HRT - Hormone Replacement Therapy in New York City, NJ

Following in the footsteps of other major international cities, New York City’s congestion pricing officially went into effect about a week ago. Now, if you insist on driving into certain parts of the city instead of using alternative forms of transportation, you have to pay $9. New Jersey is, of course, furious, but how’s this whole thing working out for regular New Yorkers? Pretty darn well, actually, with traffic already lower and buses moving faster according to the New York Times.

Since congestion pricing has gone into effect, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority says tens of thousands fewer cars have entered the busiest parts of the city, with traffic falling by 7.5 percent on the first day it went into effect. On Sunday, traffic was down an estimated 18.5 percent. On average, we’re talking about 43,800 fewer cars per day and 219,000 fewer cars per week. Traffic was heavier later in the week, but based on past driving trends, that was to be expected.

The city didn’t collect data on how many drivers entered the zone before congestion pricing went into effect, so we don’t have exact numbers, but the estimates are encouraging. It’s also possible that colder weather may have reduced the number of people driving into the city that week anyway. Still, the MTA, which is overseeing the program, likes what it’s seen so far.

“There’s so much evidence that people are experiencing a much less traffic-congested environment,” Janno Lieber, the chairman and chief executive of the MTA, told the New York Times. “They’re seeing streets that are moving more efficiently, and they’re hearing less noise, and they’re feeling a less tense environment around tunnels and bridges.”

Congestion pricing was never just about reducing the number of cars in the city, though. Fewer cars would also mean a better quality of life for the millions of people who actually live in New York City, and in that regard, it sounds like congestion pricing has also been a success:

New York City’s Tech Transit Lab on Monday announced the launch of its seventh annual competition, which this year will be centered around tech startups looking to work with NYC public transportation agencies that will pilot their artificial intelligence technologies.

The lab is an eight-week program for tech startups led by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the New Jersey Transit Corporation, the NYC Department of Transportation and the Partnership Fund for New York City.

Stacey Matlen, vice president of innovation at the Partnership for New York City, said AI will be central to the program this year.

“This year we’re focused on harnessing the power of AI and other tech to improve foundational elements of the customer experience like scheduling, communications and system maintenance. We’re excited to collaborate with our partner agencies and forward-thinking technology companies to build a vibrant future that benefits all New Yorkers,” Matlen said.

This year, the transportation agencies are seeking proposals for two challenges. The first calls for technologies to help the agencies analyze ridership and travel-demand data to improve ridership, and the other calls for ways to optimize inspections and maintenance.

Following company applications, representatives from each participating transportation agency will evaluate the impact of the proposals, along with the applicants’ product, team and value proposition.

Previously competition themes have included optimizing transit schedules, paid ridership, customer communications, inspections and maintenance. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the lab called for experimental solutions that could help the public transportation agencies near NYC recover from the health crisis and boost environmental sustainability.

Last September, the lab shared the results its 2024 program, which took on public transit projects such as converting lampposts into EV chargers, using lidar to create digital maps for visually impaired riders and creating under-train and vehicle surveillance systems for automated inspection. The 2024 program was the largest so far, attracting 150 applicants.

Since the program’s inception in 2018, more than 900 companies have applied to participate in the program, 69 companies have tested their technologies and 37 solutions have commercially scaled or informed commercial procurements — including a live subway map, which is now used by the MTA.

The lab is accepting applications until Feb. 27, and the selected companies will pilot their technologies with one or more of those agencies over an eight-week period later this year.

'New York owes New Jersey answers': Josh Gottheimer talks congestion pricing taxes

NJ Congressman, gubernatorial candidate, Gottheimer says he doesn't want to hit any more hard-working families with more taxes but says something has to be done about congestion pricing.

The Brief

New York City rolled out congestion pricing less than two weeks ago – and while preliminary data released by the MTA showed modest traffic reductions in its first week, it nonetheless remains controversial.

What is ‘reverse congestion pricing’?

The backstory:

Last week, Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop floated the idea of a ‘reverse congestion pricing’ toll.

"New Jersey has the same opportunity to push the buttons that New York is pushing against us," Fulop said. "We could do that to them, but the goal is to get to a table to have a reasonable solution."

What they're saying:

However, not everyone is on board, such as Democratic Rep. Josh Gottheimer, NJ-5. He shared his thoughts Friday on

"No, I want people to come to Jersey," he said. "Right, so, I don't want to hit any hard-working families with more taxes. I want lower taxes, lower costs for people. We got to make life more affordable for people."

Big picture view:

Meanwhile, Fulop believes reverse congestion pricing is the answer to New York City's new toll.

"There's plenty of crossings between Staten Island, New York, Bergen County, Hudson County into New Jersey," Fulop said. "There's plenty of opportunities to have the same sort of impact fee that New York is putting on New Jersey."

The idea is the money will go to fund New Jersey’s mass transit system, plagued by delays and cancelations.

"My view is that New Jersey Transit is a terrible product, and it should be invested in more, and until you get a reliable transportation system in New Jersey, you can't responsibly think that people are going to take the trains," Fulop said. "But this was an opportunity to get hundreds of millions of dollars into New Jersey Transit, and I think the governor just took a very easy political approach."

What we don't know:

The details have yet to be flushed out, but Fulop says gantries or toll sites could be stationed outside of tunnels and bridges in New Jersey. Like congestion pricing, there may be exemptions or crossing credits.

It’s unclear if, like congestion pricing, New Jerseyans would pay the toll to reenter their home state like some New Yorkers do.

The other side:

reached out to the MTA and transit advocacy groups to gauge their interest, but they declined to comment. We also reached out to New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy to get his take, but haven't heard back.

Congestion pricing is an electronic tolling system that charges vehicles for entering Manhattan's Congestion Relief Zone (CRZ) — the area below 60th Street, excluding certain highways like the FDR Drive and West Side Highway. The program aims to:

Peak hours (5 a.m. – 9 p.m. weekdays l 9 a.m. – 9 p.m. weekends)

Off-peak hours (9 p.m. – 5 a.m. weekdays l 9 p.m. – 9 a.m. weekends)

Toll rates drop by 75%:

Focus on fan safety hits new heights with custom solution by Axis Communications

Located in East Rutherford, NJ and serving the New York City metropolitan area, MetLife Stadium regularly hosts events ranging from stadium concerts to NFL games—and the venue has been at the forefront of stadium security since it was built. (Photo: Business Wire)

CHELMSFORD, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Axis Communications, the industry leader in video surveillance and network devices, today announced the implementation of a custom surveillance solution developed in collaboration with the MetLife Stadium security team. This new, tailored solution will help the venue augment its security capabilities, providing high-quality video at unprecedented distances and allowing the security team to identify details from anywhere in the venue.

“As one of the world's largest stadiums, the safety of fans is our number one priority,” said Danny DeLorenzi, VP of Security and Safety Services, MetLife Stadium. “Unfortunately, none of the out-of-the-box solutions we tried could provide the desired coverage at the video quality we were looking for. Axis worked with us to build a custom solution where our needs were taken into consideration from the concept phase all the way through implementation. The result was an innovative new camera capable of providing full visibility throughout the entire bowl of the stadium while also allowing us to take advantage of advanced video analytics solutions.”

Located in East Rutherford, NJ and serving the New York City metropolitan area, MetLife Stadium regularly hosts events ranging from stadium concerts to NFL games—and the venue has been at the forefront of stadium security since it was built. The stadium is consistently rated one of the safest in the NFL, and in 2013 it was the first NFL stadium to achieve SAFETY Act certification from the US Department of Homeland Security. MetLife Stadium has twice been named a Facility of Merit by the prestigious National Center for Spectator Sports Safety and Security (NCS⁴) and has established a reputation for implementing modern security solutions. In keeping with this reputation, MetLife Stadium refused to compromise on a surveillance solution, choosing instead to work directly with Axis on a device tailored to the venue’s unique needs.

“MetLife Stadium has always been committed to strong security, and it holds its partners to a very high standard,” Fredrik Nilsson, VP, Axis Communications. “When the security team explained to us that they were having a hard time finding an off-the-shelf device that met their needs, we viewed it as an opportunity to innovate and design a more tailored solution. As a result, the MetLife Stadium security team will be well positioned to detect, investigate, and respond to any security challenges that come its way.”

The new device includes a number of features specifically tailored to improve performance in a stadium setting. It provides optimal performance in a variety of lighting conditions, and electronic image stabilization (EIS) capabilities that help keep the image steady even amid the raucous crowds and turbulent weather of an open-air stadium. It also features a custom-made lens that enables 8K resolution, and is capable of recording images in a wide dynamic range, capturing a broad spectrum of color hues in sharp, high-contrast video. Because the camera can more accurately identify and catalogue identifying features it is able to run more advanced and complex video analytics. The device adheres to a form factor consistent with existing surveillance devices, enabling compatibility with the pressed concrete structure’s existing camera mounts. Additionally, MetLife Stadium ensured the device could be easily integrated with the venue’s current security stack, including its Video Management System (VMS), current technology partners, and local public safety agencies.

With the new surveillance solution in place, MetLife Stadium’s security capabilities are more advanced than ever—but the security team is already planning for new enhancements. Venue officials are working to identify ways to leverage the devices to enhance security while also exploring different video analytics solutions. The ultimate goal is to not just improve security but streamline entry to the stadium, create easier access to amenities, and improve staffing efficiency.

MetLife Stadium, located in East Rutherford, NJ, is the home of the New York Jets and New York Giants and is one of the largest stadiums in the NFL (82,500). The stadium hosts the world’s biggest events on the world’s biggest stage and will host the FIFA World Cup 26™ Final and 7 other matches throughout the tournament. The venue annually ranks as one of the busiest stadiums in the world and has been named “Highest Grossing Stadium of the Year” 9 times by Billboard. Event highlights include Super Bowl XLVIII, NHL Stadium Series, WrestleMania, Copa America Centenario Final, 2021 Army-Navy Game, and many concerts, college football games, and international soccer matches.

About Axis Communications

Axis enables a smarter and safer world by improving security, safety, operational efficiency, and business intelligence. As a network technology company and industry leader, Axis offers video surveillance, access control, intercoms, and audio solutions. These are enhanced by intelligent analytics applications and supported by high-quality training.

Axis has around 5,000 dedicated employees in over 50 countries and collaborates with technology and system integration partners worldwide to deliver customer solutions. Axis was founded in 1984, and the headquarters are in Lund, Sweden.

Contacts

Chris Shanelaris Public Relations Manager, Americas Axis Communications Phone: (978-614-3023) Email: [email protected]

Early data shows that congestion pricing could be alleviating conditions in often-gridlocked areas of Manhattan and increasing use of public transit while potentially altering vehicle routes.

It’s too early to see if congestion pricing will change the behavior of commuters heading to New York City from New Jersey, although the Metropolitan Transportation Authority estimates only a small portion of Garden State workers have been affected by the introduction of the controversial toll program.

Transit experts, politicians and news outlets have looked for answers in London, where congestion pricing has been in place for over 20 years. While the toll initially helped ease traffic in Europe’s most congested city, traffic eventually crept back up. It did, however, help fund major infrastructure upgrades for the city’s public transportation.

David Metz, an honorary professor at the Center for Transport Studies, University College London, spoke to NJ Spotlight News about how congestion pricing has worked in London.

Editor’s note: This conversation was edited for clarity and brevity.

NJ Spotlight News: Congestion pricing has become a contentious issue in New York and New Jersey. How has it worked in London?

David Metz: It’s been generally acceptable. The technology works. You pay a fixed amount for entering the zone each day online, or you have an account and you’re charged automatically, the enforcement uses camera technology identifying number plates. This is publicly acceptable. There’s no kind of pushback against it.

When it was introduced, initially there was a big drop in traffic going into the central zone, and so delays due to congestion, at that time, also reduced. But then over the next five years or so, the delays returned to the original level.

Two explanations [are] given for this, which are not mutually exclusive: the one offered by Transport for London, which is the body in charge for congestion charging and in charge of public transport in London generally, they said they took advantage of the reduced volume of traffic to introduce more bus lanes, cycle lanes and pedestrian spaces, thus taking away the amount of road space for general traffic.

The other explanation, which I give — which is a more general one: If you take action to reduce the amount of congestion, such as with a congestion charge, so you reduce delays. Then some of the people who were deterred by the scale of the previous delays are now attracted back onto the road network.

Who will pay for congestion pricing?

Those who are less able or less inclined to pay the charge will avoid using their cars on the system, whereas those more able to pay will take advantage of the space that now becomes available. And those more able are those on higher incomes, and probably those people traveling on business who can charge their business account.

So my general sense is it’s quite hard to change the total amount of congestion, but you can get some redistribution in favor of those better able to pay. But on the other hand, if you’ve got a good public transport system — subway and buses — and that can be funded better from the proceeds of the congestion charge, then that still may be generally a good outcome.

NJSN: There’s an argument here that both New York and New Jersey should have built up their public transport systems before implementing congestion pricing. What was public transportation like in London 20 years ago when congestion pricing was implemented?

DM: I think it wasn’t bad then, because the main part of the [London] Underground was in place at that time, and the buses were improving. The occasion to introduce congestion charging was when the first Mayor Ken Livingstone, under the new arrangements for London government, was elected [in 2000] as a kind of an independent, and he included in his political manifesto the introduction of congestion charging. So when he got elected, he just pushed ahead with it very quickly, reckoning that by the time he was up for reelection in four years, the system would be bedded down and would be acceptable. And that actually is what happened.

Obviously, if you start from a better position with better-performing railways, in particular, it makes the introduction of any additional charge for road use more acceptable. But then the questions were had, how do you get to that better position? If you’ve neglected the upkeep of your railways, their performance is poor.

And in London, we’ve been opening more railways, notably what’s called the Elizabeth line, which is a major east-west line that opened a year or two ago and became immediately very popular. And then before that, we had a system called the Overground, which was taking older, rather underused surface-rail assets and making them into an urban metro system with more frequent trains, better branding, better reliability.

NJSN: You are quoted in one article talking about Singapore and how they adjust congestion pricing based on driver behavior. And London is considering how to change congestion pricing to help with traffic overall. It seems like congestion pricing should be malleable, instead of just setting the pricing structure only once.

DM: Singapore is unusual. They’ve always accepted that they would have to limit car ownership to the capacity of the road network. And also, Singapore has always had a very strong government.

So they have had a policy going way back of charging people for owning a car in Singapore, and they have a certain number of permits that they make available each year, ownership permits for auction. People bid for these, and if you got a permit, you’ve got 10 years’ use of a car, and that limits the car ownership to about 100 cars per 1,000 population, which is very low for a developed economy. In Britain, it’s about 450. In many European countries, higher, and I think in the United States, higher still.

Transportation, Energy & Environment

Judge rejects NJ’s last-ditch bid to stop NYC congestion pricing

And then they have an electronic system for charging for actual use when you pass through the various charging points. And their policy is to set target speeds for different roads. And if the speed drops below the target, indicating there’s more traffic than expected, they’ll raise the charge a bit. And conversely, if the speed goes above the target, they’ll lower the charge.

So, yes, in Singapore, it’s a good system, but the total charge is much more than you are charging in New York or we are charging in London.

There should be debate going on about the future of congestion charging in Britain, whether it’s moving in London from beyond the very central area to the inner suburbs, which is possible. But more generally, the argument is that with the introduction of electric vehicles, which don’t use gas or diesel — which in Britain and in most of Europe is quite highly taxed — then the state is going to lose quite a lot of revenue.

And so the question is, should there be some kind of general road user charging, so that the users of electric vehicles contribute to the cost of road maintenance, as well as contributing to the cost of public services generally. But that is a difficult political debate for any government to initiate.

Editor’s note: Zero emission vehicles currently pay an annual charge of £10, or about $12, to be exempted from congestion pricing in London. This exemption is set to end in December.

Transportation

Did NJ lose out on congestion pricing settlement? Murphy says no

Subscribe to NJ Spotlight News

Today's Spotlight Weekly Editor's Picks

CONGESTION PRICING DAVID METZ LONDON CONGESTION PRICING NYC CONGESTION PRICING PUBLIC TRANSPORT ROAD TOLLS TOLLS TRAFFIC

Social Justice Writer

Taylor Jung is a multimedia reporter on the social justice beat who joined NJ Spotlight News in 2021. Much of her reporting has been on multiracial identity and issues facing the BIPOC (Black, ... read more