Congestion Pricing doesn't improve traffic in London. Light Rail is the best solution
Reader comment on: Why I Drive

Submitted by George N. Spitz, Mar 24, 2008 02:53

Andrew Wolf is correct in questioning Congestion Pricing. The London Times recently pointed out that Congestion Pricing has not solved the traffic problem in London. Additional transportation options for overcrowded transit such as the IRT Lexington Avenue Subway line and the slow-moving, uncomfortable articulated buses on 1st, 2nd and 3rd Avenues would be desirable. But, Mayor Bloomberg's PlaNYC, the MTA and the Manhattan "Reform" Democratic political establishment are supporting the wrong solution. They're spending $4.65 billion for a four stop 1.7 mile Second Avenue Subway in Manhattan that is now projected to be finished in 2015 and the construction is causing considerable destruction in the neighborhoods. The Mayor's PlaNYC and the MTA are contemplating miniscule transit improvements for Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island.

The best remedy for traffic congestion on the Upper East Side and elsewhere in the city is to spend the $4.65 billion on roughly 50 miles of street level boarding, good for the disabled and elderly, non polluting Light Rail which can be up and running in roughly than three years. Similar solutions have worked in Portland, Sacramento, Denver, Phoenix, Houston and other Metropolitan Areas in North America and Europe. But Light Rail is a 21st century method for solving traffic congestion and air quality problems that is unfortunately ignored by Mayor Bloomberg's PlaNYC, the MTA and the Eastside "Reform" Democratic Party establishment.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.