A 19-page report titled, "A Cure Worse than the Disease? How London's 'Congestion Pricing' System Could Hurt New York City's Economy" was released today by the Queens Chamber of Commerce.

The Appleseed report offers only a shallow, biased and unsubstantiated analysis of the potential impact of how road pricing might impact New York.

• Only one scenario of how congestion pricing might be applied in New York is presented in the report. Clearly, an array of options-including options that ease the burden for those who must drive-must be considered, and the potential impact of each scenario weighed carefully. The report fails to do this.
  
  
• The report ignores the time savings, increases in air quality, quality of life improvements and other significant benefits that would result from less traffic.
  
  
• The report states that London's business community has "for the most part" reacted negatively to the congestion charge. The fact is that London's business community is in fact supportive of the charge [http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/cclondon/pdfs/ThirdAnnualReportFinal.pdf]. A recent study by the city of London found that 60% of businesses support the charge, while only 25% are opposed [http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/cc-
  ex/pdfs/consultation/wez_SchemeDescription-Summary.pdf].
  
  
• The Appleseed report estimates that 40,000 fewer people would enter the Manhattan CBD each weekday, resulting in an estimated $2.7 billion in economic output. The report does not contain any information about how these estimates were derived, except to say they are based on "fairly conservative estimates."

Says Paul Steely White, the Executive Director of Transportation Alternatives, "This report only considers the potential impact on the small minority of people who must drive to Manhattan. It is full of unsubstantiated assumptions, and offers only a shallow and biased view of the potential impact of road pricing in New York City."