January 12, 2007
The NYC Traffic Blame Game
The NY Times bursts the bubble for a lot of New Yorkers who complain about city traffic. While most of us blame out-of-towners for clogging up streets, it turns out that city drivers make up most of the vehicular traffic. The reasons are varied: many people drive from the outer boroughs where subway service is less accessible. Many are government workers who get free parking (think about that one, Mayor Mike, as you PLANYC). Some just prefer cars to the subways or buses.
There have been many studies which offer different numbers of cars entering the city. The NY Times created this helpful graphic to illustrate the flow of car traffic into Manhattan:
Another cause for traffic, as the study suggests, is that many drivers just pass through Manhattan as they travel in and between its surrounding boroughs and suburbs. Queens and Brooklyn subway riders know the feeling. Yes, Manhattan Island is a transportation hub, but it’s also a car magnet. Unless the city improves its mass transit and figures out ways to decrease vehicular congestion, giving the finger to the driver who came inches from running over your foot won’t do much to solve the problem. Luckily, Mayor Mike seems to have put solutions on the table (see 2nd Avenue subway and congestion pricing), but how far that goes, nobody knows.
Photograph of traffic on the Grand Central by Vidiot on Flickr
|
Surprise, surprise. The vast majority of the BAD, greedy, socially-reckless finance people who ALWAYS use tax loopholes to avoid paying their FAIR share take public transportation to work. The humble civil servants, however, cause backups and pollution and take up all the parking. Just another example of how the government can cause a problem while the people remain shockingly clueless and advocate...congestion pricing? Or, we could let public employees pay their own damn parking and solve the problem for FREE!
"...congestion pricing? Or, we could let public employees pay their own damn parking and solve the problem for FREE!"
Yes, I'm all for both of those, as well as imposing a minimum passenger rule for the bridges (as they did during the transit strike).
How is the Second Avenue subway going to help traffic? I seriously doubt the UES side is contributing that many cars to the daily commute. They should take that money and build more subway lines in the distant parts of the outer boroughs so those people mentioned in the article won't see driving as a better alternative.
"More than half the commuters who drive to jobs in Manhattan live in New York City." Even if 25% (an extremely low estimate) are given congestion pricing, that can make a significant dent in traffic. I'd like to see what the figures were during the subway strike, because I imagine that is what the capacity of Manhattan traffic is supposed to be - not what it is now.
RE: "more trains" comment
Based on the graphic provided by the NY times, the UES represents more than 5,000 car commuters in the region; this is comparable to the figures of the outer boroughs. That said, it is possible that a more efficient mass transit system such as the 2nd ave improvements would provide more alternatives to automobiles for commuters in that neighborhood.
Two points:
1) From experience walking/driving through the UES on a weekday morning during the school year, a lot of the vehicular traffic before 8am is from parents driving their kids to school -- even if it's not a far walk, or even if the bus would do the trick. Things seem calmer in the summer, even in June.
2) I know a few people who commute from Westchester and who drive in because the Metro-North service sucks. It's expensive, crowded, and if you have to get to the west side, you'll double your commute time.
Congestion pricing, how it was implemented in London, gives a 90% discount to residents within the congestion zone. Even with a 0% discount, I have a feeling that many of the UES parents doing the school run in their private cars would continue to do so.
And more thoughts about the UES situation make me think there are probably a lot of car services picking up people to bring them downtown or to Jersey -- not sure if that's where those UES car commuters also may be coming from.
To anyone who says the 2nd Avenue subway is a waste of money, I challenge you to do a commute for a month on the 4/5/6 during rush hour. Then tell us if you really think infrequent, crowded trains are ok for an area that continues to have more riders, whether they're normal or reverse commuters.
Greg, here's my issue. The UES is one region. It looks like there are about 30 other regions on that map in colors ranging from 1,000 to 5,000 cars. Not only is the UES then a drop in the bucket, as the closest group of driver's to their jobs, they are probably least likely to embrace mass transit even if it is dropped (literally) at their doorsteps.
And since there isn't much room left on the UES to build more housing, I would take the billions of dollars and build mass transit in an underdeveloped neighborhood AND build some affordable housing.
Actually the study didn't poll all the govt' employees-the Times came up with the answer that Gov't employees drive in because of free parking from a review of census figures and then supposition.
The Times never asked why they drive!
The truth is that Gov't folks drive in because the Gov't runs 24/7!
Now you can argue that mass transit does-but how long would you wait for a train after riding an ambulance all night?
Would you want to jump on a bus when you work at 311 and now how crazy thing can be on one?
If you're a cop and you are forced to do OT due to an arrest-you can't rely on mass transit!
If you think "forcing" public employees to pay for parking will work-it's obvious you've never worked for the Gov't!
Poster #6.
I take the Metro North on daily basis, the schedule really isn't that bad unless you need to leave the city after 9pm. The regular AM Peak and PM peak the trains leave every 15-30 minutes depending on your station.
I do agree it's VERY expensive, but so is driving. The car takes a toll on miles and stop and go traffic. Then have to pay the garage fees in Manhattan.
The thing that really the MTA needs to step and do is ELIMINATE charging for parking at its stations. Isn't that what PARK AND RIDE should be about it?
Wong,
Mayor Mike has most definitely NOT put congestion pricing on the table. If anything, he has rejected it out of hand. And the 2nd Avenue subway is a state project. Mayor Mike has had almost nothing to do with it. Unfortunately, Mayor Mike has no transportation plan or policy.
Not to worry gang, this problem with the autos is gonna take care of itself in about 5-10 yrs. Then we humans will deal with it like we always do...
The Second Avenue subway may alleviate crowding on the 4/5/6 but it isn't going to get people out of their cars. And if those people coming down the East Side need to get to midtown then they are just going to clog the trains coming in from Queens - assuming the construction actually does link those lines together. Last map I saw had the word "tentative" all over it.
anyway, I merely bring this up because the city has a housing problem and it makes far more sense to me to spend money making it easier for people to populate the underutilized parts of the city. The map speaks for itself about cars from the far fringes of Brooklyn and Queens.
An easy way to solve the free govt employee parking would be to pay them an extra 100-500 per month (whatever their parking spot is worth) and let them choose if they want the money or the parking spot. My guess is that many of them would take the train and pocket the difference and it would be revenue neutral for the government (eventually could be revenue positive). This seems like a clear win-win in which we allow people to show their true preferences.