000 new
> > > homes.

This I hope does. It would be a good thing.

>
> > Maybe we should take a new look on the proposed Lomdex and Mid-Manhattan

> > expresswayshttp://www.nycroads.com/roads/lower-manhattan/http://www.nycroads.com...


>
> > Stéphane Dumas
>
> Alas, his proposal contains NOTHING of the sort, despite the advances
> in tunnelng technology.
>
> It's not about environmentalism, but rather the political funding-
> e.g. with the highest concentration of such donars living alongside
> Central Park.
>

If that is true, then why did Bella Abzug lose in her run for Congress
in the Upper East Side to a Repub. And the Repub iirc, won
reelection.


> It's doctrine is that to push the problem away, so that the policy-
> maker elitists (including Wall Street) do not have to smell the
> concentrated pollution at a tunnel portal that would otherwise serve
> as a great advertisement and inducement for electric automobiles, at
> least with serial hybrids.
>

I have to believe you know better then that. It is far from smell.
Soot from deisel engines, ill effects from pollution in general.


> Think about the security debacle of the outright cancellation of the
> 9A West Street Tunnel, which was to protect the WTC area from truck
> bombs, owing to Goldman Sachs opposition to spending $1 billion to
> extend it north by a block or so, though which gave $16 billion in the
> last fiscal year to its executives.
>
> One can only come to a very unfortunate conclusion about the nature of
> planning in Manhattan.
>

Mr Willinger, Ms Dumas:

politics is everything in NYC, and I do mean everything. As long as
cars and trucks esp have internal combustion engines emitting
pollution, you are going to have opposition to any new roads, tunnels,
etc in NYC. It is not a question of planning, it is a question of
politics. And in NYC the opposition has a lot of money to spend.

The feeling in NYC is if you are going to spend billions on something,
it had better be mass transit. That is why you are going to get a 2nd
ave subway.

You can complain all you want about priorities, but this was settled
years ago and it is DEAD, period.

My suggestion would be to focus on a waterborn tunnel for the
Gowanus. That I think is the best idea, and the Gowanus is in
horrible shape. There is nothing to argue about on this one, they
should start tomorrow, if not sooner.

Take care, Randy in S Dade, FL


GK

unread,
Apr 24, 2007, 8:00:26 AM4/24/07
to
pigst...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Apr 21, 2:36 pm, "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> JG <jgrov...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8
>>> congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.
>> Not unless the state government in Albany approves the scheme.
>>
>> --
>
>
> So Scott,
>
> Tell me how you really feel.
>
> I think $8 is not nearly enough. $50 for each and every car and
> light truck and $1000 for semis. It is time to get serious about
> Manhattan congestion, and the use of the streets esp by commercial
> vehicle FOR FREE.
>
> And it is time to end the Canal Street FREEWAY bet Brooklyn and the
> Holland Tun.
>
> Now, let's have at it.
>
> Take care, Randy in S Dade, FL
>
>
There needs to be free access between NJ and Long Island forever, and it
goes right through Manhattan. I sincerely hope that will never change.
Otherwise NYC will toll its way out of existence.
What business is going to locate in NYC if they can't get shipments
delivered or customers in & out due to congestion pricing.

Stupid idea all the way around.

Manhattan is right in the middle between Long Island and the test of
North America, so that cross town traffic must continue to be accommodated.

GK

Mike Tantillo

unread,
Apr 24, 2007, 11:55:58 AM4/24/07
to
On Apr 24, 2:00 pm, GK <ontheair...@atverizon.net> wrote:

> pigsty1...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Apr 21, 2:36 pm, "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> JG <jgrov...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> This weekend Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to introduce an $8
> >>> congestion fee for drivers who enter Manhattan below 86th Street.
> >> Not unless the state government in Albany approves the scheme.
>
> >> --
>
> > So Scott,
>
> > Tell me how you really feel.
>
> > I think $8 is not nearly enough. $50 for each and every car and
> > light truck and $1000 for semis. It is time to get serious about
> > Manhattan congestion, and the use of the streets esp by commercial
> > vehicle FOR FREE.

I disagree. $8 is enough to make people reconsider frivolous trips
and think twice about whether or not to drive into the city vs. take a
train, but you can't make it prohibitively expensive.

>
> > And it is time to end the Canal Street FREEWAY bet Brooklyn and the
> > Holland Tun.

It already has been ended by a truck ban at the Holland Tunnel. 59th
St. Bridge to Lincoln Tunnel is still popular though.

>
> > Now, let's have at it.
>
> > Take care, Randy in S Dade, FL
>
> There needs to be free access between NJ and Long Island forever, and it
> goes right through Manhattan. I sincerely hope that will never change.
> Otherwise NYC will toll its way out of existence.
> What business is going to locate in NYC if they can't get shipments
> delivered or customers in & out due to congestion pricing.
>

Actually, Long Island traffic can (and mostly is) accomodated via the
Bronx and the GWB, or the Verrazano Bridge. At least any driver with
the slightest bit of a brain will go those ways, which despite having
heavy traffic, is a relative breeze to trying to get across midtown
Manhattan. I know of hardly any Long Islanders (Nassau and Suffolk
Counties), who would consider driving across midtown at anytime other
than the middle of the night. According to many proposals I've seen,
NYC residents would receive a discount, with residents of the
congestion charge zone receiving a very steep discount. Additionally,
the fee could be variable or only charged at certain times of the
day. This would help accomodate Brooklyn and Queens residents who
live too close to Manhattan to effectively detour around it, and could
also allow free access in the middle of the night or other off peak
times.

I sincerely hope the free-for-all with regard to Manhattan access goes
away, and soon. Congestion is strangling commerce in Manhattan, and
this is a good way to remove some of that congestion by eliminating
frivolous or unnecessary trips through the CBD. Why anyone would want
to drive there when they don't have to is beyond me. When I'm walking
someplace, I usually avoid a crowded place if at all possible even if
it involves a little detour.

Businesses locate to NYC now because it is the biggest business market
in America. It is arguably the capital of the world, given the
presense of the UN, and the capital of capitalism, given the financial
institutions located in the city. That isn't going to change. The
vast vast majority of customers to any NYC business arrive by a method
other than a private auto...train, ferry, bus, subway, taxi, or on
foot to name a few. So I doubt businesses would suddenly lose their
customers. In fact, their customers, the vast majority of whom depend
on mass transit or walking, might find it easier to get there if the
streets aren't as congested. Busses and taxis can actually get to
their destinations faster with less congested streets. Deliveries to
businesses may be impacted somewhat. But when you count the cost of
fuel, shipping, etc., $8 isn't too bad. In fact, if the congestion
pricing works the way it is supposed to, there will be discount
periods where the fee is much less. This would encourage shippers to
make deliveries in the middle of the night, when it makes the most
sense to do so since the streets are emptiest. Businesses will want
to go out opf their way to accomodate shipments at odd hours, since it
might be cheaper.

Anyone who thinks this is a bad idea should check out what they do in
the center of some European cities. They don't charge a congestion
fee (meaning anyone who chooses to pay can enter), but they just flat
out ban non-essential traffic from the city center at certain times.
In Italy, its called a ZTL (zona traffica limitado, or traffic limited
zone), and usually only busses, taxis, emergency vehicles, and
residents' vehicles are given unlimited access. All other vehicles
are restricted to certain times of the day. In Rome, the ban on cars
is in effect from 6AM to 8PM on weekdays, and I think from 10PM to 3AM
on Saturday and Friday nights. Trucks are only allowed to make
deliveries at certain times of the day. There is a huge difference in
the amount of traffic on one side of the cordon and the other. The
effect is that it is actually pleasant to walk through the city
center, and busses/transit moves freely. Part of the problem is not
just vehicle congestion but the lack of parking as well, which is why
a taxi wins over a private auto in this case.

Anyway, that was a long winded answer, but in general, I think we
should try to reduce the amount of traffic within city centers that
were designed for walking/transit (NYC, Boston, San Francisco, etc),
however that method should be something that is open to everyone to
participate (such as a fee as opposed to the residency restrictions in
Italy's ZTL's). The congestion fee meets those objectives. And
before anyone brings up poor people, the vast majority of poor people
cannot afford a car in NYC, let alone parking rates....they take
transit, like just about everyone else. Their transit experience
would be enhanced by a congestion fee since the busses will be more
reliable.

> Stupid idea all the way around.

Anyone not from NYC would probably think its a stupid idea, especially
people who think everyone drives everywhere in NYC like in the rest of
the country. This is clearly not the case. Mr. GK, I'm not implying
that you do not know what you are talking about here, but I'm pointing
out, in general, why someone not familiar with NYC might think this is
a stupid idea. So don't take it personally, I know you are quite
familiar with NYC.

>
> Manhattan is right in the middle between Long Island and the test of
> North America, so that cross town traffic must continue to be accommodated.

Long Islanders do not, in general, drive across Manhattan, especially
at the peak congestion periods.

Ultimately, NYC has a congestion problem. Some tough decisions may
have to be made to solve the congestion problems...and some of these
decisions would very likely be asinine decisions in any other city in
America, but given the high transit usage in NYC, I think some strange
things could actually work here.

>
> GK- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Rothman

unread,
Apr 24, 2007, 12:45:16 PM4/24/07
to

Streets are meant to be used. Seems to me those that are for extreme
pricing schemes ($50 per car, e.g.) want empty streets.

rsh...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 24, 2007, 5:51:38 PM4/24/07
to
On Apr 24, 8:00 am, GK <ontheair...@atverizon.net> wrote:

Why do you believe this? Nothing is free and you know it. You might
like free access, but it is not truly free. Someone is paying for
it. Who said anything about businesses not having truck deliveries?
You are being rediculous, really rediculous. Now if you would cut the
emotionalism, please, we could have a civil discussion..

It is 2007, not 1957. Those days are gone forever. Are commercial
rents the same as they were then? Of course not. Businesses will
adjust. I already asked the question. Why do those businesses in
Penn Station and Grand Central pay those huge rents? Month after
month after month. Because they make money.

And how do you figure it is free today? How do you go from NJ to LI
without paying a toll? Let me ask you this. If you were going from
LI to NJ, during the day and the Verrazano was doing well, but the
Canal Street Freeway was in horrid shape as it so often is, you
wouldn't pay the toll to make it back quicker and easier?

Sancho Panza

unread,
Apr 25, 2007, 1:38:09 AM4/25/07
to

"GK" <onthe...@atverizon.net> wrote in message
news:ujmXh.4101$A72.3098@trnddc07...

> There needs to be free access between NJ and Long Island forever, and it
> goes right through Manhattan. I sincerely hope that will never change.
> Otherwise NYC will toll its way out of existence.
> What business is going to locate in NYC if they can't get shipments
> delivered or customers in & out due to congestion pricing.
>
> Stupid idea all the way around.
>
> Manhattan is right in the middle between Long Island and the test of North
> America, so that cross town traffic must continue to be accommodated.

Is Staten Island chopped liver or what?


GK

unread,
Apr 25, 2007, 5:48:11 AM4/25/07
to
pigst...@yahoo.com wrote:

> And how do you figure it is free today? How do you go from NJ to LI
> without paying a toll?

One toll only per round trip from NJ to LI is either east thru Staten
Island, Goethals Bridge, toll free direction on Verrazzano Bridge or
Holland Tunnel, Grand St, Delancey St, Wiliamsburg Bridge, then
westbound return on LIE, BQE, Williamsburg Br, Delancey St, Broome St,
Holland Tunnel, and your back in the USA. I've done it probably
thousands of times.

Let me ask you this. If you were going from
> LI to NJ, during the day and the Verrazano was doing well, but the
> Canal Street Freeway was in horrid shape as it so often is, you
> wouldn't pay the toll to make it back quicker and easier?

Depends. The choice for this is usually done further east in LI, say at
the E end of the Southern St Pkwy where you either take the Belt or the
Cross Island Pkwy's. Also I would only consider paying the $8 EZ Pass or
$9 cash toll on the Verrazano Br only if I was heading to work and
running late. Any other time I would opt for the route of the unbuilt
I-78 Lower Manhattan Expwy. Canal St itself is rarely used, only if
Broome St is backed up, even then it is crossed as I drive south to
approach the Holland hole-in-the-wall from northbound Hudson St as an
alternative.

If you want me to consider avoiding crossing lower Manhattan on the
westbound return, take the ridiculous tolls off the Verrazano Bridge.
That would take a lot of traffic out of Manhattan. Notice I said take
the tolls off, not change the toll structure. Even then the westbound
Guinea Gangplank and SI expressway would just get more clogged pissing
off the local NIMBY's in SI, but it would take very much traffic out of
Manhattan.

GK

unread,
Apr 25, 2007, 6:31:48 AM4/25/07
to
STIsland is there. The Guintified Gangplank toll needs to be done away
with in order to clear much crosstown traffic out of Manhattan.

GK

Mike Tantillo

unread,
Apr 26, 2007, 9:25:09 AM4/26/07
to
On Apr 25, 12:31 pm, GK <ontheair...@atverizon.net> wrote:
> Sancho Panza wrote:
> > "GK" <ontheair...@atverizon.net> wrote in message

You definitely have a good point here. The EPA should allow the toll
to return to two way, with open road tolling for E-ZPass. Therefore,
from a financial perspective you have a 2 way toll, but from a
physical perspective, you only have one directions worth of traffic
stopping to pay.

GK

unread,
Apr 26, 2007, 4:36:35 PM4/26/07
to
That's what NY people think I said, but NO I said the toll on the VZB
needs to GO AWAY. Not make both directions pay it.

And BTW, how could you have 2 direction tolling if you only have one
direction stopping? I'm not following that one.

GK

Mayer Samuels

unread,
Apr 27, 2007, 6:46:54 AM4/27/07
to

GK,

You may prefer getting rid of the toll on the Verrazano entirely, but
as a practical matter tolls are needed to pay for maintenance of
bridges and transit.

A better approach would be toll equity. We already have this on the
Port Authority crossings (and IIRC the Tappan Zee), where every
crossing from NJ to NY is $5 eastbound. A similar toll equity should
exist on the bridges/ tunnels that connect Long Island (Bklyn/Qns) to
SI/Manhattan/Bronx. Charge a one-way $5 toll on every one of these
crossings in the direction of leaving Long Island. Now, there would
be no incentive to drive through Manhattan to avoid a toll. Now, the
toll can be reduced and made one-way since there are no free bridges
to compete with. You'd have the following potential traffic patterns:

NJ-Long Island $5, whether you go through SI, Manhattan, or the Bronx/
GWB.
Long Island - NJ $5, whether you go through SI, Manhattan, or the
Bronx/GWB.

NJ to SI, Manhattan, Bronx $5.
Long Island to SI, Manhattan, Bronx $5.
No toll in the reverse direction

Manhattan or Bronx to Staten Island $5 whether you go through NJ or
Brooklyn/Qns
Staten Island to Manhattan or Bronx $5 whether you go through NJ or
Brooklyn/Qns

On a personal note, I generally avoid tolls and usually go through
Manhattan on my way back from Bklyn or Queens, when I visit Bklyn or
Queens to avoid the Verrazano tolls. If there were no free way, and
all the tolls were equivalent, I'd take the Verrazano. I "grin and
bear" the Port Authority toll on my way in, and I'd just "grin and
bear" the MTA toll on my way out, assuming that everybody else who is
making the trip between LI and NJ is forced to pay the same toll.


Rothman

unread,
Apr 27, 2007, 7:51:49 AM4/27/07
to
> You may prefer getting rid of the toll on the Verrazano entirely, but
> as a practical matter tolls are needed to pay for maintenance of
> bridges and transit.

Tolls aren't the only option. There are these things called taxes as
well.

Mike Tantillo

unread,
Apr 27, 2007, 8:43:50 AM4/27/07
to

True, but I tend to like tolls since the people who drive over the
bridge, and therefore cause the congestion on said bridge (or if
traffic is moving, are causing the bridge to be one car closer to
capacity), pay for it. If I lived in Brooklyn, I wouldn't want to pay
for the VZB in my property taxes if I rarely ever used it. I wouldn't
want gas taxes either, since there is no way to charge a premium for a
bottleneck like the VZB. I wouldnt' want to force all NYS tax payers
to pay for it, since someone from Buffalo really doesn't care about
the VZB. I think tolls are the perfect solution, though they should
be collected in a more environmentally friendly way.

Rothman

unread,
Apr 27, 2007, 9:18:37 AM4/27/07
to

You could be benefitting from the traffic going across the bridge,
however. Say, if you're a business owner and you're getting supplies
or customers into your business that are using the bridge.

Mike Tantillo

unread,
Apr 27, 2007, 12:14:30 PM4/27/07
to
> or customers into your business that are using the bridge.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Thats a possibility, but I think that is different. The business
benefits but everyone else who lives on the other side of the bridge
does not benefit when I take a car across. A business at my end of
the bridge could benefit, and I could save a toll, and society would
benefit by my car not being on the bridge if I shopped on my own
side. In the absense of a toll, it might not be an obvious choice,
but with a toll, I think hard about my decision to cross before I do
so.

hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com

unread,
Apr 27, 2007, 2:32:03 PM4/27/07
to
On Apr 25, 1:38 am, "Sancho Panza" <otterpo...@xhotmail.com> wrote:
> Is Staten Island chopped liver or what?

Pretty much.

rsh...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 29, 2007, 8:33:40 PM4/29/07
to


Guys take a good look at Gridlock Sam's prop. That is what he wants
is a "toll" to enter Manhattan below 96th St, and the bridges between
the outer boros to be FREE. You ought to take a look at it on
www.gridlocksam.com

The MTA bridge tolls go mostly for the RR's and the subway. I don't
know the exact formula, but I understand the RR's get the bulk of it.
RM found out, at least on bridges, maint is fairly low. My thinking
is after subsidising mass transit, the biggest part is the bonds.

In addition, my thinking is the MTA's bonded indebtedness is mostly
mass transit related over the last 50 years.
So that would be where a lot of their money goes to.

GS"s idea is remove the tolls on the bridges in the outer boros, all
of them, and insitute a heavy toll below 96th
and use the surpluses for mass transit. And for what the MTA needs
for bridge and tunnel maint.

I just think the semi truck tolls should be a lot higher then $100.
And for Rothman, I don't see many empty stores in Manhattan paying
many thousands of dollars each and every month. And I doubt the
streets would be empty with a very heavy cong "toll".


Take care, Randy right now in Savannah, GA, nxt week in Atlanta.


JG

unread,
Apr 30, 2007, 1:16:33 PM4/30/07
to

Bubba-tonia has managed to keep 95 percent of the Mississippi River
bridges free. Any idea of a toll is met by screams of poverty and
pestulance and plague.

Rothman

unread,
Apr 30, 2007, 1:48:05 PM4/30/07
to
> pestulance and plague.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Pestulance and plague? Which side of the river has that, and which
side is scared of getting it?

GK

unread,
Apr 30, 2007, 7:55:31 PM4/30/07
to
Bottom line, NYC is just a very darn mobility unfriendly city. No new
road improvements in many decades, and high tolls just to drive around,
and geographically connecting other land masses (Long Island & North
America) that need to get through.

Just get rid of all the darn tolls already.
I know, fat chance once they have a cash cow.

GK

0 new messages