![]()
MY BOOK ![]() ARTICLES Peak Freaks Hurricane NYC From Grief to Action (pdf) The Coming Energy Crunch Auto Asphyxiation Alarmingly Useless LINKS Kunstler Oil Drum NYC NoLandGrab.org Starts & Fits Dope on the Slope Brooklyn Views Polis Atlantic Yards Report Transportation Alternatives Rushkoff Planetizen Global Public Media Laid Off Dad Bird to the North Auto-Free NY Gothamist Gotham Gazette Mom Previous Life Winds READING Catastrophe Notes Small Urban Spaces High Tide Powerdown Rendezvous With Rama Ancient Sunlight Geography of Nowhere The Power Broker Resource Wars Invisible Heroes Nothing Sacred ARCHIVES June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 January 2010
|
![]()
Automobile Worship New York City mayoral candidate Fernando Ferrer says he's leading Democrats to the Promised Land. At a rubber-chicken dinner at a local Brooklyn Democratic club last week, he announced, "This is the year we send the message coast to coast: It starts here in New York City. Then we go to Albany, and then we take back the White House for Democrats." New York City economist and activist Charlie Komanoff is an advocate of developing a congestion-pricing tolling system for New York City. This type of urban tolling has been enormously successful in London. In addition to delivering environmental and quality-of-life benefits, congestion pricing, according to Komanoff's calculations, could raise as much as $700 million annually. He is disappointed in the opening salvo of the Ferrer campaign. "If Freddy Ferrer won't stand up for civic and constitutional principles, let alone a driver's self-interest in finding a parking space, what hope is there that he'll stand up for the public good on an issue like East River bridge tolls?"
Comments
Ferrer's argument takes this issue in the wrong direction. Instead of being eliminiated one day a week, the charge people pay at parking meters should be increased to serve as a form of congestion pricing of parking to match what should be congestion pricing of travel. This, at least, is the conclusion reached by Gary Roth, a Columbia University urban planning student who studied the cost of curbside parking for his 2004 master's thesis (pdf).
Roth notes the tremendous disparity between the amount of money charged by expensive off-street parking lots, and cheap curbside parking, and states: "As the currently low curbside parking fees subsidize auto travel, higher parking fees should make the transportation system more efficient and reduce pricing distortions" (p. 5). In conclusion, he looked at who would benefit from higher parking meter charges and who would lose out. The winners: 1) commercial vehicles such as delivery trucks and the businesses that employ them, 2) car sharing services like ZipCar and FlexCar, 3) retail stores generally (through increased shopper turnover), 4) the city government (through raised revenue) and by extension taxpayers generally, and 5) parking lot operators (whose business model would change quite significantly). The losers: motorists.
You are best!
prilosec http://courses.dsu.edu/ttla/_discTTLA/00000078.htm?prilosec [url=http://courses.dsu.edu/ttla/_discTTLA/00000078.htm?prilosec]prilosec[/url] levaquin http://courses.dsu.edu/ttla/_discTTLA/00000079.htm?levaquin [url=http://courses.dsu.edu/ttla/_discTTLA/00000079.htm?levaquin]levaquin[/url] fosamax http://courses.dsu.edu/ttla/_discTTLA/0000007a.htm?fosamax [url=http://courses.dsu.edu/ttla/_discTTLA/0000007a.htm?fosamax]fosamax[/url] Regards. Post a Comment (You'll be taken to Blogger's site and then returned back to this page.) |