Yankee Stadium's Metro-North Station Not a Done Deal
A day before the City Council vote on the Yankee Stadium
proposal, Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg announced
support for construction of a new Metro-North station
next to the stadium.
High Traffic Fatality Toll Persists in NJ
A citizen recently interviewed by the Asbury Park
Press said motorists should not be ticketed for speeding
to appointments when they are late.
Jersey Road Privatization Off the Table - for a Few
Weeks
During his election campaign this fall, Senator Jon
Corzine assured New Jersey voters that he wouldn't
consider selling the New Jersey Turnpike.
Dueling Toll Studies?
The South Western Regional Planning Agency has submitted
its own application to the Federal Highway Administration
to study the reintroduction of tolls to Connecticut
highways.
Better Information Through Legislation
NYC Councilwoman Gale Brewer recently introduced a
bill directing the NYC DOT to adopt real-world performance
measures regarding the city's transportation system,
as opposed to the data on bureaucratic activity it
currently reports.
Tinkering, Not Planning, on Staten Island
Mayor Bloomberg's Staten Island Transportation Task
Force came out with its recommendations in late March.
Yankee Stadium's Metro-North
Station Not a Done Deal
A day before the City Council vote on the Yankee
Stadium proposal, Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg
announced support for construction of a new Metro-North
station next to the stadium. The Tri-State Campaign
and other organizations have said for months that the
station should replace new parking garages as a main
transportation component of the plan. The station would
serve trains from the Hudson, Harlem Valley and New
Haven lines.
As a political stroke, the announcement worked — even
Council members who had been sharply critical of the
stadium plan the prior week lined up on April 5 to
approve the Yankees’ land use application. Some
cited the train station as the cover they needed to
go along with the mayor and Council Speaker Christine
Quinn’s support for the project.
However, the announcement cost the mayor and governor
little. The Yankees’ entire land use plan — with
garages containing thousands of new parking spaces
displacing parkland — has been approved, while
neither the Yankees, the state nor the city have pledged
a dime for the train station.
If the MTA is forced to undertake the project with
its own resources, it is likely that its funding will
come from other essential Metro-North or NYC Transit
projects. The MTA will attempt to fudge this fact and
fall on its sword for the outgoing governor. But to
the extent the transit system runs into larger capital
budget problems down the road — there are big
unfunded “out-year” costs, not to mention
huge unrealized asset sales within the approved 2005-2009
MTA capital program — the Yankee Stadium station
could well meet the budget axe in a consolidation of
priorities under the next state administration. City
Council members will blame the MTA if that happens.
Perhaps the only politician who might be held accountable
to some degree is Adolfo Carrión, who has ambitions
to run for mayor in 2009 and who says the interests
of the Yankees and the South Bronx are the same.
The MTA is expected to offer a preliminary budget
and design for the station at its April 26 board meeting.
Transit advocates say the elimination of additional
parking could free up $70 million in state funding,
more than enough for the station. A New York Times
editorial this weekend called on the Yankees to help
fund the station. But unfortunately, few politicians
or media outlets appear to understand a basic fact—the
more parking available at a site, the more likely people
are to choose driving over transit. With the construction
of thousands more parking spaces near the Yankees stadium,
the Metro-North station, even if constructed, will
not do as much as it could to reduce game-day traffic
in the South Bronx.
Councilman Joel Rivera said that he is lobbying hard
for a “feasibility study for game-day residential
parking permits.” If all the new parking is built,
permits could at least help ensure that fans use it
by restricting their access to street parking.
[Back to Top]
High Traffic Fatality Toll
Persists in NJ
A citizen recently interviewed by the Asbury Park
Press said motorists should not be ticketed for speeding
to appointments for which they are late. Does the statement
suggest the reason traffic deaths have not significantly
declined in over a decade in New Jersey? Are traffic
offenses indeed viewed by elected leaders and police
as petty white-collar crime that politicians would
do well to stay away from, despite the high body count?
According to state data compiled by the Tri-State
Campaign, 2005 was the second most deadly year on New
Jersey’s roadways since 1997. 758 people died
in traffic crashes in 2005, up nearly 5% from 2004.
Pedestrian fatalities also increased, to 156 in 2005
from 150 the previous year.
An analysis of federal traffic fatality data reveals
New Jersey would benefit from more enforcement. Federal
records show that more than 60% of traffic fatalities
from 1999 through 2004 were the result of speeding
or otherwise reckless driving.
In response to the Campaign’s release of the
data, the Corzine administration pointed to a NJ DOT “Safety
First” initiative. It includes plans to prevent
median crossover crashes, improve sidewalks, increase “safe
streets to schools” funding and quicken emergency
response time to crashes.
The administration demurred regarding the Campaign’s
call for a “broken window” approach to
roadway crime, but the release spurred some papers
to call for stepped up enforcement. In February, Governor
Corzine complained about speed traps during a radio
show, saying, “situations designed for revenues
just aren't right.” The fringe motor-libertarian
National Motorists Association said of the state’s
traffic deaths, “there is no problem.”
[Back to Top]
Jersey Road Privatization
Off the Table - For a Few Weeks
During the his election campaign this fall, Senator
Jon Corzine assured New Jersey voters that he wouldn’t
consider selling the New Jersey Turnpike (MTR #512).
Perhaps having to deal with the difficult issue of
the state’s Transportation Trust Fund has changed
his mind. The governor’s office recently told
the Philadelphia Inquirer it wouldn’t rule out
the sale of toll roads saying, “Before selling
or leasing any of our transportation assets, we have
to make sure these transactions are successful.”
The statement responded to a new round of proposals
in the state senate. Senator Raymond Lesniak has written
a bill authorizing sale of 49% of the New Jersey Turnpike
and Garden State Parkway to private investors. Lesniak
originally said the plan would garner $6 billion to
pay off state pension obligations, but has since shown
flexibility about devoting proceeds to infrastructure.
The plan would skirt the problem of the state’s
controlling share by legislating annual toll increases
pegged to the consumer price index, according to NJBIZ.
Whether toll road investors would be interested in
a minority share is unknown. So is whether the plan
represents a good deal for citizens, but the idea appears
to be making toll-road sale more palatable to opinion-makers
across the state.
Senator William Gormley is leading a push for the
second toll-road privatization plan to lease the Atlantic
City Expressway for 75 years, dedicating 70% of the
estimated $3.8 billion price to southern Jersey projects
and the other 30% to the Transportation Trust Fund.
[Back to Top]
Dueling Toll Studies?
The South Western Regional Planning Agency has submitted
its own application to the Federal Highway Administration
to study the reintroduction of tolls to Connecticut
highways.
The New Haven Register recently wrote that the State
Dept. of Transportation recently submitted a proposal
to FHWA for a study of HOT lane conversion of HOV lanes
on interstates around Hartford (single-occupant vehicles
paying tolls to use lanes currently designated for
carpools — MTR #526), though other stories have
said the ConnDOT study would look at a variety of strategies
across the state.
SWRPA, a metropolitan planning organization, believes
a study looking just at lower Fairfield County would
constitute a stronger proposal, so has submitted its
own study plan. There are no HOV lanes in the southwestern
part of CT, for instance. SWRPA said it was interested
in working with DOT, but accused the agency of ignoring
its requests. SWRPA representatives told the Stamford
Advocate that the DOT’s application did not say
it would study impact on mass transit ridership and
fares, presented out-of-date information about area
traffic volumes and did not focus enough on lower Fairfield
County. SWRPA has said it will withdraw its application
if DOT proves that its requests were heard.
[Back to Top]
Better Information Through
Legislation
NYC Councilwoman Gale Brewer recently introduced
a bill directing the NYC DOT to adopt real-world performance
measures regarding the city’s transportation
system, as opposed to the data on bureaucratic activity
it currently reports.
Intro 199 says “the Department of Transportation
currently measures surface transportation performance
through an array of output measures that assess activity
[such as] the number of traffic lights repaired and
the number of potholes filled.”
If enacted, the bill would supplement these statistics
with a set of measures whose aim will be to assess
and reduce “the amount of traffic citywide and
within each borough.” Specific aims of the new
data would be to “reduce commute time citywide,” reduce
household exposure to street emissions and reduce driving’s
share of travel to central business districts while
increasing those of mass transit, cycling and walking.
A report on transportation performance would be due
each January 15.
The legislation leaves it to the NYC DOT to come
up with the specific units of measurement, but the
aim of the performance measures is clear and worthy
of passage by the Council. Supporters hope the information
will inform a goal-driven city transportation policy
that curbs driving impacts and makes more room for
other means of travel.
[Back to Top]
Tinkering, Not Planning, on
Staten Island
Mayor Bloomberg’s Staten Island Transportation
Task Force came out with its recommendations in late
March. The report cannot be called innovative. Some worthy
projects, like reactivating the rail freight bridge over
the Arthur Kill and building a third bus depot in Charleston
have been discussed for years and should already be complete.
In fact, most of the recommendations existed before the
creation of the Task Force.
The Mayor formed the Task Force, with elected officials,
agency heads, and community board chairs, after pressure
from many of the same people to address mounting congestion
problems.
Short-term recommendations (to be complete by 2007)
offer modest bus service improvements and a somewhat
better schedule and expanded parking for the Staten Island
Railway, but are mainly weighted toward shoehorning more
cars through intersections. The tone of the effort seems
set at the outset of the city’s presentation, where
mass transit is called “limited” but the
highway system is described as “under-built.” However,
that the mayor successfully pressed NYC Transit to participate
and come through with some initiatives is noteworthy.
One interesting short term recommendation inserts the
city into development guidelines, possibly requiring
developers to connect adjacent sites to reduce short-haul
traffic on busy roads by allowing easier access between
neighboring uses.
One test of the initiative will be its staying power.
But even in the medium and longer terms, transit-oriented
points are disappointingly listed as “studies,” while
street and highway projects are itemized as “improvements.” The
studies include bus rapid transit on Hylan Boulevard
and Richmond Avenue and additional miles of greenways,
to be done by 2009 (not the 2007 implementation date
the NYC DOT and NYC Transit have cited for their city-wide
bus rapid transit effort). The “improvements” are
widening Forest Hill Road, Arthur Kill Road and other
streets, and a variety of highway ramp projects.
Land use/transportation studies for the north shore
and an area along the West Shore Expressway are mentioned,
but whether the establishment of transit-oriented growth
zones is intended is not clear.
Reaction to the plan seems to demonstrate how low the
bar has been set for transportation innovation and government
performance in the city. Some elected leaders seemed
amazed that the city met the 60-day deadline imposed
by Mayor Bloomberg. Borough President Molinaro said the
recommendations “absolutely address all my concerns.”
Ultimately, if growth proceeds as projected on Staten
Island, the borough will need a stronger plan that channels
development to designated higher-density areas that can
be better served by mass transit. The Island today could
probably support a good set of bus rapid transit lines,
but the city seems in no hurry to plan or test that concept.
We urge Staten Island elected and civic leaders to
keep the pressure on Mayor Bloomberg for more ambitious
traffic relief and a broader vision of Staten Island’s
future than is represented in the current grab-bag of
small-scale and recycled initiatives. For a complete
list of projects, go to www.nyc.gov.html/gmtf.
[Back to Top]
