4 ms·
>replacing them with something (costing hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars and 2-20 years to build) NYC has the highest transit use of any city i
by jcims 5y ago
>replacing them with something
(costing hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars and 2-20 years to build)
NYC has the highest transit use of any city in the US and they would still have to nearly double capacity to get rid of cars:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_high_transit_ridership https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_high_...
- lwansbrough 5y agoEasy, get rid of cars. Makes room for more busses.
- masklinn 5y agoCan’t work, it has to be the other way around or there is no transition path: first convert a subset of car infrastructure to make alternatives more approachable / desirable, then iterate on that to reduce the space given to cars further. That is essentially what the netherlands have been doing for decades.
- lwansbrough 5y agoWell, the first step IMO is to eliminate single family zoning in favour of mixed use zoning and legalize middle housing, that should cut down the need for cars substantially in most North American cities. Then anyone who still needs a car can be inconvenienced by stricter regulations.
- masklinn 5y agoSure i was kinda assuming that anyway, but it’s nowhere near sufficient as demonstrated by… pretty much everywhere outside of NA.
- jcims 5y agoThis is one of those things that would meet the criteria of the article. Don't fight traffic, create opportunities for people to open stores and restaurants inside housing development.
- fouc 5y agoThere's a well known effect, called induced demand, where building more roads cause traffic to increase. Doing the reverse will decrease traffic, then transit won't have to scale up nearly as much as we might assume.