Comments on: 30 Firms Submit Proposals for NYC’s Congestion Pricing System

By: Out of Debt free debt

Out of Debt free debt — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 21:25:13 +0000

I'm searching for sites related to making an internet income and yours came up, this is helpful content, even though on a side track. TY.

By: jeux

jeux — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 23:55:50 +0000

So Spudly, you'd prefer the DOT build such a system from scratch? Or maybe let a nonprofit run the system, funded by donations?
This pilot project isn't a subsidy, it's a contract, and it cannot move forward unless we pay the talent to build it.

By: Bern Grush

Bern Grush — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:08:10 +0000

Re Carolyn Konheim, re “Skymeter’s response”. NO to eye-in-sky. NO to tracking. YES to infrastructure-free GPS as an anonymous location service. GPS does not “see” anything. You need a different type of self-reporting receiver for that, which we do NOT use.

We can detect and charge taxis or not as City wishes. Taxis are often exempt on basis that taxi trips are better that private automobile trips (I am NOT including cruising in this). And exemptions are not the vendor’s call. Agree that couriers would be unfazed by $5.50. Our system can charged couriers by-te-minute “stopping-fees” to park in geofenced zones (in lieu of parking tickets).

"Stopping fees" are by-the-minute fees for stopping to deliver. Such fees are set by place and time so that stopping on especially busy streets, during busy times of the day costs more than less busy streets and times. This is part of the existing Skymeter technology (included in the submitted Expression of Interest), and merely needs a geo-fenced pricemap for courier-stopping fees.

But that did not make the proposal. My oversight. Sorry. and thank you for your (implied) question! B.Grush, Skymeter. [also www-grushhour-com]

By: Carolyn Konheim

Carolyn Konheim — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 17:44:24 +0000

I have perused about a third of the replies. As expected, they all say they can do what the city asks -- without mentioning the cost. Many insert some common sense in between the lines. Like IBM which did Stockholm with just 18 sensor locations at its portals. They says if 100% detection of all internal trips is required, would mean installing sensors at every intersection, which would be prohibitively expensive and impractical. The foreword of Skymeter's response tells it like it offers an eye in the sky solution. None so far ask whether there are better ways to detect and charge charge internal trips that are causing the problem -- like taxis (which are planned to be exempt) and the Fed Ex and Fresh Direct which would be unfazed by a $5.50 charge and would benefit enormously from any reduction of other cars on the road.

By: Bedraj Tripathy

Bedraj Tripathy — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 22:44:43 +0000

For once, let's look at the positive side. Yes, this is no charity. This is not about displacement or even a vendor making money or displacing existing vendors. Vendors will make money. For sure. And the existing vendor can win this deal as well. So what if IBM has won the London contract? Congestion pricing solutions are not standard, pick, plug and play solutions. Anyone who can thing of a good solution and has the capability to build it will go on and win the deal.

I think the good thing here is about the fact that it is possible to be implemented in NYC from an infrastructure and technology perspective. And that's what is critical. Point is, if you have 30 companies who are confident of the solution, it is certainly workable.

By: Nona

Nona — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:24:03 +0000

IBM also recently won the London contract and will dispace that city's original contractor.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:18:25 +0000

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:31:27 +0000

The winning bid for the elevators at the World Trade Center was reportedly zero. Why? Because the companies though the prestige would allow them to dominate the market.

If congestion pricing is implemented here and the pilot works, the company that implements it would get the first look in any other location. Given that it is a pilot, I would hope for a low bid as an investment in "goodwill."

By: Spud Spudly

Spud Spudly — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:50:04 +0000

I was thinking the same thing, fdr. Some may say the number of respondants indicates that people think it's "feasible." But others may say that it's a large number of companies who relish the idea of another public teat to suck from.

By: fdr

fdr — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:42:40 +0000

"This large number and quality of responses clearly indicates that a lot of consultants are salivating at the thought of making a lot of money."