Today’s Headlines

  • Newsday: Kheel Plan Worth a Serious Look
  • DOT Considers Variable Curbside Parking Rates for Columbus Avenue (Sun)
  • Bloomberg: Don’t Shift Congestion Zone Boundary to 60th Street (Newsday)
  • CB1 Opposes Pricing, Wants More Parking (Queens Gazette)
  • Chicago Seniors Can’t Wait for Free Transit Rides (AP)
  • MTA May Scale Back Fulton Street Transit Center Again (Sun)
  • Atlantic Yards Running Into Financial Hurdles (Post)
  • 700 West Village Residents Protest Pier 40 Plans (Post)
  • Shell CEO Shares Peak Oil Concerns With Employees (Oil Drum)
  • Cyclist Beaten and Robbed at Foot of Brooklyn Bridge (Brooklyn Paper)
  • Killer Driver Sues Victim’s Family for Damages to Car (AP via Jalopnik)

  • Columbus Ave. Curbside Demand Pricing and Quasi-BRT: Can’t Wait!

  • One piece of the Shoup concept is that money that is collected curbside goes to improving the streetscape or otherwise benefits that specific area so that you start a virtuous cycle of more turnover and improving safety/aesthetics/overall ped friendliness. It’s not clear from the Sun article if that is part of the plan – does the extra money collected go to the BID? If so, it won’t take much data to convince the other BIDs that this is a good idea. If it just goes to the city general fund, then it would be a hard case to extend this out to the rest of the city.

    I could think of many, many other places that could use this. On the East Side, Madison Ave and Second Ave would be good choices.

  • Angus Grieve-Smith

    Glenn, you’re right that it’s not definitively stated, but the fact that the Sun quoted Shoup making that point suggests that the money would indeed go to the BIDs. That’s a good thing, because the BIDs were formed in response to the inability of the city to raise money for this kind of local maintenance.

  • Heffron

    I’d like to point out that although CB1 does oppose CP, the Queens Gazette makes no mention of Eddie Hernadez, one of our group who went to speak in favor of CP, where the civil people of CB1 booed him while he was speaking and called the fliers the city handed out (which are stats on how traffic will be reduced) heinous lies and demanded they not be handed out to anyone at the meeting. I guess its ok for the Gazette to report only the news they support, and not the un-community like behavior of the CB1 board in suppressing any views from the community they disagree with.

  • Brad Aaron

    Heffron,

    This may explain it.

    Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposed plan to charge cars $8 and trucks $21 to drive into Manhattan below 86th Street on weekdays from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. is raising concern in Queens.

    “It’s going to be a negative impact for those of us who live in Queens,” Tony Barsamian, publisher and editor of the Queens Gazette, said.

    Barsamian asked local legislators about congestion pricing, beginning a three-hour town hall meeting sponsored by Assemblymember Michael Gianaris, the United Community Civic Association (UCCA) and the Gazette at the Museum of the Moving Image on January 10.

  • Heffron

    Oh yes, we are familiar with the Queens Gazette’s position, they’re really more of an editorial magazine than a paper that attempts the fairly report the news. Our group has written several pro-CP responses to their anti-CP editorials, none of which have ever been run.

    And CB1 is a run like a zoo. I was at the CB2 meeting on PlaNYC and even though I believe their director is anti-CP he still ran a fair and civil meeting where everyone got their say.

  • “The mayor, speaking on his weekly radio show, said that the plan reportedly gaining favor with the state panel, which moves the boundary of the congestion zone south to 60th Street, from 86th Street, will exascerbate gridlock “north of 60th Street”, as motorists headed to Midtown seek to avoid the fee”

    Does any one agree with the mayor?

    It doesn’t make sense to me. If there were lots of vacant parking spaces north of 60th St., then there could be gridlock as people parked there and walked to midtown – but there are so few vacant parking spaces that I don’t see a big impact.

    The 86th St. boundary might be better for other reasons, but I don’t see a major spillover effect with a 60th St. boundary.

  • Jeffrey Hyman

    Glenn and Angus, it is my understanding that state legislation is required before higher, demand-priced meter fees can be diverted from the general fund. Perhaps the district management association believes that fewer circling vehicles and increased retail activity is reward enough.

  • Jonathan

    The Times’ auto editor is taking questions this week. Send emails to askthetimes@nytimes.com to protest the paper’s pro-motorcar bias.

  • Jeffrey

    I believe the Columbus Ave BID is very enlightened and they would do it whether they keep the money or not. I just don’t think many others are so enlightened – most would probably see it as driver motorists away…

    But that’s the great part about experimenting with new ideas – let’s see if it works and can fly on its own

  • JK

    Jeffrey you are probably correct.”State legislation is required before meter fees can be diverted from the general fund.” At a minimum directing parking revenue outside the general fund would require city legislation. Either way, it is not coming soon to Columbus Ave. This is a shame, because if BIDs, or community boards, got some parking revenue, as the boroughs do in London, you would see the rapid adoption of performance parking in New York City.

  • Hilary

    JK, Is this the reason that revenue from park concessions also have to go into the general fund, and not to that park, or even the parks department? Larry Littlefield, can you tell us the way to slip this ball and chain?

  • JK

    Yes, all NYC revenue goes into the general fund. This is OMB’s prime directive. Any exceptions would require city or state legislation. Many other big cities have dedicated funding for parks or transportation (Chicago famously for Parks, and many localities in the US and Europe for parking revenue.) Such dedicated streams would be a major change in NYC. Interestingly, the mayor has proposed dedicating congestion pricing revenue to a transit locked box. Similarly, some parking revenue could go to local streetscape improvements managed by Parking Improvement Districts and/or BIDs. Makes sense, but won’t happen here without a mayor who wants it.