Guess Who Has a Lot to Lose From an MTA Meltdown: Drivers

Can you spot the flaw in this excerpt from the New York Times’ Saturday backgrounder on MTA chief Jay Walder’s pending departure for Hong Kong?

[T]he future of New York’s cash-poor transit system, depended on by millions of riders a day, has now fallen directly to Mr. Cuomo, who must pick a successor.

The passage is spot on, but for this missing note: The city and region’s 8 million train, bus and subway riders aren’t the only people who depend on public transit. So do a million or more daily motor vehicle users, who will find themselves in ever-worse gridlock if fare hikes and under-investment lead even a small fraction of transit passengers to switch to automobiles.

How much worse will traffic congestion get if transit deteriorates? A lot, potentially. Consider a combination of higher fares and reduced service sufficient to bring about a 5 percent decline in subway use, so that weekday trips by subway to the Manhattan Central Business District, currently averaging 2,160,000 a day, shrink by 110,000. My modeling suggests that while a majority of those trips will relocate or simply disappear, an estimated 35,000 of them will continue to be made, in cars.

Auto trips to the CBD will increase in this scenario by nearly 30,000, allowing for cars with more than one person. While numerically that increase is much smaller than the drop in subway use, the increased volume of traffic will depress already abysmal travel speeds in the Manhattan core by more than 4 percent and slow traffic on the CBD approaches by an average of 1-2 percent. The estimated “time costs” of these new delays: nearly $600 million a year.

Is this scenario realistic? Sadly, yes. According to my travel-and-traffic modeling, it wouldn’t take much in the way of fare hikes and service cuts to bring about a 5 percent cut in subway trips. Here’s one way it could happen:

Raise fares (generates $230 million)

  • Raise price of unlimited-fare Metrocards by 10 percent
  • Eliminate current 7 percent bonus on $10 or higher pay-per-ride Metrocards

Cut service and investment (saves $440 million total)

  • Cut $40 million from subway operations
  • Cut $400 million a year from MTA capital program

The above combination is all it would take for 5 percent of subway riders to bail and collectively put 30,000 more CBD-bound car trips on the road. Now let’s add up this scenario’s pluses and minuses.

Pluses: Transportation authorities gain $560,000,000 a year

  • MTA cost savings: $440 million
  • MTA revenue gain: $90 million ($230 million from fare hikes, less $140 million from decreased ridership)
  • MTA and Port Authority toll windfall (from increase in tolled tunnel trips): $30 million

Minuses: Public loses $995,000,000 a year + other uncalculated costs

  • Motor vehicle users’ time losses from increased congestion: $590 million
  • Transit users’ time losses from service cuts: $170 million
  • Environmental costs (more pollution, crashes, noise, etc.): $135 million
  • Lost longevity as heavier traffic discourages biking and walking: $100 million
  • Job losses from increased congestion and cutbacks in transit operations and improvements: ??
  • Lost economic activity from fewer person-trips to the CBD: ??

For every dollar saved by the MTA, the resultant drop in subway usage costs city and suburban residents nearly $1.80 in time, health and quality of life, with drivers’ lost time alone ($590 million a year) more than offsetting the MTA’s net gain ($560 million). And this accounting, which holds across a range of scenarios, omits costs due to lost employment and commerce.

From an overall societal standpoint, then, transit disinvestment is a big loser — a point that Dick Ravitch, Ted Kheel and other civic leaders labored for decades to get across to both City Hall and Albany. Ironically, many of the folks with the most to lose never even swipe a Metrocard.

  • Driver

     I agree that transit cuts would be bad for all parties, but I doubt those seriously affected would be weekday commuters to the Manhattan CBD. It seems quite possible that the majority of service cuts would be directed at weekend and overnight hours and bus lines with low ridership, primarily in the outer boroughs.  While the cuts might result in more car ownership and more car use during off peak hours or within the outer boroughs, I find it hard to imagine a significant number of people finding it necessary to drive into midtown during weekday business hours, let alone being able to afford it (parking) or deal with the nightmare commute. 
    It’s hard to imagine the MTA cutting service during peak hours and literally forcing away revenue by constricting capacity.  However it is easy to imagine them further ignoring the transit needs of those who live in areas with low ridership or those who travel at odd hours for the sake of minimizing revenue loss.

  • ZLwaldron

    Thanks for this fascinating analysis on the impact of transit policies on drivers and overall quality of life.

  • Dave

    How about:
    Pluses: Savings from ending rush-hour lane reversals at all crossings
    Pluses: Increased revenue from re-introduction of two-way tolls at VNB, GWB, HT and LT to eliminate toll-shopping
    Pluses: Implementation of East River/Harlem RiverBridge tolls via EZ-Pass and plate-reading technology
    Pluses: Inplementation of Residential Permit Parking
         Other Pluses: Increased tax revenue from limiting RPP to NYC taxpayers

                              Lower insurance receipts from limiting RPP to NYC taxpayers

  • Dave

    How about:
    Pluses: Savings from ending rush-hour lane reversals at all crossings
    Pluses: Increased revenue from re-introduction of two-way tolls at VNB, GWB, HT and LT to eliminate toll-shopping
    Pluses: Implementation of East River/Harlem RiverBridge tolls via EZ-Pass and plate-reading technology
    Pluses: Inplementation of Residential Permit Parking
         Other Pluses: Increased tax revenue from limiting RPP to NYC taxpayers

                              Lower insurance receipts from limiting RPP to NYC taxpayers

  • Anonymous

    @ Driver: You write “It’s hard to imagine the MTA cutting service during peak hours and literally forcing away revenue by constricting capacity.” But that’s precisely what will happen if the MTA cuts back on its capital program, much of which is dedicated to increasing the number of peak-hour trains per hour through improved signals, communications, track conditions, etc. You make a fair point that my hypothesized drop of $40 million a year in operations would be concentrated in off-peak and or “marginal” lines; but much if not most of the drop of $400 million a year in the capital program would strike at the system’s ability to deliver services on-peak as well as off.

  • Anonymous

    @ Driver: You write “It’s hard to imagine the MTA cutting service during peak hours and literally forcing away revenue by constricting capacity.” But that’s precisely what will happen if the MTA cuts back on its capital program, much of which is dedicated to increasing the number of peak-hour trains per hour through improved signals, communications, track conditions, etc. You make a fair point that my hypothesized drop of $40 million a year in operations would be concentrated in off-peak and or “marginal” lines; but much if not most of the drop of $400 million a year in the capital program would strike at the system’s ability to deliver services on-peak as well as off.

  • Driver

     That’s an excellent point Komanoff, I did not consider that aspect of it. 

  • Phil from NZ

    How does the principle of “triple convergence” affect this? If Transit takes cars off the highways, the highways fill up again with “induced traffic” just as much as if highway capacity had been expanded. What happens when this process is reversed and there are “disinvestments in Transit”?
    It seems to me the biggest issue is which expenditure creates the most value – highway capacity increases or Transit capacity increases? Both of them simply create more traffic. So is the surplus in value of the extra mileage over the cost, greater for highway capacity increases or for Transit capacity increases?

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Cuomo Gets His Way, and Transit Riders Get the Shaft

|
Governor Andrew Cuomo won’t be denied. Overriding proposals from the Assembly and State Senate, the governor continues to pick the pocket of New York City’s transit system, diverting $30 million from the MTA in the state budget. Cuomo had originally proposed a $40 million raid, so it could have been worse. But because this diversion […]

New York State Withholding a Fortune in Transit Taxes From MTA

|
How many ways can New York state raid the MTA piggy bank? Here’s one to keep an eye on. As the state budget deadlock drags on into its third month, Albany is withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in dedicated transit tax revenue from the MTA.  The state, which collects transit taxes before distributing the […]