Editorial
Traffi c pricing: A great idea, if done right
For more than a decade now, the
movement to institute congestion
pricing in New York City has been
proposed, debated and ultimately killed
over and over again. But this time, it
appears that the hotly debated proposal
is fi nally going to become a reality.
As we went to press this week, it was
reported that Democrats in the state
Legislature appeared to have enough
votes in favor of congestion pricing to
include it in the budget that’s still being
hammered out. Lawmakers have
until Mon., April 1, to get a budget deal
done.
What this means is that very soon
anyone crossing an East River bridge
into Manhattan, or traveling south of
60th St. in Manhattan, will be charged
a toll. The revenue generated from this
plan will be used to fund much-needed
public transit improvements — even
though it’s hoped that congestion pricing
will encourage more people to leave
their cars at home when traveling to
our borough, thereby reducing traffi c
volume.
The assumption, of course, is that
most Manhattanites will support this
plan. After all, it’s being done because
of the insane gridlock we are increasingly
experiencing on our streets. Why
anyone would even want to drive, take
a cab or hop into an app-hail car during
midday in Midtown Manhattan —
or anywhere south of 60th St. — is a
Cars and trucks pouring off the Manhattan Bridge at Canal St. of course
contribute to Downtown’s enormous traffic problem. Under congestion
pricing, drivers entering the borough anywhere south of 60th St.
would be assessed a surcharge. The figure $11 is being mentioned.
mystery to us. But plenty of people do
it — and, as a result, have the pleasure
of sitting in traffi c and going nowhere
fast as CitiBike riders whiz by them. To
each his or her own.
Yet, there are concerns for Manhattanites
about this plan. For example,
will people just park on the edge of the
zone, then take mass transit or a cab
or ride-share car into the zone? Again,
as with the infernal traffi c, would
commuters and others be dumb/crazy
enough to try to park in Manhattan,
given that parking here is already so
diffi cult? State Senator Brad Hoylman,
PHOTO BY ALEJANDRA O’CONNELL-DOMENECH
however, for one, does think residential
parking permits would be needed to
offset this potential infl ux.
In addition, Hoylman feels that Manhattan
dwellers should “get a discount”
when they pass in or out of the zone.
In addition, he feels there should only
be a one-way toll — for people entering
the zone — since leaving the zone (i.e.,
lessening congestion here) is the idea.
Some say “equity” is needed — that
the toll should be two-way — but we
strongly disagree. It’s simply counterintuitive.
Hoylman’s ideas, in general, are
spot-on on this issue.
Defi nitely, buses need all the help
they can get. Buses, like most of the
other traffi c on the borough’s streets,
often move at a snail’s pace. The M14 is
one of the city’s slowest lines, according
to the Bus Turnaround Coalition.
Community Board 3 (East Village /
Lower East Side) has not taken a position
on a traffi c tax yet. That might be
because the Lower East Side does not
have great transportation, and some
people really do rely on cars there. Plus,
there is a fair amount of back and forth
with Brooklyn, and shopping districts
on the LES want the traffi c.
But Community Board 2 (Greenwich
Village, Soho, Little Italy, Chinatown)
is strongly for congestion pricing. A
resolution this Jan. 29 by C.B. 2 said the
board supports the concept because “...
traffi c congestion on our streets has increased
exponentially over the last several
years, with an additional 150,000
for-hire vehicles fl ooding our streets,
resulting in increased noise and air pollution,
hazardous conditions for pedestrians,
drivers and bicyclists alike, and
high costs to business.”
In addition, the Board 2 resolution
noted, the M.T.A. simply desperately
needs this cash infusion, but it must go
into a “locked box” for transportation.
As for complaints that bike lanes
and bus lanes are causing the traffi c —
let’s face it, the buses are way too slow,
so more dedicated lanes for them are
what’s needed, and bike lanes are also
essential: Bike lanes encourage healthy
activity and health over all, bikes don’t
pollute and they are far, far less dangerous
than cars to pedestrians, other bikers
and other drivers. There should not
be a rollback on bike lanes. That ship
has sailed, to mix metaphors. Bikes are
also just one of the fastest and most
convenient ways to get around, especially
in densely packed Manhattan,
where nothing is really that far away
— but where gridlock and transit woes
make trips so much longer than they
should take.
Meanwhile, the other boroughs have
been more strongly opposed to congestion
plans and bridge tolls. Queens, in
particular, is known for having inadequate
mass transit.
The woeful state of the city’s public
transit system, combined with the stark
increase in traffi c volume in recent
years, has made congestion pricing a
necessary evil in the eyes of many. But
it needs to come with changes for the
Metropolitan Transportation Authority
and for commuters from the other boroughs
alike.
For one thing, the M.T.A. must do
more to trim the fat from its corporate
budget.
The overhead in the M.T.A. is staggering;
more than one-quarter of all its
employees earn in excess of $100,000
a year at a time that the authority faces
an unprecedented defi cit. Leadership
must be held accountable to cut costs
as the public is asked to pay more for
improvements.
For this plan to be truly palatable to
all New York City residents, the city
and state must follow through with the
promise to use that revenue solely on
public transportation improvements —
and those improvements must begin
almost immediately.
Funds from congestion pricing will
be used to improve ferry service, in addition
to bus service.
The city and M.T.A. must also fully
fund Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Bus Forward
initiative. S.B.S. allows for larger
buses, off-board fare collection and
dedicated bus lanes, all of which aim to
move commuters around more quickly.
The congestion pricing plan must
also serve to provide a down payment
for the future of public transportation.
If congestion pricing is going to work
for New York City, then the city and
state must keep their promise, and it
must be an unshakable, unconditional
pact.
For this “tax” on drivers, the city
must fi nally provide all New Yorkers
with a modern, effi cient public transportation
Publisher of The Villager, Villager Express, Chelsea Now,
Downtown Express and Manhattan Express
VICTORIA SCHNEPS-YUNIS
JOSHUA SCHNEPS
LINCOLN ANDERSON
GABE HERMAN
MICHELE HERMAN
BOB KRASNER
TEQUILA MINSKY
MARY REINHOLZ
PAUL SCHINDLER
JOHN NAPOLI
MARCOS RAMOS
CLIFFORD LUSTER
(718) 260-2504
CLUSTER@CNGLOCAL.COM
MARVIN ROCK
GAYLE GREENBURG
JIM STEELE
JULIO TUMBACO
Member of the
PUBLISHER’S LIABILITY FOR ERROR ELIZABETH POLLY
The Publisher shall not be liable for slight changes
or typographical errors that do not lessen the value
of an advertisement. The publisher’s liability for
others errors or omissions in connection with an
advertisement is strictly limited to publication of the
advertisement in any subsequent issue.
Published by Schneps Media
One Metrotech North, 10th floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (718) 260-2500
Fax: (212) 229-2790
On-line: www.thevillager.com
E-mail: news@thevillager.com
© 2019 Schneps Media
New York Press Association
system. Member of the National
Newspaper Association
Member of the
Minority Women Business Enterprise
PRESIDENT & PUBLISHER
CEO & CO-PUBLISHER
EDITOR IN CHIEF
REPORTER
CONTRIBUTORS
ART DIRECTORS
ADVERTISING
CIRCULATION SALES MNGR.
ACCOUNT EXECUTIVES
12 March 28, 2019 TVG Schneps Media
/www.thevillager.com
/www.thevillager.com
link
link
link
link