Cuomo Declares a State of Emergency for NYC Subways: Update 7/26 - MTA submits 2 phase $9bil plan

88m3

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
87,269
Reputation
3,556
Daps
154,856
Reppin
Brooklyn
BigMoneyGrip said:
The Governor just bushed congestive pricing indefinitely :wow:
Click to expand...

probably figured they'll bilk enough people with the dumb ass cameras


the optics on the congestion pricing were terrible, maybe after they deal with ghost cars at the bare minimum they can revisit this
 
88m3

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
87,269
Reputation
3,556
Daps
154,856
Reppin
Brooklyn
storyteller said:
Click to expand...


meh I think the optics and special interest groups are more at play

price gouging workers and businesses in this economy could create a doom loop


this is also the NYPD/MTA's fault for the lawlessness re cars in the city running around with fake plates/expired tags etc for years in everyones faces
 
BigMoneyGrip

BigMoneyGrip

I'm Lamont's pops
Supporter
Joined
Nov 20, 2016
Messages
79,362
Reputation
10,863
Daps
313,823
Reppin
Straight from Flatbush
88m3 said:
probably figured they'll bilk enough people with the dumb ass cameras


the optics on the congestion pricing were terrible, maybe after they deal with ghost cars at the bare minimum they can revisit this
Click to expand...
Nah I think they gonna keep those camera but they gonna change course and charge commercial vehicles (trucks and buses) along with yellow taxis and liveries(Uber, left etc).. That’s literally where the congestion is coming from..

Folk with private vehicles who drive into Manhattan almost always don’t stay done there because parking is next to impossible..
 
storyteller

storyteller

Superstar
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
15,994
Reputation
4,905
Daps
60,880
Reppin
NYC
88m3 said:
meh I think the optics and special interest groups are more at play

price gouging workers and businesses in this economy could create a doom loop


this is also the NYPD/MTA's fault for the lawlessness re cars in the city running around with fake plates/expired tags etc for years in everyones faces
Click to expand...
I doubt this does her any favors with optics.



I feel like the negativity I've seen about it has mostly come from conservative outlets :manny:. 99% of the people I know actively avoid driving below 60th as it is.

Even if she was worried about optics, doing a last-minute rug pull isn’t better optics. It’s not helping.

 
Last edited:
storyteller

storyteller

Superstar
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
15,994
Reputation
4,905
Daps
60,880
Reppin
NYC



Gov. Kathy Hochul's decision to "indefinitely pause" congestion pricing in Manhattan is likely to reverberate for decades, much like the former New Jersey governor Chris Christie's decision in 2010 to block construction of a badly needed new rail tunnel under the Hudson River.

Both were short-term choices that pushed aside critical long-term investments in the most mass-transit-dependent metropolitan area of the nation. The decision by Mr. Christie, which he said was based on the project's cost, compromised the region's competitiveness, economy and environment. Ms. Hochul's could do the same.

Mr. Christie's move earned him the enmity of many New Jersey Transit commuters, who never know whether their trip to or from work will turn into a hellish, hourslong ordeal on tracks owned by Amtrak that have suffered from decades of underinvestment and compound New Jersey Transit's own problems. The plan he killed would have cost an estimated $12.4 billion and been completed by now. A project to build new tracks and another tunnel under the Hudson River is now underway, but it will take at least another decade and about $16 billion to complete.

Ms. Hochul's action raises questions about whether congestion pricing, which was set to begin at the end of the month, will ever happen. It will mean continued congestion on some of the world's most traffic-stymied streets and no relief from the air pollution from auto and truck exhaust. And it will leave the Metropolitan Transportation Authority without an expected $1 billion a year in toll revenue that the agency planned to use to secure $15 billion in bond financing for desperately needed improvements to the transit system.

This is not the right way to run the nation's largest mass transit agency.

Congestion pricing of course has its critics. Most automobile drivers would pay a fee of $15 during peak hours to drive into Manhattan south of 60th Street. But the idea had essentially universal support from environmentalists, transit advocates, economists and policy experts. The fee was expected to reduce traffic in the city's core by as many as 120,000 vehicles a day, significantly improve traffic congestion and reduce the exhaust that is fouling Manhattan's air.

London and Stockholm have had similar programs in place for decades. After implementation, London immediately saw a 20 percent reduction in carbon emissions and a 37 percent increase in bus transit use. The results in Stockholm were similar and that city also saw a nearly 50 percent reduction in childhood asthma cases. (Children in the Bronx suffer from one of the highest rates of asthma in the country.)

Under the New York plan, the toll revenue would underwrite a long list of critical investments to the city's mass transit system, including signals to allow subway trains to run faster and with fewer interruptions on several lines. It would help pay for 500 new buses, better access for disabled commuters at 40 subway stations, new bus depots in the Bronx, Staten Island and Brooklyn, and electric buses systemwide. And it would extend the Second Avenue Subway to 125th Street, build a new light rail line connecting Brooklyn and Queens and underwrite improvements for the Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North.

Congestion pricing has always been controversial. What new tax or fee isn't? In Stockholm, public leaders held a referendum to determine whether the policy would continue or be canceled. Having seen the benefits with their own eyes, voters kept it in place.

Opposition to New York's congestion pricing plan fits into one of two categories. Some people said they agreed with the policy but had concerns about the details. Fair enough. It is a complicated program. Supporters always assumed that once it was put in place, it would be calibrated to respond to concerns. London has adjusted its program almost every other year to respond to changing needs.

Other critics opposed the plan, full stop. They don't offer solutions but defend a status quo that isn't working. They are the ones celebrating today.

Ms. Hochul has said she wants to postpone the program -- for how long she hasn't said -- because of the lingering economic impacts of the pandemic. But investing in transit and ending seemingly endless traffic headaches is exactly what our region needs to continue to recover. New York has been leading the way on congestion pricing in the United States, and this sends the wrong message to other cities trying to untangle their traffic and mass transit problems.

Her decision to suspend this program at the 11th hour raises real concerns about the region's collective ability to pursue major and essential public projects that will benefit residents, commuters and visitors now and in the future. This program was mandated by the New York State Legislature in 2019 following delays during the so-called transit Summer of Hell. Four years of study and analysis followed before it received federal approval. Hundreds of public forums were held and 100,000 public comments were submitted. The M.T.A. has already spent over $500 million building out the infrastructure. Now this suspension gives critics the chance to upend the whole undertaking.

What hope do we have to tackle the challenge of climate change, provide new housing or do other important things if we abandon this project, after all the work and money that was invested in it, less than a month before it was to begin? The M.T.A. Board and State Legislature should step in and keep the congestion pricing program moving forward.

Listen to selectionTom Wright is the president and chief executive and Kate Slevin is the executive vice president of the Regional Plan Association, a nonprofit focused on the economic health, environmental resiliency and quality of life of the New York metropolitan area.
Click to expand...
 
shonuff

shonuff

Pro
Joined
Oct 30, 2014
Messages
1,122
Reputation
380
Daps
2,494
You know about 2 weeks ago the MTA announced that they "just discovered" there were several roadways that would toll drivers even if the drivers had no intention of going into the zone

After at least 3 years of research and placing the gantries and all the other shyt that went into planning ....they just discovered it 30.days before the program was to start .....

Also the program had to.make a Billion a year which would mean that if less cars decided to come.in then you can't hit a Billion. ....a logical paradox that apparently the MTA figured out that defied the rules of.logic but still...

Finally the BEST estimate was that the toll would reduce traffic ( the whole.purpose which is to relieve congestion) would be by 15% ....the most optimistic outcome was a 15 percent reduction.an estimate from.the MTA which of course has an intrest in charging a toll....becuase it needs money badly . Also most of the studies about support for the program ...done by the MTA ...or done by groups that had an agenda that was very much about "cars are bad"

So all this hand wringing about the governor and how she's an awful administrator kinda misses the mark ...this was always full of people with an agenda - either to just make money or to support an ideology

None of it was about actually doing anything to really address the bad roadway design and car traffic policy

Congestion pricing was always a bad idea - because at no point was any real viable alternative enacted to million obvious faults in the MTA - the 700MIllion they lose from.fare jumping or the hundreds of millions i. Cost overruns they never address or the white elephant project they had with the second ave line which was to build 3 stations in a place where stations weren't needed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top