The Daily News reports:

State and city officials are hashing out a plan to ensure congestion pricing money pays for mass transit upgrades -- and mass transit upgrades only, sources said Wednesday.

Under the developing plan, net proceeds from new tolls for motorists entering a large section of Manhattan would be put in a "lock box" administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, sources in City Hall and Gov. Spitzer's office said.

The fund could only be used for transit projects that meet specific criteria, which would be spelled out by state legislation, sources said.

A member of Gov. Spitzer's administration confirmed that Spitzer will include the creation of the MTA account as a line-item in the proposed budget he unveils next week.

At a Congestion Mitigation Commission hearing yesterday at Hunter College (which saw the notable emergence of a pro-pricing coalition of advocates for low-income transit customers), Regional Plan Association President Bob Yaro testified that similar measures have successfully earmarked transit funds for decades.

The MTA's revenues at their bridge and tunnels in excess of operating costs is guaranteed by formula set by the State Legislature for use by the MTA for transit since 1968. Taxes such as the mortgage recording tax, petroleum business tax, corporate franchise tax and sales tax have also been reliably dedicated to transit since the early 1980s. It should not be difficult to establish a mechanism for congestion pricing revenue that would do the same, while requiring the use of the funds by the MTA on the projects agreed to by the MTA and the City.

Yaro also rebutted opponents' claims that the Traffic Commission's alternative pricing plan is worse than the Mayor's because it gives Manhattanites a free ride. Yaro said:

The inclusion of increased metered parking rates and a taxi surcharge within the zone, as well as the elimination of the resident park tax exemption [in the Alternative Plan] ensure that residents of the charging zone pay their share.

As key arguments against pricing are dismantled, and as the MTA and its working-class ridership finally find their collective voice, congestion pricing's impact on neighborhoods just outside the zone remains a focus of the vocal opposition.

Studies of London's congestion pricing plan showed "no adverse impact" or major parking problems on the outskirts of the congestion pricing zone. The Department of Transportation is responding to the park-and-ride concern by putting big resources into a second round of citywide neighborhood parking workshops starting next week. And, of course, Mayor Bloomberg recently announced a major crackdown on government employee parking placard abuse.

The question is whether any of that will be enough for legislators like State Senator George Onorato, who rallied a recent town hall meeting in Astoria, Queens with the cry, "We would be the parking lot for all the Long Island commuters."

Of course, this isn't helping either.

Coverage of yesterday's long-term planning and sustainability speech, "New York City 2030: Accepting the Challenge."

Text of the speech and video (NYC.gov)

Bloomy's Vision of 2030 Foresees Nightmare of Crowding & Crumbling (Post)
When a question was raised about congestion pricing -- a proposed policy of charging motorists to use roads in Manhattan, in order to relieve traffic -- an unexpected cheer erupted from the audience. It was a clear indication most of the crowd wasn't from Queens, where elected officials have angrily denounced the proposal as a hidden tax.

New York faces all-day rush hour by 2030 (CNN International)

Transportation 2030 (Post)
Officials studied traffic patterns over the past 15 years to come up with the frightening estimate of a 12-hour rush hour, based on the addition of a million more residents in the next 25 years. Those residents are expected to cram 100,000 additional cars onto already clogged roadways.

Mayor Bloomberg Addresses City's Long-Term Goals (NY1)

A city plan with room to grow (News)
Rampant development is not universally better, and so we can only hope that inherent in yesterday's talk was the promise to be more sensitive to those who already live and work here. Most important on that score, the mayor invited all New Yorkers to take part in "a citywide conversation." Actually, that's a conversation that has been going on for quite a while. My fear is that the mayor hasn't been listening.

NYC in 2030: Remedies for Growing Pains (Gotham Gazette)

Queens: Mayor Seeks Plan for City's Population Growth (NYT)
Mr. Bloomberg made the announcement at the Queens Museum of Art accompanied by videos and images of himself in a plaid bathrobe making toast and drinking coffee to illustrate the many systems, like water and electricity, that the average New Yorker taps into daily.

2030 OR BUST (Post)
Similarly, to truly develop the waterfront, whose rezoning was Bloomberg's first-term triumph, all those underserved former industrial areas desperately need light rail as London did, when it built the light rail out to Canary Wharf in the Docklands, its new financial center. (Think of New York deciding to move Wall Street to Red Hook.) London is closing fast on New York, which has to reorient itself to its ferocious international competitors.... Still, the usually reserved president of the Regional Plan Association, Robert Yaro, offered slightly different advice: "Our challenge here is to kick ass with London."

City Plans for Population Explosion (WNYC)
The mayor wants the public to participate in the planning process. A brochure about the city's challenges will go out next week in local papers and meetings will be held throughout the five boroughs. New Yorkers can also offer suggestions via the city's website.

Bloomberg Prepares for a 25-Year Boom in the City (Sun)
The bumper-to-bumper rush-hour traffic that already chokes the city's highways could, for example, last up to 12 hours a day in 2030 if transportation upgrades are not made. The city's aging power plants will not be able to keep up with energy demands - in fact, energy demand could outpace supply by as early as 2012. And subway lines where commuters are already squeezed will be "crammed beyond capacity," according to the city. Within hours of the speech, Environmental Defense, a non-profit group, released a statement calling on the mayor to consider congestion pricing for New York. City Council Member David Weprin, the chairman of the finance committee, called it a "bold vision" but said the city would have to look at the projects in the context of the budget. "There's no question that we'll have to prioritize because we can't do everything at once."

Co-chairs

• Elliot Sander, director of NYU Rudin Center for Transportation, VP at MTA contractor DMJM Harris and former city Dept. of Transporation commisioner. (Rumored to an MTA chairman candidate)
• Mary Ann Crotty, former transportation advisor for Mario Cuomo.

Members

• Janette Sadik-Kahn, VP at Parsons Brinckerhoff (Big MTA contractor leading the Partnership for NYC's congestion pricing study)
• Gene Russianoff, Straphangers Campaign (the MTA's best critic)
• Jon Orcutt, president of the Tri State Transportation Campaign (another tough MTA critic and big thinker on regional transport issues)
• Ernest Tollerson, VP at Partnership for NYC (Working on the Partnership's congestion pricing study)
• Mitch Palley, MTA board member from Suffolk (often the lone dissenting voice with votig power on the board and big supporter of the third rail project for the LIRR)
• Susan Kupferman, president MTA Bridges and Tunnels (Rumored candidate for MTA executive director)
• Robert Yaro, president of Regional Plan Association

Other Members

• James Conigliaro, Machinists
• Sam Williams, UAW 9A
• Garry Labarbera, president Teamsters Local 282
• Jack Aherne, International Union of Operating Engineers
• Chris Ward, managing director of the General Contractors Association (Ports, shipping and environment expert)
• Sonia Toledo, managing director Merrill Lynch
• Jamie Mercado, partner at Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett
• Edward Malloy, president of Buildings and Construction Trades Council
• Eva Lerner Lamb, presidents of Palisades Consulting
• Doreen Frasca, president of Frasca & Associates
• John Egan, president of Renaissance Corp.
• Binta Brown, Associate at Cravath, Swaine & Moore
• Samara Barend, director of STV Inc. (Engineering firm that did the Cross Harbor Freight Tunnel study)

While former Bogota Mayor Enrique Peñalosa and DOT Commissioner Iris Weinshall got most of the attention for their keynote speeches at last week's transportation policy conference, much of the day's real intellectual ferment took place in the five separate breakout sessions that convened before lunch. The groups were organized as follows:

• Subways and Commuter Rail moderated by Gene Russianoff
• Cars and Buses with Bruce Schaller
• Underutilized Modes with Paul Steely White
• Pedestrians and Sidewalks with Ethel Sheffer
• Comprehensive Planning and Policy with Ernest Tollerson and Bob Yaro

The goal of each workshop, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer said, was to generate lists of specific short-term and long-term priorities. After lunch, the moderators returned to the stage to present each workshop's findings.

Interestingly, a few key issues bubbled up in all five groups, regardless of the specific topic:

• The five groups all expressed a deep and strongly-felt desire for a better quality of life on Manhattan's sidewalks, streets and non-park public spaces.
• All called for a greater ability for people on the neighborhood-level to test new ideas on their own streets and share urban design best practices with other civic groups.
• Each group called for better collaboration within city government and said that there needs to be improvement in the way that city officials work together across agency lines.

That last point emerged as the day's elephant-in-the-room. Tollerson and Yaro put the question this way: Can city agencies each working "in their own separate silos" nurture the flexible, collaborative processes necessary to create the needed change in New York City's transportation and public space policy? There were some serious heavy-hitters in the Planning and Policy workshop including Buz Paaswell, Director of CUNY's Transportation Research Center, and the general feeling in that breakout group was, "No." It is time for the post-Word War II structure of agencies and authorities responsible for New York City's vast transportation and public space infrastructure to be re-thought and reformed.

After her session on Pedestrians and Sidewalks Sheffer reported, "Many said it was important that communities have more of a role in trying to determine furniture, signage, and width of sidewalks." She also said, "a real concern is that there is not enough coordination on pedestrian and street issues" between city agencies. During the session neighborhood leaders said City Hall downplayed aesthetic priorities that weren't part of big development projects or well-funded retail districts. Wellington Chan of the Chinatown Partnership summed up the mood when he explained how hard it is to procure resources for something like new street furniture:

"Anything that's not dull gray concrete is not acceptable to the Department of Transportation. They'll say, "You have to design in accordance with DOT standards or you're liable for the cost. So, to put up a nice planter, you need to be a business improvement district or a local development corporation."

Sheffer said that many of the participants in her workshop are ready to take it upon themselves to foster a new proactive culture. They want to design their own principles for managing street vendors, for instance, and to build coalitions among different civic groups. Sheffer's Pedestrians and Sidewalks group wanted to:

• Ease the conflict between pedestrians and turning cars.
• Increase the number of pedestrian ramps throughout Manhattan.
• Promote exclusive crossing periods for pedestrians at crazy intersections.
• Seek "better access to the waterfront," with money and staff to promote innovative design and public amenities.

In general, Sheffer said, the group wants to help the city cater to pedestrians' shifting needs and "enable them to traverse the borough with some degree of pleasantness."

Bruce Schaller's session on Cars and Buses spent a lot of its time focused on parking. He reported that there was a "division in the group about whether adding parking spaces eases the parking problem or adds more cars." Like Sheffer's session, Schaller's yielded a call for smarter government. He said the city should "coordinate agencies" on teams to manage big new developments or zoning changes. If the city does that, he said, experts in transportation and health and planning could evaluate a project's total impact on neighborhoods.

Schaller's group called for strong measures to solve Manhattan's congestion problem:

• "Selective congestion pricing" via a phasing-in of charges on drivers where traffic "is most acute."
• This pricing should come with and, perhaps, help to fund more and more frequent bus service.
• The city should "rationalize" its parking policy to balance the needs of all street users.

Paul Steely White of Transportation Alternatives, whose group discussed underutilized transportation modes, also called for balance. "There's just not room enough to walk and bike in Manhattan," he said. His workshop proposed these steps:

• Extend crosswalk time on busy streets
• Improve connections between subway stations and bike lanes
• Improve cyclists' access to ferries
• More bike parking outside and in private buildings as well.
• Tighten enforcement of existing bike lanes and cyclist-protection laws.

White's group also discussed parking, noting that 15 bikes can fit in the same street space used to store one motor vehicle. The group consensus was that bike parking clogged neighborhoods with big numbers of cyclists like the East Village and Williamsburg would do well to set aside some street space for bike parking, particularly around subway stops.

Those who discussed subway service produced the day's most tailored suggestions. Activist Gene Russianoff, who heads the Straphangers Campaign for the New York Public Interest Research Group, said he had urged his group to "focus on things that could happen or are on the drawing boards." He reported support for the MTA's plan to install electronic real-time information on the 1, 6 and L lines in the next year. Looking farther ahead, Russianoff's group also pushed for cross-agency policies to make the subway better serve the streets above it. These would include:

• Completion of the 2nd Ave subway, ideally with a link to Brooklyn.
• A "green component across the system," building on the success of the solar panels at the Coney Island-Stilwell Avenue station.
• Expanding elevator access and other services to people who use wheelchairs.

Participants acknowledged the gap between what New Yorkers really want and what is currently politically popular. Russianoff rated outgoing Governor George Pataki's pet project, a link from Penn Station to Grand Central, "middle priority" and gave Mayor Bloomberg's plan to extend the 7 line to 11th Avenue and 34th Street "very low priority." Yet, "at the moment seems most likely to go ahead in the real world," Russianoff said.

How to narrow the gap between the real world and the ideal? That was the focus of Tollerson and Yaro's panel.  Tollerson's group called for sensible (i.e., radical) changes to guide future laws and rules. They want to see the City:

• Prioritize projects through inter-agency collaboration
• Create 24/7 live-work neighborhoods around transit hubs (without closing streets or building new towers that warp neighborhood scale)
• Use the zoning code to promote mass-transit oriented strategies.

Sounds like a tall order? For one day, at least, it all felt entirely possible.

• The creation of the Office of Long-term Planning and Sustainability.
• The undertaking of a major greenhouse gas inventory for City government and the City overall.
• The appointment of a Sustainability Advisory Board to advise the City on environmentally sound policies and practices.
• The creation of a new partnership with the Earth Institute of Columbia University to provide the City with scientific research and advice on environmental and climate change-related issues.

Here are some of the more interesting snippets from the City's press release:

The announcement took place during a visit with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to Bloom Energy in Sunnyvale, California, where the Mayor and Governor talked about the State of California's groundbreaking sustainability initiatives.

"Now, we intend to make New York City a national leader in meeting the challenge of making ours an environmentally sustainable city. To make New York a truly sustainable city, we need a bold plan to use our land in the smartest way possible," Bloomberg said (Editor: Clearly the Mayor here is referring to this morning's Park(ing) Squat in Midtown).

The Office of Long-term Planning and Sustainability is led by Director Rohit T. Aggarwala the Office's mission is three-fold: to help develop a plan for the City's long-term growth and development, to integrate sustainability goals and practices into every aspect of that plan; and to make New York City government a "green" organization.

The Mayor announced the launch of an unprecedented effort to measure the entire carbon emissions of New York City. This much broader effort, with a target completion date within six months, will give us the first picture of the total carbon impact of everyone who lives in, works in, or visits New York City.

The Sustainability Advisory Board will be chaired by Deputy Mayor for Economic Development and Rebuilding Daniel L. Doctoroff, and its kick-off meeting will take place on Wednesday, September 27th.

Members of the Sustainability Advisory Board include:

• Christine Quinn, Speaker of the New York City Council
• James F. Gennaro, Council Member and Chair of the Committee on Environmental Protection
• Carlton Brown, COO and Founder, Full Spectrum
• Marcia Bystryn, Executive Director, New York League of Conservation Voters
• Robert Fox, Partner, Cook + Fox Architects
• Ester Fuchs, Professor of Public Affairs and Political Science at the Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs
• Peter Goldmark, Program Director of NYC Office, Environmental Defense
• Ashok Gupta, Program Director of Air and Energy, Natural Resources Defense Council
• Michael Northrop, Program Officer of Sustainable Development, Rockefeller Brothers Fund
• Ed Ott, Executive Director, NYC Central Labor Council
• Elizabeth Girardi Schoen, Senior Director of Environmental Affairs, Pfizer, Inc.
• Peggy Sheppard, Executive and Co-Founder, West Harlem Environmental Action Coalition (WE ACT)
• Daniel Tishman, Chairman and CEO, Tishman Construction Corporation
• Kathryn Wylde, President and CEO, Partnership for New York City
• Robert Yaro, President, Regional Plan Association
• Elizabeth Yeampierre, Executive Director, UPROSE

For anyone who has attended official public hearings on Brooklyn's Atlantic Yards project, the scene looked familiar: Real estate developer buses in project supporters. Supporters shout down and intimidate community members. The democratic process and opportunity for thoughtful community input is undermined.

In my personal politics I have always sympathized with labor. My grandfather was so proud of getting beat up by New York City police during a 1930's strike that he had a formal portrait taken of himself with his head wrapped in bandages and his arm in a sling. But these days, I'm finding it difficult to support New York City's unions as their members stomp public meetings and prevent well-meaning, thoughtful community people from participating in New York City's development processes. Increasingly, it seems that the building trades unions serve as little more than muscle for New York City's big developers and corporate interests. That's definitely not what Grandpa Abe got his head bashed-in for.

It is also worth noting that last night's ruckus started as Councilmember Lanza began talking about his community's traffic and transportation concerns.

If, as Robert Yaro wrote in the Gotham Gazette, New York City is going to add another one million people in the next 25 years, development, construction, and increased density is essential and inevitable. Yet, virtually every big development project across the city is being fought by neighborhood and community groups on the grounds that any new development will bring too much traffic.

It doesn't have to be this way. Urban development doesn't have to be the enemy of neighborhood quality of life. But until New York City puts in place a thoughtful, long-term, community-oriented plan for reducing motor vehicle traffic and improving more efficient modes of transportation, New York City's growth is going to be bogged down by neighborhood-level battles like the one we saw on Staten Island last night. So, what is it going to take for Mayor Bloomberg to notice that his administration's development agenda, and ultimately, his legacy, is being hindered by a lack of any sort of cohesive, citywide transportation strategy? Perhaps we'll get an answer in June when Mayor Bloomberg plans to make a major speech on land-use and transportation.