5 ms·

The real blunder in this country is the lack of viable alternative transportation options in a majority of the nation. Visited NYC recently and didn’t need to

by xyst 3y ago

The real blunder in this country is the lack of viable alternative transportation options in a majority of the nation. Visited NYC recently and didn’t need to rent a car. Primarily took the bus, ferry, and rail car/trains. In some cases I just walked from my hotel to the destination. Could have rented one of the e-bikes as well. Transportation costs for just 1 week were less than $100 (a quarter of this was because of LIRR usage). Didn’t have to deal with traffic, or some dumbass rear ending me because they weren’t paying attention. I could effectively multitask while traveling by alternative means. Unpopular opinion: heavy investing in “EV infrastructure” is a waste of time and money.

PaulHoule 3y ago
... but a small apartment costs $4000 in NYC which would cover the payment, gas, insurance and everything on two or three big SUVs. Without some revolution in the cost structure of urban life, "transit friendly" is going to look like going from the frying pan to the fire for most people.
- pkulak 3y ago
  True. But I'd say that all that proves is that there's so much demand for not needing to own a personal automobile! And yet, cities aren't like private businesses; they don't do what's in demand. Instead of spending millions on public transportation, they spend billions on more roads to suburbs because that's what they are used to, and why the hell not? What good will come to elected officials from millions of car-free millennials streaming in from all over the country? That will just jack up rents, because, let's face it, no one city can absorb the demand anyway. My home city, Portland, put in modest light rail and painted some bike lanes, which caused some new people to move in. That pissed everyone off, and all transit development abruptly stopped. Desirable city == pissed off locals, and the locals vote! So we have shitty apartments in Manhattan where the land is 99% of the cost and countless, cookie cutter suburban hellscapes.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    >But I'd say that all that proves is that there's so much demand for not needing to own a personal automobile! It really doesn't. NYC isn't $ARBITRARY_SUBURB except without obligatory car ownership.
    - PaulHoule 3y ago
      A better comparable is to consider rents in an outlying section of Queens that is far from transit and compare that to Manhattan. For that matter a person could very much live car free in a minor city like Binghamton or Ithaca NY if they work at a place that is well served by transit.
    - pkulak 3y ago
      I totally disagree. Density and transit are the defining traits of NYC. What's something else NYC offers that you can't find in a similarly sized, but spread out, population? Keeping in mind that the population of NYC is about that of the entire Dallas-Ft. Worth metro area, or the entire state of Washington.
      - thfuran 3y ago
        UN HQ, Wall Street, potentially one's family, etc. Cities just aren't fungible. There are way more reasons someone might prefer or be pushed towards one or another besides the traffic or transit.
        pkulak 3y ago
        Hell, if you're listing off important US map pin-points, you can't beat DC. But people would still rather live in NYC (according to the market). But even if NYC had the most destinations, that's just another way of saying "density", which is my entire point. And I'm not talking about personal differences, like family. Paris isn't a world class city because my mom lives there. I get that individuals have reasons to live places. I'm talking about populations, not people.
- vdnkh 3y ago
  According to AAA, the average cost of owning a new car is $12k per year [0], and that's just for one car. So New Yorkers can put that extra $1000 per month towards housing. As a New Yorker, $4000 is pretty high. You'd typically see that in hot areas for 1br's with in-unit w/d. Most people, including myself, do not pay that much. Also, interesting phrasing to make it seem like a "small nyc apartment" is a bad thing. I don't pay for expensive repairs, yard maintenance, or big ticket appliances. Most renters don't pay for heat either (at least not directly). Not to mention interest on a mortgage or property taxes. All costs totaled, living in NYC isn't strictly more expensive than living in a suburb. [0] https://newsroom.aaa.com/2023/08/annual-new-car-ownership-costs-boil-over-12k/ https://newsroom.aaa.com/2023/08/annual-new-car-ownership-co...
  - jjav 3y ago
    > According to AAA, the average cost of owning a new car is $12k per year You're not forced to pay the average if saving money is important. My primary driver costs me ~2K a year total. > All costs totaled, living in NYC isn't strictly more expensive than living in a suburb. As someone who beat my head against the wall of trying to afford to live in NYC for several years and eventually gave up and moved to the suburbs, I assure you it's far cheaper to live in the suburbs. (Sure, there are exclusive luxury suburbs that'll cost as much as living in NYC but you wouldn't move to those if affordability matters.)
PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
quick, someone tell that small rural community of 600 people they need public transportation! When people express opinions like this you immediately know they live in the city and think everyone else does too.
- bryanlarsen 3y ago
  In my experience in Canada, small rural communities typically do have public transportation. Small rural communities generally have a lot of elderly people, so most small towns provide a wheelchair accessible taxi-like service.
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    while retirement communities exist, that certainly isn't what I was describing.
    - bryanlarsen 3y ago
      I'm not talking about retirement communities. I'm talking about normal small towns where >50% of the kids move to the cities where the jobs are.
      - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
        ooooh, you're not talking about retirement communities. One wonders how the hay gets baled if most of the population is elderly people. you don't actually understand what a rural community is.
        bryanlarsen 3y ago
        In my experience, farmers don't live in rural communities. They live on farms. And 90% of them are over the age of 50. Unless it's a Hutterite colony, in which case your point is entirely moot because they have 0 private transport.
HDThoreaun 3y ago
Id like to see the US focus on walkability too, but the reality is most Americans disagree. Most Americans want to live in a SFH with a big yard in suburbia. Public transit does not really work with those constraints. Public transit is great for the people that want to live in cities, but there are more than enough that dont to make electrifying cars an important goal. NYC is great but its obvious to me that I would not enjoy living there, and Im more city postiive than the vast majority of americans.
- Tactician_mark 3y ago
  The question here is how many people don't have a garage but still want a car. The rural and suburban folks are out - plenty of room for garages and charging. So any discussion of public charging infrastructure is focused on places where public transit would be a better investment.
- earthling8118 3y ago
  This is what is always said, but for what reason can it not work? We already spend an ABSURD amount of money to create and maintain car infrastructure. These roads are not cheap and commonly are not maintained well in part due to costs. That's not getting into externalities not covered by the cost of car ownership/usage. And where does this money come from? Generally the places where there is more density. It just doesn't make sense for each person to have a several ton hunk of metal and for it to sit there taking up space 95+% of the time. This solution is not scaling well at all. People want to have a big suburban home, but at the expense of many, many others. It's just not right.
NickM 3y ago
Most of the country is not as dense as NYC, and the less dense the area, the less public transit makes sense. This is true from both an economic and an environmental standpoint: not only is it expensive to run public transit when fewer people use it, it’s also less environmentally friendly because you have big heavy buses and trains spending a lot of time driving around with few people riding them. That said, I would certainly like to see better public transportation in many areas, but it’s not a silver bullet. The idea that EV infrastructure is a waste of money because we just need more public transportation is pretty preposterous, IMO.

by xyst 3y ago

PaulHoule 3y ago

... but a small apartment costs $4000 in NYC which would cover the payment, gas, insurance and everything on two or three big SUVs. Without some revolution in the cost structure of urban life, "transit friendly" is going to look like going from the frying pan to the fire for most people.

pkulak 3y ago
True. But I'd say that all that proves is that there's so much demand for not needing to own a personal automobile! And yet, cities aren't like private businesses; they don't do what's in demand. Instead of spending millions on public transportation, they spend billions on more roads to suburbs because that's what they are used to, and why the hell not? What good will come to elected officials from millions of car-free millennials streaming in from all over the country? That will just jack up rents, because, let's face it, no one city can absorb the demand anyway. My home city, Portland, put in modest light rail and painted some bike lanes, which caused some new people to move in. That pissed everyone off, and all transit development abruptly stopped. Desirable city == pissed off locals, and the locals vote! So we have shitty apartments in Manhattan where the land is 99% of the cost and countless, cookie cutter suburban hellscapes.
- thfuran 3y ago
  >But I'd say that all that proves is that there's so much demand for not needing to own a personal automobile! It really doesn't. NYC isn't $ARBITRARY_SUBURB except without obligatory car ownership.
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    A better comparable is to consider rents in an outlying section of Queens that is far from transit and compare that to Manhattan. For that matter a person could very much live car free in a minor city like Binghamton or Ithaca NY if they work at a place that is well served by transit.
  - pkulak 3y ago
    I totally disagree. Density and transit are the defining traits of NYC. What's something else NYC offers that you can't find in a similarly sized, but spread out, population? Keeping in mind that the population of NYC is about that of the entire Dallas-Ft. Worth metro area, or the entire state of Washington.
    - thfuran 3y ago
      UN HQ, Wall Street, potentially one's family, etc. Cities just aren't fungible. There are way more reasons someone might prefer or be pushed towards one or another besides the traffic or transit.
      - pkulak 3y ago
        Hell, if you're listing off important US map pin-points, you can't beat DC. But people would still rather live in NYC (according to the market). But even if NYC had the most destinations, that's just another way of saying "density", which is my entire point. And I'm not talking about personal differences, like family. Paris isn't a world class city because my mom lives there. I get that individuals have reasons to live places. I'm talking about populations, not people.
vdnkh 3y ago
According to AAA, the average cost of owning a new car is $12k per year [0], and that's just for one car. So New Yorkers can put that extra $1000 per month towards housing. As a New Yorker, $4000 is pretty high. You'd typically see that in hot areas for 1br's with in-unit w/d. Most people, including myself, do not pay that much. Also, interesting phrasing to make it seem like a "small nyc apartment" is a bad thing. I don't pay for expensive repairs, yard maintenance, or big ticket appliances. Most renters don't pay for heat either (at least not directly). Not to mention interest on a mortgage or property taxes. All costs totaled, living in NYC isn't strictly more expensive than living in a suburb. [0] https://newsroom.aaa.com/2023/08/annual-new-car-ownership-costs-boil-over-12k/ https://newsroom.aaa.com/2023/08/annual-new-car-ownership-co...
- jjav 3y ago
  > According to AAA, the average cost of owning a new car is $12k per year You're not forced to pay the average if saving money is important. My primary driver costs me ~2K a year total. > All costs totaled, living in NYC isn't strictly more expensive than living in a suburb. As someone who beat my head against the wall of trying to afford to live in NYC for several years and eventually gave up and moved to the suburbs, I assure you it's far cheaper to live in the suburbs. (Sure, there are exclusive luxury suburbs that'll cost as much as living in NYC but you wouldn't move to those if affordability matters.)

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago

quick, someone tell that small rural community of 600 people they need public transportation! When people express opinions like this you immediately know they live in the city and think everyone else does too.

bryanlarsen 3y ago
In my experience in Canada, small rural communities typically do have public transportation. Small rural communities generally have a lot of elderly people, so most small towns provide a wheelchair accessible taxi-like service.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  while retirement communities exist, that certainly isn't what I was describing.
  - bryanlarsen 3y ago
    I'm not talking about retirement communities. I'm talking about normal small towns where >50% of the kids move to the cities where the jobs are.
    - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
      ooooh, you're not talking about retirement communities. One wonders how the hay gets baled if most of the population is elderly people. you don't actually understand what a rural community is.
      - bryanlarsen 3y ago
        In my experience, farmers don't live in rural communities. They live on farms. And 90% of them are over the age of 50. Unless it's a Hutterite colony, in which case your point is entirely moot because they have 0 private transport.

HDThoreaun 3y ago

Id like to see the US focus on walkability too, but the reality is most Americans disagree. Most Americans want to live in a SFH with a big yard in suburbia. Public transit does not really work with those constraints. Public transit is great for the people that want to live in cities, but there are more than enough that dont to make electrifying cars an important goal. NYC is great but its obvious to me that I would not enjoy living there, and Im more city postiive than the vast majority of americans.

Tactician_mark 3y ago
The question here is how many people don't have a garage but still want a car. The rural and suburban folks are out - plenty of room for garages and charging. So any discussion of public charging infrastructure is focused on places where public transit would be a better investment.
earthling8118 3y ago
This is what is always said, but for what reason can it not work? We already spend an ABSURD amount of money to create and maintain car infrastructure. These roads are not cheap and commonly are not maintained well in part due to costs. That's not getting into externalities not covered by the cost of car ownership/usage. And where does this money come from? Generally the places where there is more density. It just doesn't make sense for each person to have a several ton hunk of metal and for it to sit there taking up space 95+% of the time. This solution is not scaling well at all. People want to have a big suburban home, but at the expense of many, many others. It's just not right.

NickM 3y ago

Most of the country is not as dense as NYC, and the less dense the area, the less public transit makes sense. This is true from both an economic and an environmental standpoint: not only is it expensive to run public transit when fewer people use it, it’s also less environmentally friendly because you have big heavy buses and trains spending a lot of time driving around with few people riding them. That said, I would certainly like to see better public transportation in many areas, but it’s not a silver bullet. The idea that EV infrastructure is a waste of money because we just need more public transportation is pretty preposterous, IMO.