Max Heiman of Rockefeller University's "How Green R U" blog points out one thing that's missing from Mayor Bloomberg's PlaNYC: a mandate for improving the fuel efficiency of New York's taxis. The city has begun experimenting with a small number of hybrid taxis, and as Heiman argues, the logic for converting the whole fleet is pretty compelling:

As this op-ed in the Times City section points out, there are nearly 13,000 taxis in NYC, together driving on the order of 800 million miles per year. More than 9 out of 10 cabs on the street are Crown Vics, which are lucky to get 18 mpg.

The entire fleet turns over every three years, so a fuel efficiency standard put in place today would convert every taxi in the city to a higher standard by 2010. The authors say that the Taxi and Limousine Commission has looked at hybrid taxis that get 39 mpg and average just about $2500 more than the Crown Vic, while saving $3700 in gas each year.

This just seem like a no-brainer to me, and I don’t get why it wasn’t in Bloomberg’s plan.

I agree.

I'm not normally a Bloomberg booster, but the mayor's PlaNYC is really praiseworthy. Daniel has done a great job linking to reporting and analysis on the specific proposal for congestion pricing. He notes, correctly, that the devil is in the details. I want to argue that when you consider the details, congestion pricing comes out looking like an excellent - even crucial - idea.

It's true that congestion charges, viewed in isolation, would constitute a regressive tax (though New Yorkers paying an $8 fee would have it easy compared to Londoners, who pay twice as much). But the regressiveness can be mitigated. As Jackie Ashley wrote in the Guardian in February, "We need sharp, specialised instruments, not blunt ones." Congestion charges could be offset somewhat by reductions in other regressive taxes or fees; those who are particularly reliant on their cars - for instance, people with disabilities - could be provided with exemptions. This article in the Daily News suggests additional ways to ease the burden where appropriate: for instance, by allowing drivers five free trips a year and by reducing bus fares in neighborhoods not served by subways.

Balancing the burden would help make congestion pricing less regressive. But in a larger sense, it's a very progressive idea - especially when you consider that fewer than 5% of New Yorkers actually drive to work in Manhattan. Like a carbon tax, congestion charging would be a means of using tax policy to discourage behavior that hurts the public interest. Traffic congestion damages public health and costs the city billions of dollars a year; it also contributes to global climate change. And it is inherently progressive - redistributive - to focus transportation policy on improving mass transit as opposed to automobile traffic.

The real key, and the reason Mayor Bloomberg deserves a good deal of praise, is that congestion pricing is understood as being only one element in a far-sighted plan to address the considerable challenges New York faces over the next two decades. Give Bloomberg credit - he recognized a moment of fiscal and political opportunity, and rather than squandering it, he's using it to the public's advantage. It's only when you look at how congestion pricing fits into this larger strategy that you realize how progressive it actually is.

Think of PlaNYC as comprising four complementary plans. Congestion pricing is important to and made more progressive by each of them:  read more »

In their scramble to accomodate the massive increases in traffic that Ratner's Atlantic Yards project will mean for most of Brooklyn, the Department of Transportation has proposed changes for 4th, 6th, and 7th Avenues and 9th Street in Brooklyn. The plans for 4th Ave. and 9th Street have received some good reviews, but the plans to turn 6th and 7th Avenues into one-way streets in order to speed up traffic along these routes was overwhelmingly opposed by the community in part because these two Avenues have a high density of schools along their lengths, and ANY attempt to speed up traffic will increase the risk to our children.

The Department of Transportation has made two somewhat contradictary claims regarding these proposals. They have claimed that they need no approval from anyone to make these changes. They claim the right to change the rules with no oversight, even if it increases the risk to our children crossing the street to go to school. On the other hand, they made the promise that if Community Board 6 opposed their proposals they would not carry them out.

Well, after a massive outcry by a community that is just beginning to realize what Ratner's Atlantic Yards plan will really mean for them, Community Board 6 has comeout solidly against the changes on 6th and 7th Avenues. They have not taken a stand on the more acceptable changes for 4th Ave. and 9th Street.  read more »

Park Slope Neighbors brings you the following events relating to Brooklyn development and transportation:

1) Community Board 6 to Consider DOT One-Way Proposal, Wednesday, 6:30 p.m.

This Wednesday evening, at 6:30 p.m., the full membership of Brooklyn Community Board 6 will hold their monthly General Meeting, during which they will vote on the proposal presented last month by the Department of Transportation to convert 6th and 7th Avenues in Park Slope from two-way to one-way traffic flow.

Some 2,500 of you signed PSN's petition opposing this ill-conceived plan, and 700 of you turned out on March 15th to tell the DOT that their proposal was not acceptable to residents of Park Slope. Despite the massive community opposition, however, CB6's Transportation Committee passed a watered-down motion requesting that DOT "not proceed" with the proposal "at this time" "because there are too many questions about" how the plan would affect safety and traffic flow.

This motion does not reflect Park Slopers' unified opposition to the DOT proposal. Our community is overwhelmingly against the idea of converting 6th and 7th Avenues to one-way operation, and any motion passed by CB6 pertaining to the one-way proposal should reflect that unanimity. We encourage you to email or call CB6 in advance of Wednesday's meeting to urge them to adopt a stronger position. And we urge you to show up for CB6's meeting on Wednesday, to let them know, through our collective presence, that Park Slope residents are united in opposition to the DOT's one-way proposal. [Please note that the public will not be permitted to speak at this meeting before the vote is taken -- we recommend that you bring a sign to register your point of view.]  read more »

I love the snow. Absolutely love it. Grew up in Southern California, so I went camping in the snow but never LIVED with snow.

My first experience with LIVING with snow was, ironically, a White Christmas in Kyoto Japan. GORGEOUS! Japanese architecture seems designed to look gorgeous in the snow. Walked all over snow covered Kyoto that first snowfall in a place I lived.

Most New Yorkers I know hate it when it snows. They say the snow gets dirty too fast and it becomes impossible to walk and all the people who refuse to clean up their dog's shit leave frozen little presents for pedestrians to step on weeks later when the snow melts. All true, but by and large I love looking up at the snow falling through the light of the street lamps, love hearing the snow hitting the window as I sleep and love seeing the snow on the ground before anyone steps on it.

But today, NYC SUCKED in the snow, culminated in iced over stairs at train stations that no one was willing to deal with despite the fact that it made the stairs almost impassable.

First off, in NYC the corners of intersections get all the snow from the streets piled up, making it hard to cross the street. Fine, the road is clear, but the drains are now covered, so the street floods, and pedestrians can't cross without great effort. I used to see that as a minor irritant, but you try pushing a stroller through NYC city streets after a snow. It is terrible! I can only imagine what it is like for someone in a wheelchair or an elderly person. What's with NYC? Can't they figure out how to clear the corners? It's not like no one walks here. I understand that after one day you can't expect them to be cleared. But there are times they don't get cleared away for weeks, except for that tiny path hordes of people have to squeeze past that are formed by the pedestrians wading through themselves.  read more »