4 ms·

It would not be interesting. There should not be cars in Manhattan whether they have 0, 1, or more drivers.

afavour 5y ago
I’m as pro-transit as anyone but I don’t foresee a future where we have no cars in Manhattan any time soon. Taxis do serve a purpose even with the best subway system in the world, like when you need to go somewhere with more items than you can carry (as a parent of two young children this happens to me a lot more than it did in my twenties!) A Manhattan without private cars would still be a huge leap forward and feels more achievable (though neither feel achievable any time soon in absolute terms)
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago
  > Taxis do serve a purpose even with the best subway system in the world And from what I have read, while Manhattan is the best Subway system in the United States, it is far from being the best in the world (see for example, Tokyo).
  - afavour 5y ago
    Oh, definitely. It’s woefully underinvested and hasn’t seen large scale expansion in decades despite population growth. Not to mention the number of accessible stations is abysmal.
    - jazzyjackson 5y ago
      a ton of money is “invested” in the subway but none of it seems to be spent on the trains and tunnels…
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  > A Manhattan without private cars would still be a huge leap forward and feels more achievable Yes > (though neither feel achievable any time soon in absolute terms) Why? Only political reasons I think. I don't see any technology or capacity issue with no private cars. > (as a parent of two young children this happens to me a lot more than it did in my twenties!) Ride-share needs to include some cargo wagons. I am against childless-yuppie-focused transit initiatives too. We need to follow Europe's lead in making transit policy compatible with more demographics, or we will never overcome the current impasse.
imajoredinecon 5y ago
I’m all in favor of making our cities more pedestrian- and transit-centered, but isn’t this a little of an unproductively absolutist stance? Is there much of a difference between a shareable self-driving car and a tram?
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  I think politics in the US is extremely risk-averse and afraid to depart from status-quo. I see no solution but to be more absolutist to drive the politics forward. "Left-YIMBY shock therapy"
josh-stylo 5y ago
I've heard this before but I'm not sure how it'd work. Would it just be trucks doing deliveries? Wouldn't they still need parking and roads? What's gained by banning the cars if you can't reclaim the roads?
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  > Would it just be trucks doing deliveries? Yes > Wouldn't they still need parking and roads? This would still be something like today's yellow zones. > What's gained by banning the cars if you can't reclaim the roads? There would be far fewer lanes for the remaining trucks on avenues, and non-avenues could pedestrianized with trucks only allowed to enter if they need to access something on that block.
  - the-rc 5y ago
    14th Street is much nicer now that it's only for pedestrians, bikes, buses and local traffic. And for the past few weeks the city has been taking away from cars the west lane on 8th Avenue in midtown (30th to 42nd St, maybe? Basically, from Penn Station to Port Authority, the two local entrances to hell). Something similar is happening near the Javits Center, to give bikes a safer path between the Hudson River and Midtown. Slowly, but it's happening.
adrianmonk 5y ago
If they can make self-driving cars practical, it seems likely the technology would be transferable to buses. And that could reduce costs of and/or increase access to public transit. (Which could be done once the technology is proven, regardless of whether Waymo is interested in participating.) So even to someone who wants to purge Manhattan of cars, it still seems like it would be interesting.
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  > If they can make self-driving cars practical, it seems likely the technology would be transferable to buses. Manhattan barely needs buses. Rail is much better. Capital investment would be directed to more rail than self driving buses for the remainder. > And that could reduce costs of and/or increase access to public transit. Other place should still focus on rail over buses. Or bikes if they are really small. Buses are stop-gap on their way out unless we choose to stagnate instead (quite likely, I'm afraid). > So even to someone who wants to purge Manhattan of cars, it still seems like it would be interesting. My compromise is do in transit deserts in Queens and Brooklyn, but there is absolutely no reason to do it in Manhattan.

I’m as pro-transit as anyone but I don’t foresee a future where we have no cars in Manhattan any time soon. Taxis do serve a purpose even with the best subway system in the world, like when you need to go somewhere with more items than you can carry (as a parent of two young children this happens to me a lot more than it did in my twenties!) A Manhattan without private cars would still be a huge leap forward and feels more achievable (though neither feel achievable any time soon in absolute terms)

RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago
> Taxis do serve a purpose even with the best subway system in the world And from what I have read, while Manhattan is the best Subway system in the United States, it is far from being the best in the world (see for example, Tokyo).
- afavour 5y ago
  Oh, definitely. It’s woefully underinvested and hasn’t seen large scale expansion in decades despite population growth. Not to mention the number of accessible stations is abysmal.
  - jazzyjackson 5y ago
    a ton of money is “invested” in the subway but none of it seems to be spent on the trains and tunnels…
Ericson2314 5y ago
> A Manhattan without private cars would still be a huge leap forward and feels more achievable Yes > (though neither feel achievable any time soon in absolute terms) Why? Only political reasons I think. I don't see any technology or capacity issue with no private cars. > (as a parent of two young children this happens to me a lot more than it did in my twenties!) Ride-share needs to include some cargo wagons. I am against childless-yuppie-focused transit initiatives too. We need to follow Europe's lead in making transit policy compatible with more demographics, or we will never overcome the current impasse.

imajoredinecon 5y ago

I’m all in favor of making our cities more pedestrian- and transit-centered, but isn’t this a little of an unproductively absolutist stance? Is there much of a difference between a shareable self-driving car and a tram?

Ericson2314 5y ago
I think politics in the US is extremely risk-averse and afraid to depart from status-quo. I see no solution but to be more absolutist to drive the politics forward. "Left-YIMBY shock therapy"

josh-stylo 5y ago

I've heard this before but I'm not sure how it'd work. Would it just be trucks doing deliveries? Wouldn't they still need parking and roads? What's gained by banning the cars if you can't reclaim the roads?

Ericson2314 5y ago
> Would it just be trucks doing deliveries? Yes > Wouldn't they still need parking and roads? This would still be something like today's yellow zones. > What's gained by banning the cars if you can't reclaim the roads? There would be far fewer lanes for the remaining trucks on avenues, and non-avenues could pedestrianized with trucks only allowed to enter if they need to access something on that block.
- the-rc 5y ago
  14th Street is much nicer now that it's only for pedestrians, bikes, buses and local traffic. And for the past few weeks the city has been taking away from cars the west lane on 8th Avenue in midtown (30th to 42nd St, maybe? Basically, from Penn Station to Port Authority, the two local entrances to hell). Something similar is happening near the Javits Center, to give bikes a safer path between the Hudson River and Midtown. Slowly, but it's happening.

adrianmonk 5y ago

If they can make self-driving cars practical, it seems likely the technology would be transferable to buses. And that could reduce costs of and/or increase access to public transit. (Which could be done once the technology is proven, regardless of whether Waymo is interested in participating.) So even to someone who wants to purge Manhattan of cars, it still seems like it would be interesting.

Ericson2314 5y ago
> If they can make self-driving cars practical, it seems likely the technology would be transferable to buses. Manhattan barely needs buses. Rail is much better. Capital investment would be directed to more rail than self driving buses for the remainder. > And that could reduce costs of and/or increase access to public transit. Other place should still focus on rail over buses. Or bikes if they are really small. Buses are stop-gap on their way out unless we choose to stagnate instead (quite likely, I'm afraid). > So even to someone who wants to purge Manhattan of cars, it still seems like it would be interesting. My compromise is do in transit deserts in Queens and Brooklyn, but there is absolutely no reason to do it in Manhattan.