Skip to Content
Streetsblog New York City home
Streetsblog New York City home
Log In

This week’s MTA vote won’t just cost New Yorkers 25 percent more per ride, it will also be
costly in lost time.

Using the Balanced Transportation Analyzer (BTA), I estimate that
the fare hikes and service cuts which begin June 1 will:

    • Add an average of 6 percent more waiting and travel time to bus and subway commutes;which will...
    • cause 40,000 more autos to pile into the Manhattan Central Business District eachday; which will...
    • slow traffic by an average of 5 percent in the CBD and 1-2 percent across the City; costing...
    • drivers, truckers and bus riders $600 million in lost time annually within the CBD,and probably $1.5 billion or more citywide.

The one-two punch of higher fares and less frequent service can be expected to shrink
subway use by around 8 percent and bus ridership by 6 percent. This is a calamity not only to our
city's vitality but for the MTA as well, since it cuts deeply into the very revenue these
measures were supposed to generate. Indeed, the BTA model projects that the real gain in
farebox revenues won't even reach $500 million -- well under half of the projected $1.2
billion deficit.

The key criteria by which New York City transportation policies are judged are driver
expenses, rider expenses, driver travel times and rider travel times. The MTA and the
legislature have managed to worsen three out of four -- and, for good measure, have
aggravated others, such as traffic pollution and mayhem. A stopped clock could hardly
have done worse.

Advocates spent four months in feverish but fruitless campaigning for a stopgap solution -- the Ravitch Plan -- that was buoyed more by Dick Ravitch's sterling reputation than
by its intrinsic merits. Indeed, the plan was rife with inequities:

    • Payrolls in exurban Dutchess County would be taxed at the same rate as those oftransit-reliant New Yorkers.
    • Most Bronx and Brooklyn drivers would pay new tolls and yet those driving infrom New Jersey would not.
    • Manhattan residents would garner much of the benefit from lighter traffic in theform of quieter streets and faster cab rides, yet they would pay little of the tolls.

In short, “shared sacrifice” was more rhetoric than reality. Plus, the Ravitch Plan offered
no incentive to switch trips out of rush hours to less crowded travel times, in effect foreclosing on both choice and efficiency.

On the four criteria above, Ravitch offered not a
single solid win. The plan was a Band-Aid, but the times demanded a major overhaul.

True, Albany is broken. Even a perfectly balanced plan would have faced tough sledding.
Political reform is essential, but so too is recognizing that transit and traffic won’t get the
needed makeover until they are addressed in a unified and broadened transportation
vision
.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog New York City

Cities Matter More Than Ever After Trump Officially Denies Climate Change

We're entering a new era of federal climate denial, and it's time to use a different set of tools (like congestion pricing) to fight back.

July 31, 2025

SEE IT! Small Japanese Pickup Truck Shows Bigger is Definitely Not Better

One Brooklyn business has seen the future of safe streets and heavy lugging — and it's going to be O-KEI!

July 31, 2025

Opinion: Jessica Tisch Must Get Creative About Traffic Enforcement

NYPD speed enforcement needs a revamp — fortunately the city’s own data point the way.

July 31, 2025

Thursday’s Headlines: Bedford Demise Edition

The Adams administration started the process of making cyclists less safe on Bedford Avenue. Plus other news.

July 31, 2025

Hit-And-Run Rogue Driver Caught After Seriously Injuring Cycling Senior in Heart of the City

A reckless driver struck a cyclist on Second Avenue then fled. He was later caught, but the victim suffered life-changing injuries.

July 30, 2025
See all posts