Comments Nick Endorsed

I live at the corner of Broadway and Broome. Broome St is a connector street from the Williamsburg Bridge to the Holland Tunnel. Every day at rush hour and many times over the weekend traffic is 100% gridlock. This means a traffic cop is needed (costly) and ambulances / fire trucks have a very hard time getting through. As Broome St locks up, Broadway does as well - causing mayhem for hours at a time. Plus as Soho is nearly 100% retail stores - there is huge foot traffic further competing for limited surface space.

I FULLY support the Move NY plan and this new bill and very much hope it gets enacted. The explicit benefits are clear - and there are actually many more tangential benefits as well (e.g. an ambulance getting to a hospital faster to save a life).

Thank you.

I live beside the Brooklyn bridge and regularly walk and bicycle it. Especially summer evenings, it is almost unusably crowded. Commuting pedestrians have trouble getting around tourists; tourists can't enjoy themselves becuase they can only walk 1-2 wide; bicycles need to constantly ring their bell so space will be made.

I am very excited to see a proposed widening of the path on this list, and hope it is given high priority. Please fight for it!

We bought a car a number of years ago with the express purpose of making getting out of NYC easier for us. This city takes a huge psychological toll on me and my family and we frequently leave it for the peace and quiet of the Catskills or Bear Mountain.

That said, we continue to work on and support any efforts geared towards making this city a saner, healthier place for people to live, work and play. I believe that, many generations down the road, we will have learned how to make cities a place where people can thrive without feeling the need to flee, but it will take a lot of work and a commitment to efforts like this one.

We all pay a price for the choices that we make, but we are not always in control of the environment in which we live. Some people live next to busy highways or noisy intersections, not because they chose to live there, but because they can't afford to live anywhere else. It is a false argument to suggest that, if you don't like it you should just leave.

I fully support this initiative, both because of its goal of creating fair tolls for use of infrastructure, and because of the way it would lock the money into being spent evenly across all modes of transportation, including cars/roads, keeping it out of the hands of politicians who would like to use the funds elsewhere.

Finally, we must acknowledge that, even today, car owners receive a disproportionate amount of the funds used for transportation. Here in Manhattan, less than 24% of residents own a car, but about 38% of the surface area of Manhattan is given over to them exclusively. Pedestrians, cyclists and public transit users are not being given there due under the current funding formulas being used both nationally and locally. So, this is a step in the right direction.

Kudos to the team of people who have been working so long and hard in putting together this proposal and pushing it in Albany as well as here in NYC. Thank you for all that you do.

It looks as though this bill is designed to level the playing field as well as incentivize using public transit over private cars as a way to get around the city. Manhattan is an island that is blanketed with many different options when it comes to transit, and we need to do more to improve the quality and accessibility of that service.

For a long time, public transit has been at an unfair disadvantage in its competition with private transit, both in terms of funding and infrastructure. A case in point is the fact that Select Bus Service buses have to compete with turning and double parked cars, rather than having their own, truly dedicated lanes in which to drive.

This bill would help to tear down some of those barriers to good transit by improving funding and also reflecting the true cost of owning and driving a car in the city. Not only does driving more cause our roads to deteriorate faster, but it also negatively affects our health and that of the environment in which we live. Asthma rates are higher, obesity and heart problems are higher, deaths due to crashes are higher, and these are all health issues that are tied directly to the car.

George objects to the notion that people living here should have to pay as much as the rest of those who drive in from off of the island. The fact is, prices for parking and road services are paid for by everybody, not just car owners. And the amount that car owners pay is far too low, especially when one starts to take externalities like the health issues I mentioned above into account. This plan would not make it impossible to own a car, but it would definitely get people to think more consciously about whether or not to drive or even own a car. In the long term, this must be our goal.

Mayors across the United States and the world are starting to put into place various plans that are heavily informed by Vision Zero (zero deaths and serious injuries due to traffic related incidents). They are also, many of them, confronting the effects of Climate Change, from hurricanes to unseasonably high Summer and Winter temperatures, to Ozone Days, when it is recommended that citizens stay inside due to high levels of ozone in the air, to water shortages due to low snow pack. Manhattan is not immune to these realities, and emissions from cars are a part of the overall reason why Climate Change is happening.

I believe that we are facing some difficult choices, among which is the necessity of giving up our society's love affair with the car. We can no longer continue to drive for every visit to a friend or every errand we have to run. We have no excuse to do so here in NYC where we have so many alternatives. MoveNY has put forth a very thoughtful, thoroughly researched plan that is a compromise designed to address the needs of all those who use the roads and public transit in our city. It gets the job done with out raising the gas tax (though that is something that sorely needs to be addressed). It gives money back to walkers, bikers, transit users and, yes, drivers. This is a small price to pay for making sure that future generations have a healthy world in which to live and raise their children.

If the purpose is to reduce traffic, then a part of this plan should be to enforce double parking and require full payment of parking tickets from everyone. No more negotiations to reduce the cost of all the parking tickets that big trucking and delivery companies get for themselves.

You aren't being penalized for owning cars. The space those cars take up is heavily subsidized by the public. For comparison, a square foot of the Empire State Building gift shop costs over $830 a month, but an entire 250 sq ft parking spot a few feet away would be lucky to make the city $300 a month. Why does city land somehow become hundreds of times less important or valuable when you need to store your car?

This is a good start, but New York needs dynamic parking prices along with Parking Benefit Districts. Donald Shoup et al - as well as the city of San Francisco and others - have shown that dynamic pricing that adjusts to maintain 85% occupancy helps make sure everyone who needs parking can get it, and having a PBD ensures that the money raised goes to the local neighborhood.

The state could require any congressional district (or, better yet, each voter precinct) over a certain level of density to offer citizens in that district the option to institute dynamic parking with state funds. Increased parking revenue in the PBD can be used to institute immediate amenities, like free Wifi/parklets/better street cleaning, and a portion gets used to pay the state back gradually. It can function like a neighborhood-level loan from the state, but PBDs stand to reduce congestion, asthma rates, and car fatality rates, which all have economic impacts, too. And if precincts don't want it, they can just say no. I know state transportation funds are hotly contested, but I don't see how at least offering crowded neighborhoods the choice hurts anyone besides creating a bit of money-shuffling in the short term.

A car is a personal choice that has so many impacts on those around you and an extensive network of social costs. To say that you shouldn't share in the cost of your decision is to pass the costs of your personal choices onto the larger public. What is really criminal is that I'm subsidizing your use of an automobile that is one of the greatest sources of carbon emissions in this country, occupies the majority of our road space-both in travel and in parking, all while giving me no benefit. Please start paying your fare share!

We need to reclaim the streets of our city, the free river crossing on the 59th street bridge has taken away the streets of LIC and Sunnyside, and the impacts can be felt as far away as Maspeth, Woodside, and Astoria.

The logic of this proposal is well structured and honest, but it might need to provide some assistance for neighborhoods in Queens near transit stops where people will inclined to treat as their new park and ride lot while taking a train or express bus to Manhattan. Residential parking permits would help people that live in these communities, and could also start to reflect the true cost of free parking in this city.

The MoveNY legislation is an absolute necessity. It is the best plan on the table and there are no other plans that achieve as much in the way of traffic normalization, equity, increased revenue for transit, increased revenue for road infrastructure, and rationalized transportation patterns. However, we need to support better cross-Hudson rail/ferry access to NYC markets. Housing prices are imbalanced across the reason mainly due to unequal access to rail transit to NYC jobs. We must increase access to Rockland County by expanding Haverstraw-Ossining Ferry service and by restoring the West Shore Railroad passenger service from Haverstraw to Secaucus and ultimately to Penn Station New York. https://www.change.org/p/boost-the-economy-expand-the-ferry

The plan prevents you from being tolled twice. Please read the bill. You are tolled a maximum amount in a 24-hour period.

The status quo-- (subsidizing traffic over the East River crossings) make no sense at all. The proposal is basic common sense to anyone willing to study it.When I do choose to drive, I would much prefer to not be stuck in traffic. When I don't choose to drive, I would prefer that other drivers pay for what they use, and car-pool when possible.

Related specifically to part 1-- 60th street is obviously a good cut-off point due to Central Park and the Queensboro bridge.

A good start, but why not also implement dynamic real-time pricing of on-street parking as well?

Hurry up! :)

Private cars and driving is a privilege, not a right. Too long have we turned our streets over for the exclusive movement of vehicles instead of people. This plan does not ban private cars (which one could make a decent argument for), instead, the plan gives recognizes that there is not enough supply of roadway to meet demand, and that creating more roadway for cars has far too high of cost to people, the built environment, and the ecosystem. It quantifies, in economic terms, the scarcity of space for each persons' car to get into Manhattan CBD and reflects *some* of the social and environmental costs of deciding to drive into the most densely settled area in the country, rather than utilizing active transportation or our world-class transit system. Further, it recognizes that there isn't great service everywhere in the city - which can be a burden on lower middle class families that have to live farther away from good transit, but can afford a car - by directing the proceeds of the shift in tolls/new tolls to transit investments and expansion.

Is it a perfect plan? Of course not. Will all of us have to continue to engage with policy makers to ensure that the money is spent equitably (i.e. transit expansion in poorer and underserved areas)? Of course. But, this is a massive step toward prioritizing moving people, instead of vehicles. As well as recognizing the roles transit, for hire vehicles, efficient commercial deliveries, active transportation, and intelligent parking policy have in making a vibrant, equitable, thriving, and people-centered city.

A great feature of this rebalancing of tolls is that it would no longer encourage truck traffic to pass through Manhattan, making life worse for everyone. Instead, it will encourage trucks that do not have a destination in Manhattan (i.e. coming from JFK and going to the mainland) will use the Verrazano and go through Staten Island, where the infrastructure is more suited to handle such vehicles.

No more subsidies to wealthy(er) car owners in the most transit rich area in the country!

Plenty of interests inside NYC believe in this plan (as do I). This isn't "another tax on New Yorkers." It's a first step toward making drivers pay for their own chosen method of transportation, instead of everyone else doing that for you (as we all do). You're operating on the assumption that roads don't have to be income-generating in the way that the MTA does. That's unfair, and *I'm* tired of paying higher consumer prices so *you* can sit in your car. If you don't like paying to drive, join the rest of us in other methods of transportation - you'll be more than welcome!

I want this provision badly. But, I'm wondering if there is a way for the governor to use some other executive privilege, other emergency or constitutional power to undermine this mechanism?

We can and should exempt or heavily discount scooters and motorbikes from these tolls.We should be encouraging people who must travel by motor vehicle to do so using these smaller vehicles. Powered two-wheelers ("PTWs") take 1/6th of the space while parked, and 1/6th of the space on the roadway. An *average* PTW gets 40-80 mpg!If we don't exempt PTWs from these new tolls (or at least match the current EZpass 50% discount) are we encouraging people to take their much-larger cars or trucks, instead of a small, fuel-efficient PTW.The London congestion pricing system (on which MoveNY is based) exempts PTWs from ALL fees. We should follow their lead in this regard, too.