update

» Saturday, December 03, 2005

Seven Solutions to the Atlantic Yards Traffic Problem

Over the last few months I have been interviewing some of the city’s leading transportation policy and planning experts asking them this one question:

In light of the Atlantic Yards project and the all of the other major development taking place in and around Downtown Brooklyn these days, what policy, planning and design ideas should be considered to ensure that the neighborhoods around Atlantic Yards and the transportation network that serves the area remain functional and healthy?

Remarkably, I found that everyone I spoke with, whether from city agencies, advocacy groups or policy think tanks generally presented the same set of ideas. In other words, New York City's transportation and planning communities know how to solve the area's traffic problems. The ideas are there. The question is whether the city can generate the political will and revenue to make these changes happen.

Still, changes start as ideas. So, here are seven ideas that the city, state and private developer Forest City Ratner should seriously consider to ensure that this massive project of 16-towers and a 19,000-seat arena has a chance to work:

1. Improve subway service and facilities.
Fun though it may be to one day call Manhattanites the “bridge and tunnel” crowd, former Department of Transportation Deputy Commissioner “Gridlock” Sam Schwartz says that Manhattanites don’t like taking the subway into Brooklyn. Data collected by the Brooklyn Academy of Music shows this to be true. To convince Manhattanites to take the subway to events at Atlantic Yards, Brooklyn’s downtown subway stations must be improved significantly, and train service needs to be more frequent and reliable, particularly during big events. This will require significant funding by the MTA.

2. Create incentives to take transit.
To get people onto trains and buses, Jon Orcutt, president of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, suggests we “build a transit incentive into the basketball ticket.” When people buy event tickets, give them a free or reduced ride on a subway or bus. An interesting version of this idea is being proposed for the 80,000-seat NASCAR track on Staten Island. Tickets to events would be linked directly to mode of travel. Your ticket doesn’t only get you a seat at the racetrack, it also assigns you a parking space, a ride on a ferry, or a seat on a bus. The number of parking spaces around the track has been limited to ensure that Staten Island’s bridges and roads are not overtaxed. By contrast, no such transportation planning has been put forward by the developer of the Atlantic Yards. Rather than computer modeling the area's traffic they are filming the intersection of Flatbush, Atlantic and Fourth, ostensibly, to show that traffic isn’t as bad there as people believe it is. Note to the videographers: Make sure you film the intersection from the pedestrians’ perspective, not just the motorists’.

3. Limit and manage parking space
The hot book in urban planning circles these days is Donald Shoup’s 700-page thriller, The High Cost of Free Parking. It turns out that the single biggest generator of automobile trips is free, abundant parking. Even if Atlantic Yards is built atop the city’s second largest transit hub, if lots of parking space is available, people will use their cars to get there and traffic congestion will increase. If parking is scarce and expensive, people will be far more likely to leave their cars at home and use transit. At Atlantic Yards, Regional Plan Association’s Jeff Zupan said, it is vital that “we not build a big supply of parking that then creates more of an automobile environment.”

To ensure that the surrounding residential streets don’t become de facto arena parking lots, a residential parking permit program needs to be set up in all of the nearby neighborhoods. So that local businesses are not hurt and residential permits aren’t condemned as “elitist,” the permit system should allow for non-residents to park their cars for one or two hours – enough time to shop but not enough time to attend a basketball game.

4. Design a great pedestrian environment.
The intersection of Flatbush, Atlantic and Fourth is, simply, a terrifying place to cross the street. That is because the needs and requirements of vehicular traffic have, for years, been prioritzed above all else. With the amount of pedestrian traffic that an arena and other development would bring, we need to redesign the Crossroads of Brooklyn with the needs and priorities of pedestrians and transit users first in mind. The developer, city and state need to ask themselves: How can we turn this intersection into a truly great public space?

To begin to do this, we should install traffic-calming features where busy thoroughfares meet quiet residential streets along all three avenue corridors. We should not bury pedestrians in underground tunnels, or narrow the sidewalks to accommodate black limo drop-offs and increased vehicular traffic flow. Gehry’s current plan to build big super-blocks with “towers in the park” set way back off the street has to be redesigned. These ideas are proven neighborhood killers.

5. Get Bus Rapid Transit Rolling (BRT)
Cities around the world are using BRT with great success. BRT gives buses their own dedicated lanes and a variety of other features that vastly increase the speed, reliability and, subsequently, the ridership on buses in crowded cities. BRT is relatively cheap and easy to get up and running. The MTA is studying the idea of turning the Flatbush Avenue B41 into a BRT route. “We have to squeeze more transportation performance out of our streets,” Transportation Alternatives’ Director Paul Steely White, said. “The best way to do this is to switch people out of their cars into high-capacity buses.” The cost of BRT, of course, is that cars would be banned from two or even four lanes of Flatbush Avenue, at least during rush hours when the lanes would be dedicated exclusively to buses. If people really want to solve the area’s traffic problems, this is the price that must be paid.

6. Make Brooklyn more bike-friendly
Visiting Northern European cities many Americans discover, as I did, that the bicycle can be a cheap, fast, clean, efficient and extremely pleasant form of urban transportation. As New York City grows more dense, as the price of gasoline ratchets up, and as local and global environmental issues become more urgent, bicycling is emerging as an obvious solution to some of our city’s most pressing problems.

“The highest rates of cycling in the whole city are in Brooklyn,” White said. If we’re thinking towards the future, then the development of Atlantic Yards should improve Brooklyn’s bike network. Likewise, the Atlantic Avenue transit hub should have a Bike Station, a park’n’ride facility where commuters, shoppers and employees can safely park their bikes during the day and evening.

7. Implement congestion pricing
All these ideas are nice, but how do we pay for them? First, it should be remembered that Forest City Ratner is asking for more than $200 million in public subsidies for the Atlantic Yards project. A significant portion of that public money should be invested in improving the public space around the project. It shouldn’t all go into a half-billion-dollar basketball arena, the most expensive ever built.

Second, every transportation expert I spoke to suggested that we take a very serious look at implementing congestion pricing in New York City. Congestion pricing is an automated tolling system that is used to control traffic. London, the world city most analogous to New York, has had remarkable success with congestion pricing. To drive into London’s busy, crowded central business district motorists are automatically charged 8£, or about $14. There are no toll plazas and drivers don’t have to slow down to pay. The system has been a tremendous success, even in the eyes of earlier skeptics. Traffic congestion is down 38 percent, and if you do need to get through London in a car or delivery truck, driving is now fast and reliable. The system has not hurt local business or reduced the number of people visiting Downtown London. Congestion pricing is raising about $175 million a year, all of which is being plowed back into bus, pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure.

Well-served by mass transit, suffering from crippling traffic congestion, and overrun by through-traffic to the free East River bridges, Downtown Brooklyn is a place that should seriously consider the benefits of congestion pricing.



Comments

Interesting ideas if it's possible to implement them.

(A good post after nearly a month with no entries!)

Yeah, the "if it's possible to implement them" -- that's really pretty much always the most important thing, isn't it? The political will, the funding...

Sorry I've been slack with the postings. Been busy working. I'll try to pick it back up.

Sorry to be a stickler, but the headline calls the list "Seven Solutions," while the article more accurately describes them as "ideas... to ensure that this massive project... has a chance to work."

For ignorant neophytes such as myself, ideas like "congestion pricing" and "limiting parking" are a tough sell. Overselling them as "solutions," with the implied promise that these ideas will actually solve any problems, muddies the clear-headed debate that you promote.

Otherwise, great article. Do-nothing fuddy-duddies who make empty claims to the progressive liberal agenda, will slowly come around if you keep on squacking.

Oh, yeah, Lumi you're soooo ignorant. Not!

Granted, ones doesn't know whether something is a solution until it is implemented and it actually solves the problem. But those two ideas that you picked out -- congestion pricing and careful management and limiting of parking space in places with great density and transit option -- those are two of the most proven methods of reducing motor vehicle traffic in cities all around the world. London actually has reduced traffic congestion by 38% with congestion pricing and cities like Copenhagen and Melbourne have made enormous strides by getting rid of parking space. So, I think we do know enough to call the above seven ideas solutions.

I imagine, though, that you're really most objecting to the idea that there is any solution at all to the traffic that would be brought by 16 towers and a 19,000-seat arena. If I'm making it sound like these seven ideas will totally get rid of traffic then, yeah, I'm overselling it. But that's not my intent. The truth is that even if they built the Atlantic Yards project and implemented these seven ideas to their fullest, we could still have more automobile traffic coming in and out of the neighborhoods around the development, particularly during arena events. Any increase in density as big as this project is going to bring more people by any and every mode of transport.

Still, these seven ideas are some of the very best ways of dealing with that. And, truly, since something like 40% of the rush hour traffic coming down Flatbush Avenue is thru-traffic to the free Manhattan Bridge, a congestion pricing fee really does have the potential of reducing traffic a significant amount in and around Downtown Brooklyn.

Here's a letter to MArty Markowitz that has gone unanswered:




26 September 2005
Marty Markowitz
Borough President
Borough Hall
209 Joralemon Street
Brooklyn NY 11201


Dear Mr. Markowitz:

We crossed paths two weeks ago at a Katrina fund-raiser on Argyle Road – and at the time I thought it would be in bad taste to confront you on this issue. However: I write this as a concerned citizen, longtime homeowner in Park Slope and member of the Board of Directors of Project for Public Spaces.

Your advocacy of a sports stadium and massive housing at the already overcrowded juncture of Flatbush, Atlantic and Fourth Avenues has been extremely alarming. Your belated suggestion – after the property has been transferred -- that it be “downsized” is of little help.

You could have been an advocate for your constituents from the beginning rather than asking a developer – after the fact -- to nibble around the edges of an over-bloated project. City dwellers and urbanists alike know full well that convention centers and sports stadiums deaden rather than enliven an area, which is why they are best kept at some distance from residential zones. And massive housing blocks do precisely the same.

In the particular case of Atlantic-Flatbush-Fourth Avenue, we have an area that increasingly has been coming alive without needing any mega-development’s so-called “jumpstart.” On the contrary, a stadium would utterly destroy the optimism that’s already been created by zoning changes along Fourth Avenue and by local efforts of people living around BAM.

Let me be very clear: I am not anti-development. In fact, I looked forward to the original master plan for the site as proposed by Jonathan Rose and derailed by legal shenanigans. That Forest City Ratner has made an esthetic and communal hash of its development so far suggests that piling-on of more huge enterprises here is wrongheaded and harmful.

The BAM Arts District, which I support, is development enough and if it is gradual probably will enhance the surrounding neighborhoods.

But the hazard of an unnecessary stadium with frequent surges of vehicular traffic pouring into an intersection that frequently is gridlocked already, will create dangerous and unlivable conditions.

There is widespread agreement that small businesses and small-scale residential development are essential to regenerating what has been lost in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago and New York. The current mayor agrees that New York lags other urban areas in encouraging small-scale entrepreneurship that knits communities together. I happen believe that New Yorkers deserve to have big-box retailers, too, but if we are to have mega-stores, they should be in fringe neighborhoods so as not to disrupt an area’s social fabric.

Frank Gehry notwithstanding, Mr. Ratner’s record in Brooklyn is shameful. The highest and best use for land opposite his Metrotech is: a carwash! To my knowledge, nothing has been built on Metro Tech’s perimeters and the place has become the sort of anti-urban “dead city” that I thought we’d abandoned decades ago. His architecture at the junction of Flatbush and Atlantic Avenue rises to a level of crap. And there is no guarantee he will build anything resembling Frank Gehry’s notable drawings – and that’s all they are is drawings.

Supporting a stadium is fine -- if placed an area where it does no harm. The same is true of housing. And closing of streets. And the same is true of borough presidents who also should do no harm.



Very truly yours,



Michael J. Whiteman

Aaron, No. 3 would be the most effective of this list. The only way to get people out of their cars is to eliminate one of two things: Road space or parking. Subway improvements are nice, but the nicest subway in the world wouldn't win any customers next to ample free parking. Sorry to be so jaded, but I think that's reality.
AD

Yeah, I think #3, parking and #7, pricing are the two most effective methods on this list for reducing automobile traffic. But you can't just remove the car trips and not give people other ways to get into the area. So, I think you've also really got to consider these transit, bike and pedestrian upgrades to get the mode shift. Just like they did in London.

Further discussion about traffic at the Borough Hall meeting:
http://timesratnerreport.blogspot.com/2005/12/looming-disaster-of-traffic-call-for_06.html

hi,

what happens when security requirements are thrown into the mix.... don't forget that right now Metro Tech is having streets demapped for security reasons...

Good suggestions.

I would caution you about BRT, though. While BRT has been successful in Latin America, BRT's track record in the U.S. has been not been as good. Also, BRT has become a favorite of the pro-highway, anti-transit bunch... here's two articles that explain why:
---------------------

Is It BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) or BAS (Bait and Switch)?
-------------------

Fast-Lane Fallacy

Bus "Rapid" Transit Is Anything But.

------------------

BRT doesn't work in cities that don't have the will to take a lane or two of road space away from private automobiles. In places where lanes are set aside for the exclusive use of BRT, it generally works really well.

As for the security question: I don't see this development as being any bigger a target than Madison Square Garden or any other big building in Manhattan. In my opinion, obsessing over terrorism security will ultimately lead to an even bigger loss for the neighborhoods around the Atlantic Yards.

If you really wanted to make the buldings car-bomb proof, I suppose you could set the buildings way back from the street, make the lower ten floors windowless and fortified, and totally lockdown public space with metal detectors and cameras. That's pretty much what the NYPD insisted be done at the "Freedom Tower" at Ground Zero. But that would almost certainly create a truly awful public space with no relationship to the surrounding neighborhoods. We should do everything we can to ensure this doesn't become another corporate shopping fortress.

Well done!
[url=http://xlelbzsk.com/hjsl/pewq.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://vydjktal.com/iuer/rxea.html]Cool site[/url]

Nice site!
My homepage | Please visit

Nice site!
http://xlelbzsk.com/hjsl/pewq.html | http://bkocyjca.com/gtsj/iukc.html



Post a Comment (You'll be taken to Blogger's site and then returned back to this page.)