Congestion Pricing: Time For Car Owners To Pay
By Julie RaskinFrom the July 23, 2007 issue | Posted in Local | Email this article
By Julie Raskin
Congestion pricing was resurrected three days after opponents declared its death. On July 19, Governor Spitzer announced the creation of a 17-member Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission to implement the pricing scheme. City and state officials will appoint members of the commission to set fees and oversee implementation of the plan and other proposals to reduce traffic congestion.
Hanging like smog above a skyline, congestion- pricing opponents could stagnate the process in the commission by appointing members to oppose the plan. The legislature will have final say over any agreement.
Congestion pricing still makes a lot of sense. Here is why.
$111,000 is the average annual income of a Westchester County resident who commutes to Manhattan by car.
Only 4.6 percent of New Yorkers drive to work in Manhattan while virtually everybody else takes the subway, bus, walks or rides a bike to work.
$400 million is the annual revenue generated by instituting congestion pricing in New York City, and that money would be used exclusively to improve and expand mass transit for the supermajority of New Yorkers who rely on it each day.
When you look at those numbers it becomes hard to see congestion pricing as unfairly targeting the lower and middle classes, as its critics claim. That false assertion is perhaps the biggest piece of misinformation circulated by critics.
The program, which would charge cars $8 to drive into Manhattan’s central business district between 6am and 6pm, is a progressive tax. Unfortunately, bad news travels fast, and the proposal’s critics continue to pump out misinformed attacks. Here are some of those false critiques dispelled.
Critics say: The city has no plans to improve mass transit before implementing congestion pricing, leaving cash-strapped folks in the boroughs stranded when they can’t afford to drive to work.
The truth is: The City could receive a $500 million grant from the federal government for implementation. $300 million of the $500 million is earmarked for immediate improvements and additions to the bus system, starting in the neighborhoods currently underserved by mass transit. This means middle- and working-class New Yorkers in outer boroughs will see 400 new buses and improved technology to quicken bus trips.
Critics say: The congestion fee for trucks ($21) will cripple small business.
The truth is: First, this fee only applies to trucks carrying 7000 lbs or more, which means that many delivery vehicles serving small businesses will only be charged the normal $8 fee. Second, for trucks that are charged $21, the fee is small compared to the company’s profit. In either case, the charge is a one-time fee, so trucks pay once and can make deliveries all day.
Critics say: OK, so congestion pricing will reduce traffic in Midtown, making daily life more pleasant for some Manhattan- bound commuters and some of the wealthiest Manhattanites who live in the zone, but what about the rest of New York?
The truth is: According to the NYC Department of Transportation’s analysis, 72 percent of the time saved resulting from reduced traffic will occur on streets outside the pricing zone. Because fewer people each day will be leaving their homes outside the zone by car and driving into Manhattan, traffic will be reduced throughout the city. Substantial traffic reductions are predicted for downtown Brooklyn, Williamsburg/ Greenpoint, Long Island City, Harlem, the South Bronx and Flushing.
Critics say: Neighborhoods along the pricing zone will be turned into parking lots as commuters drive close to the zone and then take mass transit.
The truth is: The city could implement residential parking zones allowing neighborhood residents to obtain permits to park in their neighborhood while ticketing others. Parking lots are already scarce in many of these neighbors due to real estate pressures. There’s just no space to park cars.
Congestion pricing could remove over 100,000 cars each day from our streets. That means better breathing and more room for New Yorkers to bike and walk to work. See you in the bike lane.
Julie Raskin is a student of Urban Studies and Environmental Policy, and an intern at Transportation Alternatives, an advocacy group for cycling, walking and environmentally sensible transportation.
8 Responses to “Congestion Pricing: Time For Car Owners To Pay”
July 24th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Congestion pricing is obvious choice for New Yorkers. Those against it, let us count, the pro-parking lot lobby, oil industry, car dealerships and A.K. Gupta.
July 25th, 2007 at 5:10 am
I support congestion pricing, but was not aware that express buses cost $10 roundtrip (according to Mr. Gupta). If so, the goal must be to make the express buses equal to express subways — a single metrocard fare. The result would be as powerful as when the whole city was made a “one fare zone.” Otherwise, I think it will take more than an $8 fee to persuade people to switch.
July 25th, 2007 at 6:34 am
Let’s count among the morons Jill, who lacks even a 6th-grade reading comprehension.
I clearly wrote in favor of congestion pricing, stating: “some sort of levy on rush-hour traffic should be implemented,” and “New York should implement a fairer system, such as a “variable congestion charge” based on tailpipe emissions.”
Thus, my disagreement is with the specific of Bloomberg’s plan, not the idea itself.
But many advocates are dittoheads at best or dishonest at worst. They are not looking at the details of the plan and how it imposes unfair burdens both in terms of the pricing scheme and the mass transit options. But they refuse to engage the ideas.
There are all sorts of better proposals out there not being considered–why the headlong rush into a bad idea? We should be fighting for a fair system of congestion pricing instead of what our billionaire mayor is trying to impose, a scheme to free luxury vehicles from gridlock.
July 25th, 2007 at 8:31 am
Nice to see the Indy arguing with itself for a change. More of this, please.
July 25th, 2007 at 10:05 am
This could be a worst case scenario for congestion-pricing-promised funding for mass transit. During the Koch administration, the City promised hundreds of millions of dollars from the Battery Park City development to create and preserve affordable housing. That still hasn’t happened.
Read:
BATTERY PARK CITY RECHARGED
The 1960s promise to fund low-cost housing through Battery Park City languished for decades. Why the city finally made good on its pledge. > By Alyssa Katz
READ ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://citylimits.org/content/articles/viewarticle.cfm?article_id=3188
The money was there all along. In 1989, New York City and the state-controlled Battery Park City Authority reached an agreement: The authority, which leases the site from the city, would give the city $600 million in its revenues–money paid by major tenants in lieu of taxes–to be spent on affordable housing.
It wasn’t. A year ago, the city’s Independent Budget Office (IBO) determined that “little if any of the $600 million was used for housing programs, and was instead used for general budget purposes.” Total spent on housing: $143 million. A clause in the agreement allowed the funds to be redirected if City Hall needed them to “maintain fiscal stability”–and according to the Dinkins, Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations, that was always the case.
July 25th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Excellent piece and good debate here on the website. I wonder what the writer Julie Raskin has to say about (1) the proposed use of cameras by Bloomberg and (2) what written promises do New Yorkers have from Mayor Bloomberg that he will use congestion pricing funds for mass transit?
We have heard from A.K. Gupta, now let’s hear from Raskin.
July 24th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
Please forgive the erasing of comments. The Indypendent is experiencing an extraordinary amount of spam in the past couple days and our moderation is overworked. If you had comments posted that were erased, we apologize and invite you to post again.
Sorry for the confusion.