According to the latest Quinnipiac University poll, 60% of New York City voters support congestion pricing if the revenues are used to improve city and regional mass transit. Majority support for congestion pricing when tied to transit improvements was found in every borough. This bodes well for the city’s congestion pricing efforts, since the plan has always been and will continue to be predicated on providing a dedicated revenue source for transit . Some of the projects to be funded by congestion pricing revenue include the ARC rail tunnel under the Hudson River, LIRR East Side Access, the Second Avenue Subway, bus rapid transit in all five boroughs, and new Metro-North stations in Queens and the Bronx (in Corona, Elmhurst, Co-op City, and Parkchester).
The Quinnipiac pollsters should be credited for asking the right question. In previous polls, respondents were asked whether they supported congestion pricing but were not told that pricing revenues would fund transit capital projects. Not surprisingly, New Yorkers did not want to pay more for unspecified benefits. (Respondents in prior polls were asked whether they would support congestion pricing if it would prevent transit fare increases; a majority said they would.)
The results of the poll suggest that pricing supporters should emphasize the transit benefits of the pricing plan as they lobby the public, as well as the NYC Council and State Legislature. Both legislative bodies must approve a congestion pricing plan before it can be enacted. The MTA should also ensure that significant outer borough transit improvements, such as robust and expanded bus rapid transit routes, are included in its next capital plan (to be released in March) and will be funded by congestion pricing revenue.
The state Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission will release an interim report today comparing three alternative congestion mitigation plans to the original PlaNYC congestion pricing plan. (Copies are already available via City Room here; MTR will be covering the report later today.)
Also in pricing news, the Tri-State Campaign has released congestion pricing fact sheets for New Jersey’s counties and legislative districts. Not surprisingly, only a small percentage of NJ commuters drive to what would become the congestion pricing zone. In none of NJ’s counties or districts do more than 5% of workers drive alone to the congestion pricing zone, and in only one county, one congressional district and three legislative districts do more than 3% of workers drive alone to the CPZ.
[…] “Transit Lockbox” Not a Far-Fetched Idea New Yorkers support congestion pricing 59%-38% if the money raised is used to improve mass transit, according to a Quinnipiac poll released last week. The results are virtually identical to those of a January poll (which MTR covered here). […]
[…] Headlines Balanced Q Poll Finds Pricing Preferable to Bridge Tolls (Post, News)60th Street Alternative Plan Seen as Favorite […]
[…] Mobilizing the Region News and opinion from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign. Updated daily, Monday-Friday. « Q Poll Finds NYC Support For Congestion Pricing […]
No where is there any money from the congestion pricing proposal to pay for Access to the Regions Core (ARC). Tri-State needs to check its sources. All of this money is either from federal, NJ state or Port Authority toll money. MTA or any NY state source, including this congestion pricing revenue has NOT been indicated in any plans to be used for ARC, even though it will remove autos. This is again showing Tri-State’s NY bias because most of the staff does not understand NJ issues except for at least the lack of need for a Parkway widening. Check your sources, only rhetoric has been used to say it will pay for ARC. Since Port Jervis line and part of Pascack Valley line will get direct ARC service, I do agree some of this money should be used for ARC since NY state will be getting the benefit.
Tom,
In fact, you can check our sources for us. We are referring to PlaNYC which specifically lists ARC as a project that could receive congestion pricing revenue. See http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/report_transportation.pdf.
Congestion pricing has not been approved yet, so unfortunately this is the only “source” of information we have at the moment about where the money will be spent.
Also, you might be surprised to learn that half our staff is from NJ!
I. NYC should copy this part of London’s congestion charging:
1. Londoners driving hybrids or electric cars pay no congestion charge because they help cut pollution. Electric car drivers park free in London. Garages are being asked to install chargers so electric cars can recharge their batteries; this stimulates electric car purchases and Gwhiz electric cars fill “the city” (London’s Wall Street).
II. NYC busses are badly designed, whereas:
2. Berkeley, Ca has bike racks on bus fronts; each cyclist lifts his bike on/off.
3. Why can’t people exit and enter the NYC busses simultaneously as in Berlin where busses have extra wide front and back doors and therefore:
a. Driver can open right side to let people out, first
b. Then driver opens left side to let people in, so passengers get in and out simultaneously
c. Therefore there is no delay at each stop, as we have in NYC, when those getting on have to wait for those getting off
4. All three doors open at every stop automatically in Berlin vs NYC busses having an idiotic yellow strip people have to push while holding a baby or groceries to open the door; many people shout “back door” or simply exit the front door so they don’t have to deal with the yellow strip.
9. Handicapped people in Berlin roll themselves right into the bus through wide doors and up an automatic ramp; they lock themselves into place and the bus takes off.
10. People with baby strollers also roll themselves right into the bus through wide middle doors; the bus is so low they don’t need a ramp and there is a designated place for them to stand with their strollers opposite the middle door.
11. LED readouts and audio announcements should announce each stop as in Berlin and Paris busses
III. Fares and Bus Speed
12. Berliners entering the bus lanes are given hefty fines; thus the bus lanes remain clear and busses run on time to the minute.
13. LED readout at each stop tells when a bus is due or delayed.
13. When will NYC get the equivalent of England’s Oyster card? The fare is read and deducted by placing one’s wallet on a pad; you don’t even have to remove the transit card from your wallet or holder. This speeds up entering busses and subways. Many NYkers stop to see how much is left on their cards, preventing others from quickly paying and causing route delays. Oyster cards do not reveal balances.
III. Gas and Pollution
Why not have the taxi owner, not the driver, pay for gas. This would encourage taxi owners to buy hybrid cars. Or NYC might mandate that all fleets over XX size must be hybrids, including government cars, “black” limos and taxis.
IV. Noise Pollution
Eliminate beeps from “kneeling” busses, penetrating even triple glazed windows all night. The bus is stopped and the door is closed when it kneels; there is no reason for the beeps.
—
[…] voters support congestion pricing as a means to improve mass transit, according to a January Quinnipiac University poll. The Campaign for New York’s Future comprises more than 150 organizations that support […]
hybrid cars would be the best thing because they are less polluting to the environment *~:
[…] transportation planning. They like the pedestrian plazas and bike lanes, hell, they even liked the congestion charge as long as the money was going towards improving transit. No candidate, outside of Stringer (who […]
[…] which finds that 60% of NYC voters support congestion pricing if it improves regional transit, is available here. […]