Surcharges for people who want to use roads during times of heavy traffic – so called congestion pricing – has been a subject of debate for some time. Leaders in a number of cities, including Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago have considered using this device. It’s already been in place abroad, notably in Singapore, London and Stockholm.

But New York City has been the first city in the United States to actually implement this plan a little over a year ago, charging $9 for drivers with EZ Passes, who enter the island south of 60^th Street on weekdays from 4 a.m. to 9 pm. And weekends from 9 a. m to 9 p.m. 

The results of this sometimes-contentious initiative, it turns out, have been very positive.

According to a January 30^th  article in Bloomberg’s City Lab Perspectives “Manhattan’s streets are indeed flowing faster with taxis and buses reporting quicker trips . . . .”

As a study by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)  revealed, “Using a generalized synthetic controls design, we find that the policy increased speeds on CBD (Central Business  District) roads by 11%, with little-to-no effect on air quality, transactions at shops and restaurants, or overall foot traffic in the CBD.”

Surprisingly, the greatest benefits of congestion pricing in Manhattan have been felt by many of the drivers who objected to the plan in the first place. As Bloomberg reports, “The majority of drivers’ time has accrued to those traveling outside the toll zone entirely – for example, those commuting from Brooklyn to Queens or within Northern New Jersey.”

This sounds counterintuitive, but here’s the explanation, reports Bloomberg, “consider that most drivers heading into the island traverse roadways outside the congestion relief zone as they approach it from Long Island, New Jersey, or wherever they begin their journey. By shrinking the number of peak-time cars flowing into the toll zone, congestion pricing reduces traffic on outlying roadways, where remaining drivers – including those who never had Manhattan on their itinerary – can now go faster.”

Critics of the plan – and there were plenty – argued that quite the opposite would be true, assuming that congestion pricing would provoke drivers to using suburban roadways, that would then become overloaded and slower. But according to the NBER study, there was “no evidence of offsetting slowdowns on different road types – suggesting that the policy reduced overall traffic volumes rather than simply displaced congestion.” 

In fact, the NBER found that “Highly exposed local roads. . . just above the northern border of the CBD at 60th St., experienced a similar increase in speeds to those inside the CBD.

Will other cities follow suit now that there’s evidence of success in New York City? Time will tell. 

#CityGovernmentManagement #CityTransportationManagement #CityTransportationPerformance #NewYorkCityAndCongestionPricing #StateandLocalDebateAboutCongestionPricing #NewYorkCityCongestionPricingPerformanceMeasurement #NewYorkCityCongestionPricingInitialOutcomes #StateandLocalGovernmentManagement #StaeandLocalGovernmentPerformance #StateandLocalTransportationManagement #BloombergCityLabProspectives #NationalBureauEconomicResearch #NBER #NBERandCongestionPricing #CongestionPricingAndTravelTime #StateandLocalManagementNews #StateandLocalTransportationNews #BarrettandGreeneInc.