Today’s Headlines

I’m for congestion pricing as much is anyone else here, but it seems like blaming Albany is letting the city off the hook too easily.

The city can stripe as many red bus lanes as it wants tomorrow. NYPD is a city problem. The city could reign in placards immediately. The city could change parking in business districts to short-term market rate at any time. AFAICT the city could institute tolls on the free bridges or put a bike lane on the Brooklyn bridge tomorrow. I’m not sure how far the state or MTA jurisdiction extends beyond the bridge and tunnel approaches, but the city could certainly redesign the surrounding traffic sewers to reduce push the impact of excess traffic volumes out of pedestrian areas — for example, 2nd Ave and the midblock access roads around the Queensboro and QMT, Canal St, or streets leading to the FDR onramps. A cordon would still needed to moderate traffic from the north, and a unified pricing scheme would reduce gaming the system but the point is that city politics are just as dysfunctional for the majority of residents and workers.

Another example where city departments could work outside the box is in automated traffic enforcement. Others here have suggested traffic cameras reporting to insurance or public shaming, even if they aren’t authorized to levy a fine. This would be a clear way to build support for enabling legislation. I wonder if the city could also discipline public employees or revoke driving privileges for such unofficial violations. The city certainly has leverage over fleet owners in contract with the city or needing city permits.

The TLC is already tasked to prosecute these violations for taxis independent of NYPD, I wonder if anything prohibits them from setting up automated enforcement of their own. Certainly nothing keeps an enterprising streetsblog reader from downloading the Reported app (a more convenient frontend to 311 TLC complaints) — this is one of the few instances in the city where personal action leads frequently to clear, direct consequences for the offender.

So the Unions are getting what they want. More people. No talk of productivity increases anywhere.

It could be worse. The schools got a 3.9 percent increase in state funding as other things were cut. The Regents and unions are meeting to discuss what service cuts to impose since the schools are being “cheated out of $billions.”

I agree with you. I am writing about productivity in the traditional economic sense.

The NY Times story is instructive: congestion pricing advocates failed to counter the false narrative that they were elitists imposing a tax on the unwashed masses who just wanted to take Sunday drives over the bridges for free as they had been doing for years.

A congestion fee targeting only the Midtown business district would make more sense politically and practically. There are comparatively few constituents and legislators to piss off, and with a more focused fee, the benefits could be targeted to public transportation improvements in the same area: more express buses to Midtown, railway and subway station improvements to relieve crowding, and even street changes like widening sidewalks, pedestrianization, and bollards. It would be a demonstration that pricing could deliver tangible benefits. Leave the politically charged issue of the bridge crossings for another day.

The NYPD simply doesn’t care about enforcing the law against bus lane violations and are indeed some of the wort violators. It’s absolutely disgusting how supper progressive mayor of the fairest city in the United States is so oblivious on this. Today, the Livingston St bus lane was completely full of cars again including an NYPD van. It’s so f—ing shameful. Makes me sick.

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4dbf293c8bffd4f617650ef30e5d4e23435b5bcc3409b93b41d2532b10c051cf.jpg

I don’t see any overhead cameras in that photo either. Or anywhere close by.

https://goo.gl/maps/31jwDTWb95N2

Where are the bus lane enforcement cameras? There are huge gaps on our routes.

That’s the problem with congestion pricing proposals to date: one zone is being targeted for a charge to fund diffuse improvements city- and region-wide. Policies that concentrate costs and spread benefits seem rational from a data perspective but often don’t work politically. If congestion pricing is to be accepted politically, especially in this populist age, the benefits need to be targeted to the people and places that will bear the costs. Midtown has the worst congestion, the most commuters, and fewer residents than elsewhere, so it is a logical place to try it out.

“Policies that concentrate costs and spread benefits…”.

Isn’t the criticism of congestion pricing the exact opposite? People argue that the benefit will be concentrated in the CBD, while the cost will be spread among everyone within driving distance of the CBD.

(“rein in placards”)

You’re right that the City could be doing much more; for instance, it could step up enforcement against commonplace congestion-inducing driver behaviorss as double parking.

Unfortunately, the police department considers our civilian government irrelevant, and recognises no obligation to take direction from the mayor. So the idea of empowering other agencies to do enforcement is a good one.

The recent budget calls for an increase on the allowed number of bus lane cameras.

Only on previously approved SBS routes in Manhattan south of 96th Street.

The SBS routes in Manhattan south of 96th Street are the M86, M79, M34/34A, and M23, plus part of the M15. Riders on the rest of the M15, on the M60, on the portions of the Bx6 and Bx12 in Manhattan, on the SBS lines outside Manhattan, and of course on non-SBS lines citywide don’t count, I guess.

The city could solve this issue with physical separation where applicable.

And then the SBS or limited bus gets stuck behind the local, or behind an express bus, or behind a bus that’s boarding a wheelchair passenger. Physical separation is great if there are two bus lanes. If there’s only one, it can be disastrous to service.

The Fix NY program is clearly designed to spread benefits by allocating the congestion revenues to a range of projects throughout the metropolitan area. In fact, there is no single big idea that has caught the public imagination in this plan other than taking money from drivers and giving it to the MTA. While that might benefit a lot of people if the money is spent well, it’s too abstract.

The problem with the strategy of spreading benefits widely is not that it fails to placate the critics (who will latch onto whatever criticisms they can come up with, whether based in reality or not), but rather that it fails to build a strong base of support because the improvements for most affected people would be so marginal–or even, in their perception anyway, a net negative. Polls showed net opposition to congestion pricing in much of the city. I have known people who do not even own a car and take transit every day to become upset at the thought of one day having to pay a toll to drive across the Queensboro Bridge.

That said, you are right, the charging plan does also suffer from its costs being spread too widely. The charging zone as designed is too large for a feasible, focused program of improvements, and as a result the charges disturb too many people with diverse interests without providing corresponding benefits. A smaller and more targeted plan with a more targeted and tangible program of benefits would be more likely to work.