Don’t gloss over congestion pricing’s drawbacks
Manhattan: Re “How to save congestion pricing” (op-ed, March 12): Lucius Riccio neglected to mention far-reaching and longterm consequences for NYC. Limiting pollution and traffic are important goals, but negative impacts have not been sufficiently explored. Bridge and tunnel tolls into Manhattan are already expensive, and I know several professionals who have gotten jobs in New Jersey and moved there. Some Manhattan-based companies are considering leaving or converting jobs so employees work from home to avoid the congestion toll. Those commuting from areas without public transportation will limit coming into Manhattan, and those who have to travel uptown to get their cars won’t stay in town as long after work. The ripple effect will reduce the customers for theaters, movies, restaurants and shops — not just by those working from home, but by fewer non-residents venturing into Midtown if they have to take subways. Not only are subways noisy, dirty and often dangerous, but they desperately need improvements (like safer trains and stations, and more elevators and escalators).
Those who continue to commute and who can’t afford almost $50 a day in tolls will swamp the George Washington Bridge (photo) and neighborhoods above 60th St. to park, creating congestion and more pollution there. More Ubers, Lyfts and taxis will continue to clog streets and will have to charge considerably higher fares. Taxi drivers I’ve spoken with are worried: They already work long hours to survive and fear they won’t get as many riders.
Though it initially seemed positive, when the complete picture and consequences are considered, congestion pricing will create considerable losses for NYC and its merchants, restaurants and cultural resources. Fredda Seidenbaum