Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford
Within Manhattan, no one drives like that.
Midtown residents aren't driving to the UES for a movie or dinner, ever. They would walk/train/bus/Uber/car service/cab. There's no parking or valet service, so it would be pointless. Other cities have parking or valet at multiplexes and restaurants.
|
So you are saying that Ubers, cabs, car services and any vehicles other than private autos would be exempt from any charge for crossing the "congestion" limit?
I had an Uber driver the other day who said she only picked up people on the way to work and home at night. She had the Uber logo sticker on her car, of course. So how is the city going to know a rare-but-sometime Uber driver is "working" on a particular occasion when they cross into the "congestion" zone? What's to stop me (if I had a car which I don't--I have a scooter which is parkable in all sorts of places a car is not) from becoming an Uber driver and picking up passengers once a month?
FYI, parking is an issue in SF to, perhaps, only a slightly lesser degree. We are the home of Uber, after all, and for good reason. While my building has underground parking, I frequently drive out of the "congestion zone" to places where I can park--let's call it "Brooklyn" for dinner and other reasons. I would rarely drive to other places within the "zone" (I could probably park the scooter somewhere but would fear it being damaged or stolen) but use public transit or Uber for that. So the chief purpose of having a vehicle is trips out from downtown, but I have to return home of course.
So the question remains: Is the proposal in New York to impose a toll on anyone living in Manhattan below 59th street who may own a private vehicle and want to drive it to Brooklyn or Queens (I know some great restaurants in both).