“I believe casinos in upstate New York could be a great magnet to bring the New York City traffic up.”

Governor Cuomo’s declaration in this year’s State of the State address would seem to suggest that upstate casinos would be built in transit-accessible locations. Less than half of New York City households own a vehicle, so “to bring the New York City traffic up” to casinos beyond the limits of Metro-North would ostensibly require some investments in transit.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t look to be part of the plan. Too often, transit access, congestion and wear-and-tear  on our roads are barely mentioned amidst the tax revenue ideology that accompanies economic development ventures. We’ve seen it before in New York, whether it’s the Governor’s effort to approve fracking, or the effort to lure New York City residents up to the Adirondacks (where there is no other option but to drive).

The June 30 deadline for casino applications brought 17 applicants vying for just four destination casino licenses in three upstate regions—the Catskills/Hudson Valley region, Eastern Southern Tier, and Capital Region. The final decision is expected to be made by the Gaming Facility Location Board, an appointed board with Cuomo-friendly appointees by the fall with casinos potentially opening as soon as 2015.

Some of the proposals submitted tout their proximity to public transit, while others propose significant expansions of the roadway system to bring customers directly to their door. Genting Americas is proposing a new Thruway Exit for a casino in Tuxedo, and Caesars Entertainment is offering to invest at least $20 million to improve traffic in the already burdened area near the proposed resort for Woodbury, “including funding a substantial portion of the long-delayed improvements to Exit 131 on the New York State Thruway.”

Still unanswered, however, is whether transportation options will be prioritized in the selection process. According to the NYS Gaming Commission, “local impact and siting factors” will only account for 20 percent of the total points awarded, while “economic activity and business development factors” will account for 70 percent. Considering that the Cuomo administration is roughly estimating that these casinos will create 3,000 permanent jobs, “local impact and siting factors” should be the top priority. Despite this expected spike in local employment, vehicle-miles traveled (VMT), proximity to public transit and impact on maintenance of local roads — all important points of discussion — have been scantly referenced in the public dialogue. As a Times Herald-Record editorial states, “For all of the progress toward the eventual conclusion, however, we still do not know just what the state will be looking for, what factors will be the most important, in making the decision.”

There is also the dilemma of viability. The “looming casino war,” triggered by more competitors entering the market in the Northeast, has forced at least one East Coast casino (owned by Caesars) to close its doors. Given the chance that whatever gets built today could be upstaged tomorrow, some are urging New York to move cautiously. A good question to ask may be, “what happens to the infrastructure if a resort goes belly-up?”

After Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed the Commonwealth’s Expanded Gaming Act in 2011, pedestrian advocacy organization WalkBoston submitted an excellent set of criteria to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission to assure good planning for walking, biking and transit trips to and from proposed casinos.

Unlike in Massachusetts, local communities in New York do not play a significant role in the decision process, so it’s up to the Gaming Facility Location Board to consider questions such as:

• How will the selected casinos impact regional VMT?
• What are the long-term maintenance costs to local roads, and who will be responsible for them?
• Will workers be provided with any kind of employee transport?
• If built with private dollars, will the new road infrastructure abide by the same rules as roads built with public dollars, such as congestion mitigation and air-quality management?
• Will the state ensure that casino “siting factors” will comply with the Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Priority Act?

While an argument could be made that casinos closer to home will reduce the VMT of those traveling out of state to get their gambling fix, in a world awash with lobbying cash and politicians clamoring for the anticipated revenue dollars, it’s hard to say who will be watchdogging these decisions to assure New York isn’t saddled with unintended consequences — and costs.