20 ms·

> but Manhattan could have significantly higher population density without overwhelming the infrastructure. This is not really true, mostly based on the transp

by wdewind 11y ago

> but Manhattan could have significantly higher population density without overwhelming the infrastructure. This is not really true, mostly based on the transportation infrastructure. Manhattan is absolutely not ready to move more people around per day. Both train and car traffic is rising sharply and neither system are scaling particularly gracefully. I'm not informed about water treatment, police/fire services etc., but I'd be surprised to hear that they are operating with a lot of room for growth. Hospitals are a mess. Have you ever played any Sim City at all? Jeez this is basic stuff :)

bradleyjg 11y ago
Street congestion is increasingly a problem, not so much because it slows down private cars but because it slows down buses. Those bus delays in turn increase subway ridership, and overcrowding slows trains loading and unloading. Although uber does probably deserve some of the blame the mayor's attempted response was ham-fisted and bound the fail. The answer is a congestion fee like Bloomberg wanted to put in. Also eliminating most city employee parking permits and upping the cost of on-street parking to prevent circling. As for the subway, it depends on the line. The Lexington Avenue line is the most overcrowded. More trains can't be added at this point -- at least not without CBTC (which they should really prioritize more!) The second avenue subway should help there, but that's not exactly around the corner either. After the Lexington Line the next most congested is the L, which is only relevant to a small part of Manhattan (but has big implications for growth in northern Brooklyn) and the E/F coming in from Queens until it hits midtown. That leaves the majority of Manhattan with spare subway capacity to move people around. Specifically with respect to the East Village, it is because of crowding on the Lexington line that I suggested densification should start at the south-west part of the neighborhood which has access to the sixth avenue line subways.
- wdewind 11y ago
  > Street congestion is increasingly a problem, not so much because it slows down private cars but because it slows down buses. Those bus delays in turn increase subway ridership, and overcrowding slows trains loading and unloading. I think the issue is population growth not matching funding (or Albany robbing us). I don't doubt that this contributes, but I'd be surprised to see people switching from buses to subway being a leading cause of subway congestion. > Although uber does probably deserve some of the blame t Again this seems like a really small thing. I doubt uber created many new taxis, so much as absorbed yellow/livery cabs. I'm sure it has an effect but I don't think it's the core issue. > The answer is a congestion fee like Bloomberg wanted to put in. 100% agreed with the congestion fee, bummed it didn't happen. > That leaves the majority of Manhattan with spare subway capacity to move people around. I don't think this is true. One of the reasons the green line is so overcrowded is because so many people work on that line. It's not only about where people live. If you put people next to the E, it doesn't mean they only take the E. > it is because of crowding on the Lexington line that I suggested densification should start at the south-west part of the neighborhood which has access to the sixth avenue line subways. I agree that we should rezone and that the preservation stuff is a nightmare.
  - bradleyjg 11y ago
    >> That leaves the majority of Manhattan with spare subway capacity to move people around. > I don't think this is true. One of the reasons the green line is so overcrowded is because so many people work on that line. It's not only about where people live. If you put people next to the E, it doesn't mean they only take the E. First, I'm not sure that's the case. Most of the jobs in Manhattan are in midtown and downtown. Downtown all the lines converge and in midtown there's multiple crosstown subways. Sure if you work at Hunter College you have to take the Lexington line, but that's a relatively small number of people. Second, inasmuch as its about where you work rather than where you live it doesn't matter whether or not you put new housing in Manhattan. If you put it in Jersey City or Brooklyn you still need to get those people to work. A moritorium on new housing in the entire metro area is a non-starter. So from that POV, you might as well put them in Manhattan. -- Certainly though I agree that Albany and Washington should quit ripping us off so hard and that the MTA should be less dysfunctional. We could use more and better running mass transportation.
    - wdewind 11y ago
      Yeah I was implying that the green line is the way most people get from BK, BX and upper manhattan into Midtown, where most of the jobs are. But yeah I pretty much agree with everything else you wrote. It's a tough situation.

by wdewind 11y ago

bradleyjg 11y ago

Street congestion is increasingly a problem, not so much because it slows down private cars but because it slows down buses. Those bus delays in turn increase subway ridership, and overcrowding slows trains loading and unloading. Although uber does probably deserve some of the blame the mayor's attempted response was ham-fisted and bound the fail. The answer is a congestion fee like Bloomberg wanted to put in. Also eliminating most city employee parking permits and upping the cost of on-street parking to prevent circling. As for the subway, it depends on the line. The Lexington Avenue line is the most overcrowded. More trains can't be added at this point -- at least not without CBTC (which they should really prioritize more!) The second avenue subway should help there, but that's not exactly around the corner either. After the Lexington Line the next most congested is the L, which is only relevant to a small part of Manhattan (but has big implications for growth in northern Brooklyn) and the E/F coming in from Queens until it hits midtown. That leaves the majority of Manhattan with spare subway capacity to move people around. Specifically with respect to the East Village, it is because of crowding on the Lexington line that I suggested densification should start at the south-west part of the neighborhood which has access to the sixth avenue line subways.

wdewind 11y ago
> Street congestion is increasingly a problem, not so much because it slows down private cars but because it slows down buses. Those bus delays in turn increase subway ridership, and overcrowding slows trains loading and unloading. I think the issue is population growth not matching funding (or Albany robbing us). I don't doubt that this contributes, but I'd be surprised to see people switching from buses to subway being a leading cause of subway congestion. > Although uber does probably deserve some of the blame t Again this seems like a really small thing. I doubt uber created many new taxis, so much as absorbed yellow/livery cabs. I'm sure it has an effect but I don't think it's the core issue. > The answer is a congestion fee like Bloomberg wanted to put in. 100% agreed with the congestion fee, bummed it didn't happen. > That leaves the majority of Manhattan with spare subway capacity to move people around. I don't think this is true. One of the reasons the green line is so overcrowded is because so many people work on that line. It's not only about where people live. If you put people next to the E, it doesn't mean they only take the E. > it is because of crowding on the Lexington line that I suggested densification should start at the south-west part of the neighborhood which has access to the sixth avenue line subways. I agree that we should rezone and that the preservation stuff is a nightmare.
- bradleyjg 11y ago
  >> That leaves the majority of Manhattan with spare subway capacity to move people around. > I don't think this is true. One of the reasons the green line is so overcrowded is because so many people work on that line. It's not only about where people live. If you put people next to the E, it doesn't mean they only take the E. First, I'm not sure that's the case. Most of the jobs in Manhattan are in midtown and downtown. Downtown all the lines converge and in midtown there's multiple crosstown subways. Sure if you work at Hunter College you have to take the Lexington line, but that's a relatively small number of people. Second, inasmuch as its about where you work rather than where you live it doesn't matter whether or not you put new housing in Manhattan. If you put it in Jersey City or Brooklyn you still need to get those people to work. A moritorium on new housing in the entire metro area is a non-starter. So from that POV, you might as well put them in Manhattan. -- Certainly though I agree that Albany and Washington should quit ripping us off so hard and that the MTA should be less dysfunctional. We could use more and better running mass transportation.
  - wdewind 11y ago
    Yeah I was implying that the green line is the way most people get from BK, BX and upper manhattan into Midtown, where most of the jobs are. But yeah I pretty much agree with everything else you wrote. It's a tough situation.