Group to Promote Revised Plan for Tolls on East River Bridges

[cpzilliacus]

N.Y. Times: Group to Promote Revised Plan for Tolls on East River Bridges

First, the name had to go.

There could be no more talk, transit advocates reasoned, of "congestion pricing,"  a phrase Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg often used before his sweeping plan to overhaul New York City's bridge tolling system was vanquished in 2008, and treated as political arsenic ever since.

Then, with a clean slate, supporters could move on to the hard part: sculpting a proposal that might succeed where the mayor failed.

And so, more than five years after Mr. Bloomberg's plan died in Albany, a cadre of the city's transit minds has primed a successor, fine-tuning a pricing model that might be more palatable to residents outside Manhattan, meeting quietly with former opponents and preparing to take its case early next year to a public that has grown accustomed to free, if traffic-choked, rides over the East River.

[Duke87]

The toll rearrangement plan here is a very sensible one. I've said this before, and it shows here: adding tolls to the free bridges to Manhattan is just one piece of the puzzle. You also need to reduce or eliminate tolls on the bridges that don't go to Manhattan. The point is to take traffic that isn't destined for Manhattan and encourage it to drive around Manhattan. The current scheme encourages such traffic to drive through Manhattan, which is entirely dysfunctional.

Some of the other stuff is also interesting. Upgrading the Belt Parkway to allow trucks would make life easier for cargo headed from the JFK area to New Jersey but I think the benefit is overstated (any trucks from Long Island are already taking the LIE to the Throggs Neck to the Cross Bronx to the GWB and will most likely continue to do so unless you want to talk about also upgrading the Southern State). And it's of course a non-starter of an idea anyway because NIMBYs and politics. Transit routing along some highways that don't already have it ( at the photoshopped pic of the Van Wyck) is a more practical idea.

As for bike/ped bridges to Manhattan... one from Jersey City might be useful. Currently you cannot walk or bike to New Jersey without going up to the GWB (although you can take PATH). The other two ideas posed look sexy on paper but aren't particularly cheap or of exceptional usefulness.

[Alps]

As for bike/ped bridges to Manhattan... one from Jersey City might be useful. Currently you cannot walk or bike to New Jersey without going up to the GWB (although you can take PATH).

Also ferries.

[dgolub]

This all seems very reasonable.  I currently live in Manhattan and don't own a car, and it works fine.

Regarding the Belt Parkway -> Belt Expressway conversion, what portion would get converted?  Just from I-278 to JFK or the whole thing?  If it's the whole thing, then where do the trucks go at the end?  Does the Cross Island get converted, too?

Also, what number would it get?  I-878 maybe?  If it ended at JFK, then that might make sense.

[vdeane]

I-878 would be best, especially since it could so seamlessly transition to current (hidden) I-878 at JFK, which would have an interesting situation where eastbound I-878 is on the Nassau Expressway, and westbound I-878 (which currently doesn't exist) is on the Belt Parkway.  But given that even the portion of the Grand Central Parkway that overlaps I-278 hasn't gotten much of an upgrade, it probably won't happen.

[mc78andrew]

Article says anyone who opposes this needs to provide a suggestion on how to fund the MTAs long term capital plan.  Although I am not sure I oppose this, here are a few ideas.

1.  Have MTA employees pay more for their health insurance and/or have them move to a defined contribution system rather than a defined benefit system for retirement.  Plow the savings into capital expenditures.

2.  Have the rest of the city employees do the same.  And plow that money into the MTA.

3.  Merge LIRR and most PANYNJ operations and blow out any duplicate operations and personnel.

Since this is not a site dedicated to politics, here are some other suggestions.

1.  Raise user fees.  MTA cards are expensive, but the price can be raised and people will pay it.  Tolls are technically user fees as well. 

2.  Raise the sales tax, which is already high, but who cares. 

3.  Toll the FDR. Turn over the road to the MTA and have the MTA maintain it.  That adds to the cap ex needed but should be at least cash flow positive.  I guess this is the same as turning over the east river bridges and tolling them, but I thought I would mention it. 

4.  Add MTA tax to vehicle registrations.  Nearby states like CT have an annual property tax on cars.  If you live in NYC you'll pay more to register your car.

I am sure there are others...good debate I guess.  I hate taxes, but this stuff is expensive and there are no more general fund surpluses to tackle these large projects. 

[Duke87]

As far as I'm concerned funding for the MTA is a secondary concern here. The primary reason for this revised scheme in my eyes isn't the revenue it will generate, it's the rationalization it will bring to traffic patterns by removing the ability to shunpike into (or worse, through) Manhattan.

In terms of funding the MTA, finding internal savings by revising work rules, combining agencies, and/or reducing pensions would be dandy, but good luck getting any of that past the unions.

If you want more revenue, it should come from the state, not specifically from the city. As things stand there is a disparity to the tune of billions of dollars annually between what downstate pays in state taxes and what we receive in state funding. You wonder why our infrastructure is crumbling down here so much more than it is upstate? That's one key reason why. Albany is not pulling its weight with regards to funding the MTA (on the grounds that most of the state isn't affected by it).


Or here's another fine idea: capital costs for the MTA need to be funded from whatever source appropriate at the time they are incurred, rather than paid for by taking on debt that just kicks the can down the road and increases overall costs by requiring interest payments (thanks, Pataki).

[vdeane]

As things stand there is a disparity to the tune of billions of dollars annually between what downstate pays in state taxes and what we receive in state funding.

Trouble is, if you ask anyone upstate about the disparity, they'll say the reverse I guess NY is in Alanland.

[Duke87]

As things stand there is a disparity to the tune of billions of dollars annually between what downstate pays in state taxes and what we receive in state funding.

Trouble is, if you ask anyone upstate about the disparity, they'll say the reverse I guess NY is in Alanland.

Except I can cite a source. Bottom of page 5. Plain as day. The capital region is of course higher because of the state functions in the area, but compare elsewhere. For FY2010 NYC paid 48.7% of taxes and received 40% of spending. Upstate excluding the capital region paid 23.8% of taxes and received 35.2% of spending.

Even without looking at numbers, though, there are some obvious gaps in the state covering things: there are no NY State Troopers in NYC, NYPD, paid for by city tax dollars, handles all police functions. NYSDOT's role in NYC is much less than elsewhere in the state, many major roads are maintained in part or entirely by NYCDOT, with city tax dollars.

[ARMOURERERIC]

Pull a San Diego, slap a transient occupancy tax on NYC hotel tooms dedicated to transportation.  SD's revenue stream for transportation, and the pot is pretty respectable, is actually 25% paid by tourists in ways they can't readily see.

[mc78andrew]

Is there any data or estimates on how much manhattan shun piking actually goes on?  While I am sure the proponents of East river tolling have this as a goal, it has to be an ancillary concern.  I guess I could get to Long Island from westchester toll free by taking Willis ave bridge and then head down the FDR to one of the east river bridges.  That's one giant pain in the ass shun pike though. 

I hear you on tax diversion.  Seems like that has approached the limit, but it's not like upstate has saved the money and it's sitting in some safe somewhere ready to head back down the thruway.  The have aging infrastructure of their own and downstate tax dollars have already been spent trying to repair that or have been squandered on other things.  So let's not turn on each other NY.  NY took in 71B in taxes last year.  This is about choices , not necessarily about more money...user fees like tolls will help, but they are only a drop in the bucket.

Here is another idea...could be fictional highways, but it has other components:
Sell the FDR to a private company (Macquarie might care even though they have gotten smoked on US toll roads). Part of their deal would be to totally rebuild the FDR.  Here is the best part, if they can successfully move some of the FDR into the east river, they can keep and develop that land. 

Or sell all the non tolled bridges as a package and use the money for current cap ex.  I know this sounds painful, but we are reduced to selling assets to pay for things.  Or we can pretend that some combo of new taxes and user fees can rebuild a giant heap of 100 year old infrastructure? 

[cpzilliacus]

Here is another idea...could be fictional highways, but it has other components:
Sell the FDR to a private company (Macquarie might care even though they have gotten smoked on US toll roads). Part of their deal would be to totally rebuild the FDR.  Here is the best part, if they can successfully move some of the FDR into the east river, they can keep and develop that land.

Long term lease sounds lots better than a sale of public assets.  As long as the process is open and competitive (and the details are hammered-out in advance), why not?

Not sure that such an idea would fly in New York City for reasons of politics.

Or sell all the non tolled bridges as a package and use the money for current cap ex.  I know this sounds painful, but we are reduced to selling assets to pay for things.  Or we can pretend that some combo of new taxes and user fees can rebuild a giant heap of 100 year old infrastructure?

Those could be leased as well - but given that the toll rates need to be set in harmony with each other, I assert that a turnover to NYMTA Bridge and Tunnel might make more sense.

[dgolub]

3.  Merge LIRR and most PANYNJ operations and blow out any duplicate operations and personnel.

Why LIRR but not Metro-North?

1.  Raise user fees.  MTA cards are expensive, but the price can be raised and people will pay it.  Tolls are technically user fees as well. 

This doesn't make sense.  We want to incentivize the use of mass transit where it's available.  Also, this would disproportionately take its toll on the lower end of the income spectrum.

[mc78andrew]

3.  Merge LIRR and most PANYNJ operations and blow out any duplicate operations and personnel.

Why LIRR but not Metro-North?

1.  Raise user fees.  MTA cards are expensive, but the price can be raised and people will pay it.  Tolls are technically user fees as well. 

This doesn't make sense.  We want to incentivize the use of mass transit where it's available.  Also, this would disproportionately take its toll on the lower end of the income spectrum.

Metro north as well...i'm not an expert, but i always thought metro north was more integrated into the MTA already and LIRR was not...maybe CP can add some comments there, but clearly there are more synergies than what are current being exploited.

I think it makes perfect sense.  The new tolls will put more of a real price on driving the bridges, thus any current incentive to drive will be reduced...not sure there is one though with the cost of parking in Manhattan. 

Also, incentivizing mass transit in NYC isn't really necessary.  The city, in my opinion, does that for you with it's lay out and high cost and lack of parking.  Given those constraints, you could raise the price of MTA much higher and people will not switch. 

While we all benefit from a strong MTA in the greater NYC metro area, those who disproportionally use the system should shoulder most of the burden for building, operating and expanding the system.  And the rich people who have cars can shoulder the rest.  Again, i don't think it should all be on the backs of lower end of the income spectrum, but a reality check needs to take place there too...that check is that the system is aging and expensive and that there are millions of people in the lower income spectrum that use MTA and a tiny few at the top end who don't (unfair wealth distribution is another issue for the USA, but not one for this forum).  We have a nice history of not facing tough facts like that one and it leads to decline over time.  Less expensive smart phones and more expensive metro cards is unpopular, but waiting for a delayed train with a HD screen is too. 

Also, no one cared about the low income bracket when they raised the price of cigarettes to $10 a pack from $1 a pack just 20 years ago in NYC.  Where is the outrage on that?  These people need a voice god dammit before someone like me jacks the MTA fee. 

[deathtopumpkins]

Also, no one cared about the low income bracket when they raised the price of cigarettes to $10 a pack from $1 a pack just 20 years ago in NYC.  Where is the outrage on that?

Public transit is a necessity for everyday life for many people - they use it to get to work, to go shopping,  etc.

Cigarettes are not a necessity for everyday life. They are exactly the opposite, they take away from personal and societal well-being. No one needs cigarettes to get to work.

That's why there was no one clamoring for us to "think of the poor people" when cigarette prices went up.



Also, to answer your question, both MNRR and LIRR are fully integrated into the MTA (and owned and operated by it).  They both do have a certain level of autonomy though.

[cpzilliacus]

Metro north as well...i'm not an expert, but i always thought metro north was more integrated into the MTA already and LIRR was not...maybe CP can add some comments there, but clearly there are more synergies than what are current being exploited.

You give me too much credit. I can tell you about operating arrangements of MARC rail and VRE (and they are mere shadows of the train systems run by Metro-North, LIRR, N.J. Transit and SEPTA), but not very much about the MTA's rail properties.

[froggie]

NYSDOT's role in NYC is much less than elsewhere in the state, many major roads are maintained in part or entirely by NYCDOT, with city tax dollars.

NYCDOT may have jurisdiction, but it's a safe bet they're still getting some sort of funding from NYSDOT and especially FHWA for roadwork.

Is there any data or estimates on how much manhattan shun piking actually goes on?

I'd hazard a guess that, except for unfamiliar drivers or those with a lot of time to kill, there isn't much going on.  The one time I attempted to shunpike through Manhattan, I sat for 30 minutes on Canal St alone, let alone getting into the Holland Tunnel.

[mc78andrew]

Also, no one cared about the low income bracket when they raised the price of cigarettes to $10 a pack from $1 a pack just 20 years ago in NYC.  Where is the outrage on that?

Public transit is a necessity for everyday life for many people - they use it to get to work, to go shopping,  etc.

Cigarettes are not a necessity for everyday life. They are exactly the opposite, they take away from personal and societal well-being. No one needs cigarettes to get to work.

That's why there was no one clamoring for us to "think of the poor people" when cigarette prices went up.



Also, to answer your question, both MNRR and LIRR are fully integrated into the MTA (and owned and operated by it).  They both do have a certain level of autonomy though.

Then we have our answer...raise the tax on alcohol to fund the MTA...after all, every income bracket drinks and it's not a necessity.  Again, these are hard choices...everyone wants any easy answer like tax the rich. 

Or bump all these by 1%:
https://www.nfc.usda.gov/publications/Tax_Formulas/State_City_County/taxny-c.html

Probably easier to do tolls. 

[mrsman]

As someone who does shunpike on trips between Queens and Maryland, I can say that this plan should improve things, from my personal perspective.

Coming from Bklyn or Queens, it should be considerably less to travel to Bronx or Staten Island than it is to Manhattan.  This will encourage drivers to stay on the expressways and bypass Manhattan.

If heading to Manhattan, having the toll be the same for both the Midtown Tunnel and the Queensboro Bridge will discourage most people from exiting the LIE at Van Dam to reach the free bridge, thereby considerably improving traffic in Long Island City.  (Similar result will also occur in Brooklyn.)

[Duke87]

i'm not an expert, but i always thought metro north was more integrated into the MTA already and LIRR was not.

I don't think either is more "integrated" with anything else. The various MTA agencies are all very siloed, primarily because the workers in each had different unions with different contracts before the MTA took them over, and continue to do so to this day since it's easier for management to negotiate with each separately than to try and get everyone to sign onto the same thing.

The upside to that is that when NYC Transit goes on strike, Metro-North and LIRR are unaffected and can have their service beefed up to help lifeboat the transportation system.

Is there any data or estimates on how much manhattan shun piking actually goes on?

I'd hazard a guess that, except for unfamiliar drivers or those with a lot of time to kill, there isn't much going on.  The one time I attempted to shunpike through Manhattan, I sat for 30 minutes on Canal St alone, let alone getting into the Holland Tunnel.

And that is why you don't take Canal Street if you want to do that. It's actually better to go down the FDR Drive, under Battery Park, and then up the West Side Highway to the tunnel.

Another method is to use the Williamsburg Bridge and then take Delancey, Kenmare, Broome, and Watts Streets to the tunnel... but this will involve sitting in just as much traffic if it's rush hour or on the weekend.

Or, if you're crossing-agnostic, use any free East River bridge (preferably Brooklyn or Queensboro) and then go up the FDR to the GWB. Unless you're looking to head south, this works just as well.


I use the Queensboro and Willis/Third Avenue Bridges instead of the Triboro Bridge to get between Queens and The Bronx with some frequency, under normal circumstances it costs me 10 minutes. To avoid a $5.33 toll, that's well worth it. But this is admittedly much easier than attempting to shunpike to the Holland Tunnel.