Simpler New York City congestion charge scheme recommended by state commission

The state Commission set up to review alternatives to the City's congestion charge has recommended a simpler cordon entry toll. Called the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission (TCMC) it was appointed by the governor and legislative leaders. Final say on what congestion charging scheme, if any, remains with the state legislature, but the Commission's unanimity on a congestion charging plan must strengthen its prospects.

The Commission plan would charge motorists entering Manhattan south of 60th Street weekdays 6am to 6pm $8, trucks $21.

What's different

The Commission plan differs from the Mayor's plan in:

- moving the northern boundary of the charging zone from 86th to 60th Street which goes along the southern edge of Central Park and better divides commercial from residential areas

- abandoning the free peripheral movements (FDR Drive and westside routes along the Hudson River)

- applying a $1 surcharge on taxi trips within the charging zone

- abandoning the charge on movement within the zone

- apply an entry-only charge, no charge for vehicles leaving the zone

- increase street parking charges, eliminating a resident parking exemption within the zone

What's the same

Unchanged are:

- the basic level of charges, $8 cars, $21 for regular trucks, $7 for low emission trucks

- the day pass (one charge gives he motorist unlimited driving rights that day)

- the rebate up to $8 on tolls paid to enter the zone via existing toll facilities (bridges and tunnels)

- use of E-ZPass transponders plus video tolling of  the rest

The Commission claim that increasing taxi costs with the $1/ride taxi surcharge, and raising street parking meter charges and eliminating resident parking exemptions will be similar in reducing internal traffic to the $4/day charge involved in the Mayor's plan.

The Commission says their plan will reduce traffic - vehicle miles traveled - slightly more than the Mayor's plan, and the target set in the state legislation (6.3%).

Profit of $491m/yr

The cordon plan is estimated to make an annual profit of $491m - to be used for transit. A capital cost of $73m and annual operating cost fo $62m aqre quoted - much lower costs than the Mayor's plan.

The report claims: "The Commission's plan provides an effective and practical solution to the problem of traffic congestion in New York's Central Business District and meets the criteria..."

They say it will also "reduce traffic in neighborhoods adjacent to the charging zone, decrease emissions and benefit the city and regional economy."

They foresee it as the first step toward a "coordinated traffic management strategy for Manhattan and the region." This could include one-way tolling and variable pricing on strategic crossings in combination with the cordon pricing plan.

Or else it might be the first stage to a "coordinated congestion pricing scheme" for the whole city, encompassing the MTAB&T and PANYNJ toll crossings.

No need for new technology

The plan has no need of new technology, the report says, being able to be implemented with proven electronic tolling.

They recommend "a wide range of payment options" for non-transponder equipped motorists including kiosks, designated stores, internet, SMS, telephone.

Income effects on poorer people should be addressed by the legislature in amendments to state taxation.

All profits, it says, should be dedicated by law to a dedicated MTA (transit authority) account to be used for system improvements, expansion and state of good repair projects, excluding normal replacement.

The plan was mostly the creation of Marc V Shaw a former deputy mayor under Mayor Bloomberg and early mayors. Shaw gets into trouble from time to time with unfashionable truths, but also has a reputation for gutsiness. In 2003 he infuriated the city's storied firefighters saying they "hang around the firehouse 95 percent of the time doing nothing."

Download the 14 page report of the Commission from this page:

https://www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/programs/congestion_mitigation_commission

COMMENT: Given the deadlines built into the agreement with USDOT the Mayor's plan was headed for catastrophe. It is too big, too complicated, and too expensive to implement in less than two or three years. This cordon scheme without free peripheral travel and internal charges is doable, where the Mayor's plan was not in the time available.

It may run into intensified political opposition however. Some of the very complexity of the Mayor's plan was to assuage groups who may now mobilize against charging. That would be a pity because roads have to be priced so they are used more efficiently. Managing overload with queuing - congestion - needs to be replaced by managing it by value - pricing.

An alternative to tyhe simplicity of the Commission's plan was to implement the Mayor's plan, but in discrete  phases  - cordon first, internal  charging next etc.

The biggest shortcoming of both is dedicating all the profits of the road charges to the MTA transit monopoly and its lossmaking rail and bus systems. These people are all rail transit fanatics. Private bus and van services, cabs, and other shared vehicles ('jitneys') can provide valuable transit service too - if the regulatory system doesn't stifle them.

Motorists should be able to see some of the money they are paying in the congestion charges going to projects that benefit them and make roads work better too.

Also transportation is not just about moving people. It is also about moving people's belongings, their tools, their food, their equipment, their trash, emergency services and a range of other movements that just don't work on rails. These "freight" movements will benefit from freer flowing conditions enabled by pricing, but they also need investments. New York City's roads are third world in many respects - decrepit, obsolete materially and in and geometry, and without sufficient capacity. To devote all the profits of a scheme financed by motorists to passenger rail is seriously unbalanced.

Congestion charging schemes in Norway, London, Singapore and Stockholm have all been far less rail-transit obsessed. They have all devoted a considerable proportion of the proceeds to road improvements - most in the case of the Norwegian ring tolls, all in the case of Stockholm which is devoting the bulk to a major city bypass expressway, much of it underground.  Singapore is building a serious road network,  much underground.

Both the mayor and the commission seem to go out of their way to antagonize motorists, especially truckers, setting them against a scheme which could be structured to benefit them.

Also the Commission is far too dismissive of new technology.

Sure: to implement the simple cordon no new technology is needed. But first off, the application of existing toll technology to the NYC cordon will be far from simple. It will need the very best engineers and management to get E-ZPass and cameras to work effectively in New York City streets. Established electronic tolling like this is designed for use on tollroads which are expressways, or in toll plazas with lots of room around, lots of options about where the gantries are placed and the equipment mounted. You won't have that flexibility in the dense NYC streets. The application of a proven technology, proven in one environment, can be very difficult to get right in a very different environment. The technical side is no slam dunk.

Also the simple cordon and a day pass is a very crude kind of pricing. The day pass is crude in charging the same $8 for the vehicle that makes a simple trip into the zone and parks, as for the vehicle that fills the local roads all day. The cordon itself is a black and white distinction - either you are on one side and charged or on the other and not charged. No gradation.

Congestion charging needs to be able to evolve toward price discrimination based on differences between sub-areas, and to pricing travel as such rather than mere presence. New technology - vehicle based location equipment - will be needed to refine it and make it less blunt an instrument.

Present technology, E-ZPass lane based automatic vehicle identification was designed for expressways with on and off ramps and for toll points along the road, not for networks of roads. It can be adapted to do cordon tolling but it doesn't do real pricing over a whole road network well.

This is an important start, so long as it is recognized as only that. 

TOLLROADSnews 2008-01-31