It has now been over 4 weeks since New York City started charging motorists to enter Manhattan so that they pay for a portion of the impact they have on roadways in the city. And the data overwhelmingly supports that travel times have fallen as a result. Transit ridership also appears to be increasing, despite what some critics will tell you, and trains and buses appear to be moving more efficiently as well (via Fast Company):
More commuters are opting for buses to cross Manhattan, and those buses are now traveling more quickly, too. Weekday bus ridership has grown 6%, while weekend ridership is up 21%, compared to January 2024. (Subway ridership has also grown by 7.3% on weekdays and 12% on weekends, part of a larger trend in ridership growth happening since the fall, per the MTA. Anecdotally, some subway riders have said they’ve seen more packed trains on their morning commutes.) Buses entering Manhattan from Queens, Staten Island, and the Bronx are saving up to 10 minutes on their route times, which also makes their arrivals more reliable.
Also noteworthy is that polls suggest that the majority of Manhattan commuters (~66%) now support the congestion relief zone. They are experiencing the benefits and probably doing the mental math that the time they are personally saving is worth at least $9. However, one figure that hasn't changed all that much is that about half of voters across New York State still oppose the congestion charge (though it has dropped by a few percentage points compared to earlier polls).
Paul Krugman speculates (in this recent post) that this negative view is, therefore, coming from people living in upstate NY, which is interesting, because how many of these voters will actually end up paying this charge and/or experiencing its benefits? That's the thing about being asked to spend money that you didn't have to spend before; if you can't clearly see the value in doing so, then you're not going to like the idea.
At the same time, it can be hard to win political battles with facts, figures, and rational arguments alone. Krugman also argues that there are other reasons for why this congestion relief zone is being opposed by many people and why Trump, in particular, wants to kill it:
...maybe the biggest reason for Trump’s desire to kill the congestion charge is a phenomenon I identified the last time I wrote about this: the rage some Americans obviously feel at any suggestion that people should change their behavior for the common good. What we’re seeing with regard to the congestion charge is that some Americans feel that rage even when they themselves aren’t being asked to make changes.
As I have said before, this is an important policy to follow because its success, or failure, will naturally set a precedent for the rest of North America. If transit-rich NYC can't make a congestion relief zone work, then who can? However, my optimistic view continues to be that it will ultimately stick. And already we are seeing positive sentiment from the people who it directly affects/benefits.
Today is the third day of New York's new congestion relief zone. And if you're curious to see how it's already impacting traffic conditions, here is a website run by Joshua Moshes and Benjamin Moshes, under the supervision of Brown University Professor Emily Oster.
The site collects Google Maps traffic data every 15 minutes for 19 routes leading into Manhattan (some of which are directly affected by the new relief zone and some of which are not). It then calculates average traffic times for each day of the week, both before and after the congestion charge.
Here is the Holland Tunnel on Sunday (which was day number one):
And here is the Holland Tunnel on Monday (which was the first weekday):
Already, we are seeing a meaningful reduction in average traffic times. Maybe demand is more elastic than I suggested yesterday. But obviously we're only looking at two days. So I'll check back in later once we have more data points. In the meantime, if you'd like to follow along, you now have a website.
Good morning. Well, it finally happened.
After decades of delay and negotiations, New York City finally implemented congestion pricing for the area of Manhattan south of 60th Street. This is a first for the United States, and so it's a big deal not just for the city, but for this part of the world. It went into effect yesterday, on Sunday at midnight, so that the MTA could work out any kinks before this morning's rush hour. And apparently everything went smoothly. Drivers are now required to pay $9 to enter the zone during peak hours (5am to 9pm during weekdays). The charge is also expected to rise to $15 by 2031. Of course, this is a highly contested initiative. Trump is still vowing to kill the program as one of his first acts in office and, as soon as the pricing came into effect, suburban drivers started protesting it in Manhattan. I thought Jarrett Walker had a clever response to this:
extreme activists 
plan to make streets so unsafe and gridlocked that NYC businesses lose money! 
Only car owners can shut NYC down and send a message!
2,029
One of the common rebuttals when it comes to things like road and congestion pricing is this one: "yeah, this might work in cities like London which have great transit systems, but it doesn't work in our city because we don't have that and it will unfairly disadvantage those who have no other alternative but to drive." In fact, this exact excuse was recently raised by local politicians here in Toronto. But this is New York fucking City. It has the highest annual transit ridership in North America (beating out Mexico City by nearly 2x) and it has the largest system by total length. According to the 2012-2016 American Community Survey, 85% of people traveling to Manhattan's CBD (I'm assuming lower Manhattan here) also take transit. And only 11% drive a car. So what exactly is the problem here?
This objection also ignores the fact that, generally speaking, congestion pricing has two main goals: (1) to, of course, reduce traffic congestion and (2) to generate money for more efficient modes of transport. In this case, the MTA is hoping this new congestion relief zone will generate up to $15 billion that can then be reinvested in transit and other infrastructure. Demand for roads can also be relatively inelastic in the short term, meaning demand doesn't change all that much as the price moves up and down. This makes it a good place to find money for public infrastructure, but it might mean that $9 is too low to have a dramatic impact on traffic congestion. We will see; I'm sure we'll get some data soon enough.
My prediction is that this will ultimately have an impact on congestion and that people in New York will get over the $9 charge. They'll also come to appreciate the reduced traffic congestion within the zone. So I think this road pricing will stick, and my hope is that it will become an example for other cities in the US and across North America. Congratulations on finally getting this over the line, NYC. It was certainly a hard-fought battle.
Cover photo by Veronika Galkina on Unsplash