Hacker News Reader

Comment by occz | Hacker News Reader

You can already extrapolate from the results from other cities who have implemented the policy, where it has been wildly successful at reducing congestion.

View on HN

So far, none of the data provided by the linked site would suggest Manhattan will see a reduction in transportation times. This is with the Monday snow however, which I'd imagine caused delays by itself.

I will say, being in Manhattan, their seems to be less traffic on the road. I wonder if Google Maps traffic data is using a rolling average of ~7 days or something

Are you sure? Compare before/after for the main affected regions (Holland Tunnel, Queensboro) versus the unaffected regions. We definitely need more data, but I think there's an immediate reduction in the obvious places.

According to this data, traffic is reduced on the bridges and tunnels but not within Manhattan itself, e.g., going from Hell's Kitchen to Midtown East or Greenwich Village to Alphabet City.

You're right...I was only looking at internal Manhattan, but the bridges and tunnels seem to show a significant reduction in transportation times

Google maps traffic data is live

I thought London's traffic returned to the same levels as prior to their congestion pricing?

It has not. Traffic levels are down 15-20% while number of visitors to the inside of the congestion zone has increased. Traffic speed inside the zone has also increased slightly.

Overall, London's example shows that congestion pricing works as advertised.

Singapore is probably the better model to look at? We had congestion pricing before London.

... for rich people.

Nope, it's been great for poorer people who take transit at higher rates than others, and congestion pricing funds useful transit expansions for them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com