NYC Traffic Study
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
transportation planning and engineering and director of the Urban Intelligent
Transportation Systems Center at Polytechnic University in Brooklyn] Traffic
congestion in Manhattan is a growing problem.. In 2003, London implemented a
$10 charge to vehicles entering a designated congested area. The charge was
increased to $16 in 2005, and this past February, the size of the charge area
was doubled. The result has been a 15% reduction in traffic volume and a 30%
increase in traffic speed. But before implementing its congestion-charging
scheme, London invested over $600 million on transportation infrastructure..
Here are four key contributors that should be considered in determining the
policy strategy needed for Manhattan: (1) Traffic lanes, especially curb
lanes, are often used by vehicles stopped or standing, thus creating
bottleneck conditions. (2) Cruising for customers generates half of all taxi
mileage. (3) About 30% of traffic entering Manhattan below 59th Street is
going through and not to Manhattan. For Canal Street, through-traffic can get
as high as 40%. (4) About 10% of the traffic in Manhattan is generated by
drivers cruising for a curb parking space.. focus on improving traffic
mobility through traffic engineering improvements and more efficient
enforcement of curb lane regulations; developing new regulations limiting
taxi cruising, and implementing congestion pricing techniques that
specifically discourage both through-trips and cruising by drivers searching
for a parking space
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
Queens Midtown Tunnel and the Lincoln Tunnel (both are I-495). It also
supports greater parking facilities and some sort of transfer stations for
taxis and cars so they don't have to tie up traffic.
- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Remorse begets zeal] [Windows is for Bimbos]
John Mara
> This certainly supports building a crosstown highway or tunnel linking the
> Queens Midtown Tunnel and the Lincoln Tunnel (both are I-495). It also
> supports greater parking facilities and some sort of transfer stations for
> taxis and cars so they don't have to tie up traffic.
>
But the Midtown Tunnel and Lincoln Tunnel are at capacity now. It might
make more sense to dig a deep tunnel from Brooklyn or Queens directly to
New Jersey without a stop in Manhattan. But I wonder what kind of
toll drivers would be willing to pay. Given the number of people who
are willing to crawl across Canal Street to avoid the toll on the
Verrazano, I don't think the toll could be much higer than the current
tolls. People seem to be willing to waste an incredible amount to time
to save eight bucks.
--
John Mara
Michael G. Koerner
> vjp...@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:
I have mused about a bored deep tunnel between the area of the NJTP at
interchange 16E to the LIE (I-495) in the area of the Brooklyn-Queens
Expressway (I-278) many times in various forvms. The new tunnel would be
'I-495' and the two existing tunnels would become interstate spurs (I-795 and
I-995?) from that.
To encourage that tunnel's use by through traffic (it would have to be at
least six lanes wide), I would set tolls on the entrances to Manhattan,
including the ramps from the Cross Manhattan Expressway (I-95/GW Bridge), high
enough to discourage their use by anyone who didn't REALLY want to go there by
car.
And then, there would be no more need to talk about London-style 'congestion
pricing'.
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Steve A.
> John Mara wrote:
remain NJ/NY 495. I too have called for new tubes doing exactly
that. They would be Express E-ZPass only (because there's not a lot
of room to build tolls without disturbing wetlands or killing off
businesses), starting in the rocks below Weehawken and running roughly
parallel to the Northeast Corridor train tracks. I think you could
get away with four lanes, because most traffic is heading into
Manhattan.
As for tolls entering Manhattan, a lot of Manhattan-Bronx crossings
are linking neighborhoods there and you will never be able to toll
them. So, setting tolls from the TME (Trans, not Cross) would just
send more trucks down 87 and into east Harlem. Traffic in Manhattan
is self-limiting - because congestion is so constant and oppressive, a
certain percentage of people already take alternative forms of
transportation. The remainder are willing to put up with congestion,
and pedestrians have the right of way anyway. No need to reward the
rich drivers who want to pay even more tolls just to get arond
Manhattan with their unnecessary fuel-burning contraptions.
Tester
vjp...@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:
> This certainly supports building a crosstown highway or tunnel linking the
>Queens Midtown Tunnel and the Lincoln Tunnel (both are I-495). It also
>supports greater parking facilities and some sort of transfer stations for
>taxis and cars so they don't have to tie up traffic.
Robert Moses wanted to build largely elevated crosstown expressways at
125th St., 30th St. (your expressway between the QMT and LT) and in
lower Manhattan between the Holland Tunnel and the Williamsburgh and
Manhattan Bridges (Canal St.)
If you try the Lower Manhattan Expressway and aren't extremely careful
with your route, you are liable to be haunted by the ghost of Jane
Jacobs. At the height of his power I think Moses would have had Jacobs
for breakfast but she managed to dethrone the Lion in Winter and save
her beloved "blighted" West Village.
In any case, it is hard to imagine any of these routes with anything
but massive traffic jams at least 8-12 hours/day. I think the cross
harbor rail route would probably lessen Manhattan traffic far more.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Bolwerk
Such a tunnel would probably just attract more traffic. I doubt it
would reduce congestion in other areas.
> To encourage that tunnel's use by through traffic (it would have to be
> at least six lanes wide), I would set tolls on the entrances to
> Manhattan, including the ramps from the Cross Manhattan Expressway
> (I-95/GW Bridge), high enough to discourage their use by anyone who
> didn't REALLY want to go there by car.
>
> And then, there would be no more need to talk about London-style
> 'congestion pricing'.
You'd probably need a congestion charging scheme (or something similar)
to back up the bonds that would need to be issued to build such a
tunnel. And think about the costs of boring a tunnel about five miles
long capable of holding six lanes of traffic.
And with tolls and congestion charges, it seems to me it would make
considerably more sense to charge each individual vehicle for the burden
it places on the local road network. Right now, intense use and light
use originating from the same point are charged the same - whatever the
toll is, if any ($6 from New Jersey, none from Westchester over the
Third Ave. Bridge, for instance). In light of that, congestion charging
would make sense.
A lot of the issue with congestion isn't even about raising money. Each
traffic jam means wasted gas and lower air quality. Obviously NY is a
small piece of the international market for gasoline, but nonetheless,
wasted gas still reduces the supply of gasoline available for productive
activities, driving up gasoline prices. Idle and almost-idle cars are
wasting more fuel per mile traveled, and therefore are uselessly leaving
pollutants in our local atmosphere.
As far as efficiency goes, congestion charging could be done at select
points around the city (only part of Manhattan seems silly). For places
more prone to bottleneck (traveling cross-town on Canal Street, for
instance) it would make sense to charge more.
The only way I could see additional road access between NJ and NY as
making sense is if it could be used to get trucks from NJ to Long Island
more easily. That might be achieved just as well by diverting trucks a
bit north using a combination of a new Tappan Zee, as well as a bridge
or tunnel between Westchester and Long Island - say New Rochelle to Port
Washington. It might even be a sensible place to place a new rail route
between LI & outer Queens and Westchester.
In any case, it would seem cheaper than deep boring from NJ to Brooklyn.
Besides, deep boring should be saved for expanding transit.
GK
> The only way I could see additional road access between NJ and NY as
> making sense is if it could be used to get trucks from NJ to Long Island
> more easily. That might be achieved just as well by diverting trucks a
> bit north using a combination of a new Tappan Zee, as well as a bridge
> or tunnel between Westchester and Long Island - say New Rochelle to Port
> Washington. It might even be a sensible place to place a new rail route
> between LI & outer Queens and Westchester.
>
> In any case, it would seem cheaper than deep boring from NJ to Brooklyn.
> Besides, deep boring should be saved for expanding transit.
A lot of that could be achieved much less expensively by just widening
the existing SI Expwy, I-278 and twinning the Goethals Bridge, which has
aready been proposed by the PA, the bridge that is, and opposed, it
seems, by NIMBY's.
Hard to do much improving even in sensible terms when there's opposition
to almost anything.
Eventually something will need to get done, but for now its just
frustrating to think about why things don't get built.
GK
rsh...@gmail.com
I am pretty sure the new Goethals will happen. When is the operative
question.
Take carem Randy
Joseph D. Korman
NYS DOT just spent lots of money on making a bus only lane for half of
the SI Expressway. Problem is only, a small percentage of the TA
express buses use it. Most join the SIE near the VNB. When the TA
re-routed others from the west, the riders who were used to a relatively
quick ride via the GB and NJTP, complained when their commute via the
BQE became longer in spite of the bus lane. The TA routed those buses
back through NJ.
DOT claims that there would need to be a study and work to make the lane
safe for cars to use as HOV.
However, further widening the SIE and twinning the Goethals will only
move the bottleneck to the BQE and probably make it worse. There are
essentially three lanes from the BBT/BB to the VNB. Then they have to
pay the $9.00 toll to Staten Island, which is one of the reasons cited
for the heavy traffic across Manhattan.
--
-------------------------------------------------
| Joseph D. Korman |
| mailto:re...@thejoekorner.com |
| Visit The JoeKorNer at |
| http://www.thejoekorner.com |
|-------------------------------------------------|
| AOL-IM user name joekoreln |
|-------------------------------------------------|
| The light at the end of the tunnel ... |
| may be a train going the other way! |
| The International Astronomical Union deplanets |
| Pluto and declare it a Dwarf - Dopey? |
| Don't take any wooden Metrocards |
| Battlestar Galactica was better than |
| the last two Star Treks, but now? |
| Brooklyn Tech Grads build things that work!('66)|
|-------------------------------------------------|
| All outgoing E-mail is scanned by NAV |
-------------------------------------------------
Free Lunch
Tester <te...@test.org> wrote in
<64l423tk5qefhnn8f...@entropy.org>:
IIRC someone else is credited in the memorial plaque in Washington
Square Park with saving the Village from Moses, but I don't recall the
name.
Tester
wrote:
[begin me]
>>If you try the Lower Manhattan Expressway and aren't extremely careful
>>with your route, you are liable to be haunted by the ghost of Jane
>>Jacobs. At the height of his power I think Moses would have had Jacobs
>>for breakfast but she managed to dethrone the Lion in Winter and save
>>her beloved "blighted" West Village.
>>
[end me]
>
>IIRC someone else is credited in the memorial plaque in Washington
>Square Park with saving the Village from Moses, but I don't recall the
>name.
Here's her obit in a local weekly.
http://www.thevillager.com/villager_156/janejacobsactivistwho.html
Free Lunch
Tester <te...@test.org> wrote in
<okp523140nt1c5l7p...@entropy.org>:
I wasn't really trying to argue against it, I was just remembering that
there were some others who were credited, but couldn't remember the
names.
I remember talking to a friend who was getting a master in Urban and
Regional Planning in the late seventies. He said that for the
department, Jacobs didn't exist.
Now some of her observations are almost too well respected.
Sancho Panza
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:s0u5239hdk062blmi...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 23:09:39 -0400, in misc.transport.urban-transit
> Tester <te...@test.org> wrote in
> <okp523140nt1c5l7p...@entropy.org>:
>>On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:16:24 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>wrote:
>>
>>[begin me]
>>>>If you try the Lower Manhattan Expressway and aren't extremely careful
>>>>with your route, you are liable to be haunted by the ghost of Jane
>>>>Jacobs. At the height of his power I think Moses would have had Jacobs
>>>>for breakfast but she managed to dethrone the Lion in Winter and save
>>>>her beloved "blighted" West Village.
>>>>
>>[end me]
>>>
>>>IIRC someone else is credited in the memorial plaque in Washington
>>>Square Park with saving the Village from Moses, but I don't recall the
>>>name.
>>
>>Here's her obit in a local weekly.
>>
>>http://www.thevillager.com/villager_156/janejacobsactivistwho.html
>>
> Thanks.
>
> I wasn't really trying to argue against it, I was just remembering that
> there were some others who were credited, but couldn't remember the
> names.
Mary Perot Nichols, who was editor of The Village Voice in its heyday, had a
major role.
> I remember talking to a friend who was getting a master in Urban and
> Regional Planning in the late seventies. He said that for the
> department, Jacobs didn't exist.
That is largely true for the academic side, not for the agitation side.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> But the Midtown Tunnel and Lincoln Tunnel are at capacity now. It might
> make more sense to dig a deep tunnel from Brooklyn or Queens directly to
> New Jersey without a stop in Manhattan. But I wonder what kind of
> toll drivers would be willing to pay. Given the number of people who
> are willing to crawl across Canal Street to avoid the toll on the
> Verrazano, I don't think the toll could be much higer than the current
> tolls. People seem to be willing to waste an incredible amount to time
> to save eight bucks.
Perhaps since the tunnels are at capacity now, drivers see no benefit
in taking them. I gladly pay a toll IF I am getting a faster ride.
But if I'm stuck in traffic on the toll road, I might as well be stuck
in traffic on the local road for no toll. Indeed, sometimes the local
road is better than the toll road.
Indeed, I plan to drive across lower Manhattan on a Sunday (Holland
Tunnel to Williamsburg Br) to avoid bad traffic on the BQE or Belt
Pkwy. I'd take the Lincoln and Midtown but they say that is worse.
Interestingly, the MCNY exhibit had an old film promoting the Lower
Manhattan Expy.
It would probably make more sense to bypass Manhattan altogether as
you suggest. People will pay a premium for speed.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> If you try the Lower Manhattan Expressway and aren't extremely careful
> with your route, you are liable to be haunted by the ghost of Jane
> Jacobs. At the height of his power I think Moses would have had Jacobs
> for breakfast but she managed to dethrone the Lion in Winter and save
> her beloved "blighted" West Village.
There is a big model of the area on display now at MCNY as part of the
Moses' exhibits. (see www.mcny.org)
android
<vjp...@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com> wrote in message
news:evpqp5$2k1$1...@reader2.panix.com...
alright
at first I was surprised
http://click.adultsingles.com/partner/click.asp?id=72473&site=ads&typ=click
honestly i THINK it's wrong
rsh...@gmail.com
I have some experience in this. Conside the traffic on the GWB. If
it isn't too bad and there are not other problems, take the NJ Tpk to
95, then cross the GWB, and the Triboro. I don't know exactly where
you are going, but you might be better off on the Grand Central.
I did a trip from Union County NJ to La Guardia. Left at 1 pm, got
there at 1:50, and was back before 3 pm.
Anything is better then the SI, Verrazano, Gowanus, BQE. The
problem with the Lincoln is you can sit 45 min-1 hr just to get
through even on a weekend. Unless you are going to Lower Manhattan,
the Holland is not usually a good bet.
Take care, Randy in S Dade, FL
Mr.Cool
Here is a group dedicated to suburbs vs citie topics if anyone is
intrested.
http://groups.google.com/group/cities-vs-suburbs?hl=en