Was the Cross Bronx Expressway worth building? No.

This is true not because the CBE is riddled with traffic nowadays. It is not because a train would have been better. It is not even necessarily because thousands of families were displaced from their homes in the wake of the road’s construction. If one were to make any of these arguments, he would fall into the dialectic game of pros versus cons– a game that Robert Moses would eventually (and did in fact) win with his statement that the lives of some families in the way of a highway will not be remembered or cared about as history washes them away.

He was right. The masses don’t remember this particular diaspora. So to take on the question of the CBE from any utilitarian perspective leads to the justification of its existence.

The problem lies in logical fallacy of utilitarianism. Not only is it wrong; it is like a disease.

The neighborhood of East Tremont was a healthy part of the body of NYC. And interestingly enough, it became this way through it’s own organic means– a testimony to the good will of a community. It did not become this way because one man decided it would be so.

East Tremont’s demise began not when they received a letter to be evicted. It began when Robert Moses decided not to see humanity, but utility. This is the disease that did them in. The CBE was just a side effect.

Peter Fields

Congestion in NYC is a major problem. While some people say that it is expected and inevitable in a city as dense as NY, it may be due to bad policy. Currently, there are tolled and un-tolled bridges in NY. The bridges that are not tolled are a tragedy of the commons- because it is free, people use it as much as they want without thinking of how others may be affected. In order to avoid the tolled bridges, most drivers try to take un-tolled bridges causing serious congestion, especially during work hours. Also, cars that are simply passing through NY and do not necessarily need to use the bridges often use them because they’re free way of passage.

The Move NY program proposes a solution. It supports a recalculation and a reduction of the heavy tolls on some of NY’s bridges, including the Throgs Neck, Whitestone, and Triborough bridges. To supplement the lessened tolls, it places tolls on the currently un-tolled bridges, including the Williamsburg, and Queensborough Bridge. This, the program suggests, would cause people to lessen their extensive use of the free bridges, and thus lessen congestion.

While this plan is perhaps currently the most practical solution for city’s congestion, it is important to consider the possible consequence: if tolls are placed on bridges that are not currently tolled, many drivers would find it economically feasible to take the subway to enter the city. We then must consider whether our subways, which are already crowded and often delayed, are capable of dealing with additional traffic. While theoretically the MoveNY plan makes sense, the possible burden it would put on our subway system must be considered before it could be implemented.

-Syeda Kamal

The MoveNY plan for was an interesting attempt at addressing the issues of NYC’s commuters. Currently, an issue that impacts many commuters daily is congestion on the subway and the bridges into the city.  The MoveNY proposes a recalculation of the bridge tolls in order to decrease this congestion by encouraging the use of other alternative transportation, such as subway and pedestrian bridges. Moreover, the plan hopes to provide a fairer system for more of the city’s residents by lowering tolls where there is less traffic and a shortage of transit options and increasing tolls where the opposite is true. In addition, the plan is asking each commuter to contribute to the maintenance of the infrastructure they benefit from on a daily basis.

This may not play well with the drivers who would consider this increase a new “tax” on them. Furthermore, discouraging driving and encouraging people to use the subways without improving the crowded conditions in the subways at the moment would serve to increase congestion there instead. An interesting idea proposed is the construction of a line from Brooklyn, through Queens, and up to the Bronx. Such a plan could take billions of dollars and, considering the Second Avenue Subway’s construction time, possibly another decade. Until this and other alternatives are put into place, riders would have to deal with worse conditions to improve those of the roads.

Pooneet Thaper

The Cross Bronx Expressway is a major highway that connects New Jersey, Manhattan, Bronx, and Long Island, and the creation that Robert Moses is best known for. Despite the impact of expressways and highways, and Moses’ contribution to the bustling region that is NYC today, he absolutely could have approached the construction of the Cross Bronx Expressway in a different manner. He had a better possible route to build the expressway, yet he had chosen a route that evicted and relocated thousands of families (over 60,000 residents). Whether it was a political move or simply his creative decision to choose that route, nothing can justify the movement and the unfulfilled promises to the thousands of families, and the devastating effect to Bronx. The South Bronx area had lost many manufacturing jobs due to the mass relocation of the residents. Many poorer families had to move into high-rises, the ownership of which soon fell into corrupt hands.

It does not matter how much power Moses had or if he felt it was worth it, in the end, the devastation left in the wake of his decisions did not make the construction of the expressway worth it. More thought and consideration should have been put into it, and only then should it have been built.

-Jennifer

The MoveNY Plan is a way to breathe new life into our city’s transportation system– both public and private vehicles. It’s a monumental task to undertake but it has undoubtedly become an issue that we can no longer ignore. As a daily commuter to and from the city, our trains can be a nightmare to deal with– between switching from local to express mid-route, and running on a different line when you need them most, there’s rarely a day when I’m not quietly cursing the lack of service under my breath. Sam’s plan is appealing because it’s sustainable and works on a system of redistribution. The MoveNY plan spreads out the cost of transportation and maintenance, as well as the bodies coming and going daily in Manhattan among the existing entry points. With a comparatively more equal toll for each bridge, the incentive to stay in traffic and get into the city for free is gone. Consequently, the gridlocks, accidents, and traffic jams we see often will be gone too– and that’s a future I can support.

My favorite part of the plan is that its self-sustaining. It pays for itself because the money raised can be invested in better technology for trains, greater maintenance for bridges, and other innovative ways to keep things working the way they should. I know we spend so much time praising Rob Moses for how quickly he got work done, but there’s something to be said about getting something done thoroughly and that’s what this plan seems like to me. During his presentation in class, “Gridlock Sam” mentioned that he’s having trouble getting public officials in Queens to agree to the plan– COME ON QUEENS. It’s always going to be tough to get more money out of people. However, the total cost is not as drastically different. In fact, the plan aims to lower many tolls! In the long-run, I have faith that this plan will help end NYC’s terrible congestion.

-Sindi Cela

In my opinion, the future of New York City’s transport looks grim. The subway system is crowded, and there are large swathes of the city with little to no coverage. Traveling by car in New York is very difficult, especially with the popularity of ride services such as Uber creating major traffic. The bridges and tunnels connecting the city are in need of major work, and the frequent construction and maintenance on them makes the traffic even worse for cars. The cost of traveling is rising as well, and tolls on bridges and subways have rose drastically in the past few years, and the increase doesn’t appear to be to stopping soon if nothing is done. Major work has to be done, and in my opinion, Sam Schwartz’s MoveNY seems like a very good starting point.

The plans proposed changes to bridge tolling should help with both congestion and raising the revenue necessary to fund the other aspects of the project. Having tolls within Manhattan itself is an interesting idea, and should do wonders to keep the tolls from being seen as only being a burden to the outer boroughs. At any rate, repairing the bridges and tunnels around the city is a priority, and having the funds necessary is essential to complete these projects. Other parts of the proposal, like the walking bridges, sound like they could be very good for the cities image, and could even be sources of revenue on their own from the tourism they attract.

-Jack Baumann

Change is always difficult, but there doesn’t seem to be a more logical and smart way to improve New York’s tolling system than the Move NY Fair Plan. Millions of New Yorkers deal with transportation every day and it is a huge part of our lives. There is discontent among bridge users because the toll increases every year. To avoid tolls, drivers sometimes go out of their way to go on bridges without tolls, which may be dangerous. For example, truck drivers go through the Queensboro Bridge, which can barely hold massive trucks up, to avoid tolls. In addition, there is a lot of traffic on bridges with no tolls. There also doesn’t seem to be a good reason why some bridges have tolls and others do. There is much to improve on the city’s tolling system to make bridges safer, less traffic-heavy, and cost-friendly to users.

Move NY advocates a great plan to do exactly that. To deal with traffic, it makes sense to have low tolls on bridges that have low congestion and higher tolls on bridges that do. This will give people that use highly congested bridges the incentive to use other bridges. This may also lower the number of people who unnecessarily change their routes to save a few bucks, and therefore not risk possible dangers. Lowering tolls itself is a great benefit to bridge users.

Queens’ public officials are not on board with this plan, however. They should reconsider because although Queens may not be affected much, the plan has the possibility to improve life in New York overall.

Rosa Kyung

In our Writing for Engineers class last spring, one of the first subjects we discussed was ethics. We learned about the philosophies of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill, and applied them to real-world engineering projects. The class consensus was that if a project had the potential to harm a significant number of people, even if it was profitable in some other way, it should not be built or implemented.

By choosing to divert a small piece of the Cross Bronx Expressway north, Robert Moses destroyed the vibrant community of East Tremont. Thousands of families were displaced from their homes, and were forced to scatter and find new places to live in more expensive areas of the city. This was clearly unethical. On the flip side, many people, including myself, still benefit from the Cross Bronx Expressway to this day. It’s the route I usually take when I drive into the city from Westchester. How does a person reconcile using something so convenient when lives were ruined to make it possible?

I think that if the Cross Bronx Expressway had gone along the alternate route, instead of through apartment buildings, its effect would have been much less harmful, and it would have been entirely justified. As it stands, I think that building the entire stretch of highway was worth it, and the one mile is a dark and tragic stain on its history.

Sarah Dunford

Personally, I found last Wednesday’s presentation highly comprehensive and impressive. I was unaware of how little our (already infuriating) tolls made sense. Furthermore, “Gridlock Sam’s” plan made logical sense in terms of which roadways we need to clear up and which we can afford more traffic on. Most interesting is how the illogicality of our toll system can be traced back to Robert Moses’ Tri-Borough Bridge Authority. Just as we were discussing how Moses harmed and/or helped New York City we found out one more way his policies are still affecting us today. In this specific case the argument is clear that his policies are causing us harm. While the fix to this problem seems relatively simple, this is easier said than done. Getting the votes of politicians of the outer reaches of the outer boroughs has proven rather difficult. Even when it is proven that this plan greatly helps them even if the toll on one of their four bridges is going up, politicians (and their constituents) remain stubborn. It seems to me that this issue could be handled in a very similar way that the issue of getting sports fans to come to the Barclays Center through public transit was handled: Information. The most important part of getting this plan implemented would be getting information out to the citizens of the neighborhoods that are still reluctant. In this way, these citizens could learn how this plan does indeed benefit them and in turn they can convince their elected officials to vote in their interest. Hopefully, in the end we would have an improved New York toll system and thus improved roadways.

Paul Root

The window from my room at home in Astoria, Queens captures the beauty of the East side skyscrapers, the East river and the Triboro Bridge. On my runs, I make my way to Astoria Park, around the pillars that root the Triboro bridge into Queens. I have so much admiration for the structure, yet, I would never take the bridge on my daily commutes.

$8 one way? Are you crazy? I opt for taking 35 extra minutes in my commute and take the Queensboro bridge or the subway. Sam Schwartz’s Move NY plan seems very plausible and can significantly benefit my neighborhood.

His plan suggests to increase tolls that lead to the financial areas of New York and decrease the tolls on bridges such as the Triboro, Throgs Neck and any other bridge that doesn’t connect to the financial sector of the city. When Mr. Schwartz told us about how Queens officials were so adamant about not having the plan, it seemed ridiculous.

I also highly appreciate the idea of pedestrian walk bridges, if that is a possibility, in the future, I genuinely see myself using the bridge daily. Not only would it promote a healthier living, but the views you can possibly get on such bridges could be breath taking.

In all, I really see how this plan can possibly help New York City’s economy as well as help reduce the city’s pollution, something as my tourist relatives like to point out, the city is infamous for.

Madhav Bhatt