Comments on: Rumor Mill: Sustainability Announcement Tomorrow

By: steveo

steveo — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 18:51:20 +0000

BAM's position on tolls was dumb for another reason: there's a lot more drivers in Brooklyn than in Manhattan, so "forcing" motorists to look for entertainment in their home borough would come out as a positive for BAM.

By: Clarence

Clarence — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 03:47:27 +0000

Speaking about paper tigers: Back when Bloomberg was first mulling over tolls years ago, Marty Markowitz went into a full press frenzy. On one occassion he talked about tolls and how people from Brooklyn would stop going to Broadway shows, and how people from Manhattan would no longer come to BAM for their events because of the added tolls and the burden on drivers.

Errr…yeah…I guess that $5 toll would be enough to stop people from driving to Times Square. I can see it now…

Woman: “Honey, should I get those tickets to “Wicked”?”

Man: “Yes, I can’t wait! I have wanted to see that forever!”

Woman: “Oh, but…well even though we are going to spend $200 on tickets and probably more on an expensive dinner before hand, we are gonna have to pay that toll to cross the Brooklyn Bridge in our car. That toll is gonna break our wallet, maybe we shouldn’t go?”

Man: “Yeah I guess we will just sit here and do nothing.”

When congestion pricing gets closer, we must be prepared for paper tigers….

By: mfs

mfs — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:22:15 +0000

for the “poor people driving problem”, London has ably addressed this by using the money from the congestion charge to expand the capacity of existing transit.

Similarly, NYC should address this by adding express bus, BRT, and/or heavy rail capacity to the northern bronx, queens, staten island, and outer brooklyn.

By: someguy

someguy — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:52:37 +0000

There’s plenty of data on transportation vs. income out there. Check out previous studies on congestion pricing by Komanoff, Schaller, RPA (Zupan & Perrotta), etc. The NYC Independent Budget Office did a study on bridge tolling a few years ago. Also plain-old census data (long-form) would allow you to cross reference vehicle ownership with income. The Census Transportation Planning Package (available from their website) has more detailed transportation analyses.

By: Someone who knows

Someone who knows — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:25:15 +0000

“We could require everyone who passes into the city by car to contribute a small shrubbery…… “

Presumably the toll booths would be manned by the knights who say “nee” .

By: DB

DB — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:46:53 +0000

Efficiency Nut – Can you point me to Pratt’s data? Rep. Weiner makes a similar populist, anti-CP argument as the Queens CofC and I’d like to find some counter data. I can’t find anything about Transportation Equity on Pratt’s website.

By: Ethan

Ethan — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:38:58 +0000

We could require everyone who passes into the city by car to contribute a small shrubbery……perhaps on Earth Day or Its My Park Day.

By: Efficiency Nut

Efficiency Nut — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:27:45 +0000

Hey Sproule, Where are all these low-income people who drive? That’s the argument the Queens Chamber of Commerce is spouting, but looking at car-ownership to income rates, you realize it’s a Paper Tiger extraordinaire. The Pratt Center for Community Development is doing some great work on Transportation Equity, and one of the things that their data show is just how flimsy this retort about taxing poor people really is.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:47:31 +0000

ManhattanGuestPass

By: Zach

Zach — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 06:15:06 +0000

"EZPass Central"

By: Sam

Sam — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 02:32:57 +0000

Why not make it so that each vehicle gets a set number of credits a day, and driving on expressways (this would be harder to implement on regular streets) cost a number of credits based on how congested it is? And they could implement it by putting variable signs near ramps saying "this expressway costs _ credits to drive on", each car would have an EZ-Pass like tag that also shows the number of credits left, and when going on the ramp, a machine on the side would deduct the number of credits.

By: someguy

someguy — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:00:24 +0000

CityPass is good except it makes it sound kind of exclusive and authoritarian/big brother-ish. i also like Congestion Relief Zone or Traffic Relief Zone. those are good suggestions. i could talk about the theory and policy road pricing all day, but my creativity in naming it is a bit lacking.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 22:51:48 +0000

I myself am a fan of “CityPass.” It tells drivers that this is something you need if you are going to drive into the City, while also mentally linking up with EZ-Pass. It’s short, sweet, and doesn’t sound negative or wonky, like “congestion charge.”

By: Nicolo Macchiavelli

Nicolo Macchiavelli — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 22:00:04 +0000

How bout. Bus, taxi and truck productivity differential.

By: jk

jk — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:31:57 +0000

Congestion Relief ZoneCongestion Relief DistrictCongestion Relief AreaOr substitute "traffic" for congestion in any of above. I agree that the positive should be emphasized, though EZ Pass is the means to the end, not the end. We dont call the George Washington Bride, the EZ Pass Bridge. Why would we call the Congestion Relief Zone/District the EZ Pass District?

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:31:33 +0000

Anon,

For the record, it's "Streetsblog" not "StreetsBlog."

By: Sproule

Sproule — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 20:04:58 +0000

Sorry to kill the wordsmithing, but why come up with a new name, when EZ-Pass is clearly the easiest way to administer something like this? As was mentioned before, we already have peak pricing in NYC: The toll at the GWB is $2 less at off peak hours with EZ-Pass. The problem is that the price signal is not strong enough. If that is adjusted, everyone will get EZ-Pass and everyone will know when the rates change. The infrastructure is already mostly in place, and EZ-Pass is it, up and down the Eastern seaboard. I think the only valid criticism of congestion pricing is the regressive nature of the charges, and this can be addressed with a subsidy for low-income folks (how can suburban commuters complain while they’ve enjoyed the repeal of the commuter tax?). That wouldn’t be easy to administer, but there’s an equitable solution out there. Hey, a kid can dream.

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 19:20:49 +0000

Well that was silly.But
hey, "StreetPass" actually sounds pretty good… Maybe then you can
have a Manhattan StreetPass, a Brooklyn StreetPass, etc. for various
congestion areas. Or just one for them all…

By: anon42

anon42 — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:50:01 +0000

Feh. You want acronyms, I’ll give you acronyms:

Finance-Assisted Relief of Traffic

Community-Led Initiative for Traffic-Oriented Relief on Inundated Streets

New Inside Passage Pricing for Land Enhancement

But the real hotness these days is two words scrunched together (i.e. Vision42, SolarOne or StreetsBlog). So what you really want is:

CongestionFree (makes people think it’s free)

StreetPass (evoke EZ-Pass without being it)

TransitNext (cheesy)

GoNYC (oops, already taken?)

PayGo (that too, huh?)

FunkTown59 (for that retro positive kick)

By: Clarence

Clarence — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:45:23 +0000

How about one called:

EZ Pass CCR (EZ Pass Car Commercial Rates)

This would be a rate you would pay where you could drive like cars do in every commerical in Manhattan, no other cars on the streets, no gridlock, and hardly a pedstrian or biyclist in view. (And of course wet streets, gotta have wet streets so it looks cool!)

Of course it would be lie, but hey commercials lie all the time.