Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_jd2nsdp wrote

So they voted on something in 2019 and weren’t actually able to do anything about it until this report was done? Or did all the money go into making this report? I’m generally confused, can someone explain to me?

15

LittleWind_ t1_jd31kpr wrote

Simple answer is - before any governmental action is taken (including the funding of an action) in NY, an environmental review must be carried out so that decision-makers know of the potential negative environmental impacts that might result from their action. If a negative impact is identified, they must propose measures to limit the negative impact. The same requirement applies to the federal government, who is involved here because they manage/regulate the interstate highway system.

So, in 2019, NYers voted to move forward with congestion pricing. The environmental review is ongoing and, once that is complete, decision-makers will provide the specific policy for implementation (based on the environmental review) and set a timeline for starting congestion pricing.

23

Edwunclerthe3rd t1_jd3lnp0 wrote

To add on, 4 years isnt really a long period of time for something that they have to modify infrastructure around. Traffic patterns, public transit load, and general behavior could change dramatically, and the city has to be able to anticipate that Edit: This usually culminates in a report such as a feasibility study or environmental impact statement

6

CactusBoyScout t1_jd44vas wrote

The counterpoint is that making the process take this long is part of the reason projects cost so much and often don’t happen at all. When it takes longer than any politician’s term to even do the environmental review, it’s more likely projects will simply get canceled.

Also, in this case, it’s a toll. We’re not talking about demolishing entire neighborhoods to build a highway. If there’s a problem, they can turn it off.

Ezra Klein at the NYTimes has done some articles on how NY’s experience with congestion charging is a great example of how broken these systems are. Costs for all kinds of infrastructure projects skyrocketed when these kinds of reviews became mandatory in the 1970s.

19

Edwunclerthe3rd t1_jd49an6 wrote

I'm slightly biased towards these reports as that is what I study in school, but I'm also aware that a 500 page statement is going to deter potential readers

−1

CactusBoyScout t1_jd4aj2v wrote

Do you feel like the system around these is working appropriately?

I’m not an expert, I just like reading about the mechanics of these projects when I can.

It seems to me, and a lot of non-experts, that timelines for projects like this are just way too long and that perhaps some reform of these processes is needed. Do you think that’s a fair assessment? Genuinely curious.

3

Edwunclerthe3rd t1_jd73nj3 wrote

My problem with these is that like with most other services, the work is contracted out to consulting firms. Sometimes this makes sense, the city used a danish firm for the Cloudburst program due to their track record in Copenhagen, and sometimes we'd be better off with an in house assessment. The lack of oversight and long leash NYC gives contractors is astounding

1

planning_throwaway1 t1_jd458av wrote

This is a federal requirement, unfortunately. One of those "sounds good on paper" ideas that have been a disaster for any project that might actually be good for the environment. Other countries don't do this. The cost is usually in the low millions for project of this size, but the real killer is just how long they take. 4 years for something like NYC congestion pricing sounds about right to me. Although maybe not, since it's not like there's no tolls currently, congestion pricing is largely just standardizing tolls across the board.

They were originally supposed to be short studies, just be a paragraph or two, but now in practice they look like this. Entirely to try and avoid frivolous lawsuits.

So in practice highways keep getting built, while bus ways, bike lanes and transit projects get held up for years by these things

6

tickleMyBigPoop OP t1_jd2wniy wrote

> So they voted on something in 2019 and weren’t actually able to do anything about it until this report was done

Yes

7