There are fixed and mobile cameras both around the boundary and within the charging zone which capture images of the vehicle registration marks (number plates) that have been used in the zone. These images are matched to the database of payments and exemptions and where no match is found a Penalty Charge Notice is issued to the registered keeper.

Source: This awful URL

Regarding residents of London:

If you live in the Congestion Charging
zone, you can register one private vehicle
for a 90% discount from the Congestion
Charge. This is known as a ‘Residents’
discount’. You must prove that you live
in the Congestion Charging zone and that
you own the vehicle.
The Residents’ discount is only available
to people who live in properties that are
mainly used for residential purposes and
if this is your main or permanent home.
If you live in the Congestion Charging zone
you can park off the public roads or, if you
have an on-street Residents’ parking
permit, in a Residents’ parking bay within
your local parking zone, without paying the
Congestion Charge, as long as you do not
move the vehicle during the hours of the
scheme (7am to 6.30pm Monday to
Friday).

Source: http://www.cclondon.com/downloads/ResidentsLiving.pdf

but expect *some* resistance on the photographing of license plates and the kind of payment system that it’s tied to.

I don’t know how gov’t license plate databases work in the US, but I assume NY could have access to other state’s registration data, in which case NY’s scheme could work exactly like London’s — those not charged with E-ZPass are charged when their license plate is videotapes. For the few that slip through the cracks, it just needs to be a small enough number that enforcement costs do not substantially detract from the system’s revenues.

“But you have to have some way to charge the guy with the malfunctioning EZ pass, or who forgets the EZ pass or does not have sufficient value left on it, etc., or else that guy blocks everybody.”

I would also submit that you have to accomodate tourists (believe it or not, they really do drive into manhattan– i don’t know why), the general public, and long-haul delivery trucks.

It’s probably a very small percentage (less than 2% is my guess), and there probably is a way to do this without toll booths, but I haven’t heard of a feasible version yet.

looking forward to that RPA study!

Emptier streets should be considered an opportunity not a problem.

I don’t think any of these details are reasons to oppose congestion charging, but I expect these issues will be at the top of the agenda if and when the congestion charging concept gets real legs. These issues will be raised not only by the auto commuters who have to use the system, but also by the residents of the affected Manhattan neighborhoods who will resent any additional infrastructure or traffic engineering associated with the system (I can already hear the occupants of those homes on Sutton Place in the East 50s with built in garages drawing analogies to Berlin in ’61).

mfs is right that zone-adjacent congestion will be an issue. During the transit strike a year ago, southbound traffic on Park, Lexington and Second backed up starting at 96th Street for about 5-10 blocks during rush hour. The question is how much worse the congestion could be in the five blocks north of 59th Street than they were during my commute this morning down the East Side. Not much, I would say. Second Avenue is certainly bumpr-to-bumper every morning approaching the bridge. Lexington is only slightly better through 63rd Street due to all the “holiday traffic mitigation” at Bloomies’. Park is similar through 62st, where where triple-parking is the rule in front of the Regency. I can’t speak to the impact on the West side. A comprehensive study of congestion in the five-block swath north of 59th Street and a detailed plan for maintaining or ameliorating it in connection with congestion charging would go a long way to addressing the invetable objections of those living near the dividing line.

ddartley may be right that speeding would increase due a reduction in congestion within the zone, not only because speeding would become possible but because self-righteous drivers, having paid to get in, may feel entitled to do whatever they want. Offsetting this effect would be the heightened surveillance associated with congestion charging, and the fact that the copes could do a better job of policing less congested roadways. Also, I would anticipate increased aggressiveness of pedestrians and bicyclists who can be every bit as aggressive as drivers in taking over unoccupied roadway. The sum of the roadway encroachments by pedestrians and bicyclists in the post-CG world (along with the fact that drivers “lost” to the CG issue) may bring on a paradigm shift in which dangerous driving is called out more often by cops and civilians. Wishful thinking, I know, but possible.

Among other things he found that “East River bridge commuters earn, on average, $14,300 a year more than their neighbors who don’t commute on those bridges”

The complete study (“East River Bridge Tolls: Who Will Really Pay?”) is at
http://bridgetolls.org/research/#wwp

Will traffic relief may be a good impetus for looking at this issue, sold to the public as just traffic relief, is never going to be a compelling enough vision and will only get us so far even if accepted. London, for instance, combined their congestion pricing with their “100 Public Spaces” program.

Congestion pricing needs to be looked at as a very necessary tool, as part of a larger vision for creating great streets, improved access and safety for all modes, a more efficient and equitable transportation system and maintaining and increasing NYC’s competitiveness in the world.