I’m excited for the vigor and passion he brought out….I’m less convinced on his housing policy….but hopefully he will bring Lander on his team as he has more experience when it comes to getting housing built and not just a fanciful wishlist
2 Likes
Zohran is running on a lot of exciting policies for YIMBYs and transit advocates alike, despite fearmongering to the contrary by pro-landlord outlets like TRD
Housing:
- Triple the amount of housing built with City capital funds. A Mamdani administration will construct 200,000 new affordable homes over 10 years for low-income households, seniors, and working families.
- Increasing zoned capacity. This will allow housing supply to meet New York’s demand for both mixed-income and permanently affordable housing in areas that have historically not contributed to citywide housing goals—including those cut out of City of Yes.
- Supporting climate sustainability and accessibility. By encouraging growth around subway stations and other public transit hubs across New York City, we will create a greener city.
- Eliminating parking minimums. The City should be building housing, not parking lots.
Transit:
-
Fare free buses is a main piece of his affordability policy
-
He is a sponsor of the QueensLink project
-
Strong supporter of congestion pricing
-
I would recommend reading his MicromobilityNYC AMA thread, clearly in favor of pedestrianization, bus lane enforcement, open streets, etc.
7 Likes
I don’t see the free buses happening at all.
4 Likes
Free buses is a terrible idea in this current climate. There may be use for it, but the MTA needs fare revenue and this will become a costly boondoggle and this is coming from a major transit advocate. They need to get the fare beaters under control and ensure they have secure state funding before thinking about free rides that may cost them much needed revenue.
Eliminating parking minimums is a gift from God.
3 Likes
To make an argument for the free fares on buses…some agencies actually spend more money collecting and enforcing fare collection than they make back. In some instances, the cessation of fare collection has saved an agency money because it means less investment in associated infrastructure, enforcement, and even administrative costs.
Additionally, collecting fares during boardings is one of the 7 major delays in transit. Meaning that just eliminating fare collection could speed up bus trips by lessening the time the spend at a bus stop.
Third, fare collection is, far and away, the number one point of potential conflict between riders and operators. Most bus drivers would rather not have to enforce it.
Obviously, the rate of farebox recovery is different for every mode of transport and even among different routes. For example, commuter trains typically have a high farebox recovery ratio (FRR) making them more profitable. Bus lines usually trend towards the bottom of the FRR spectrum.
What might be a more realistic option for NYC, is to stop collecting fares on a key route like they did in Boston. Treat it like a pilot program and see how it goes.
7 Likes
I see your point and how it could be useful but it just seems unbelievable, especially with the amount of money we’d have to put into it to recoup the MTA’s lost revenue.
Implementing free buses would require an enormous financial commitment. The MTA’s budget is already strained, and covering fare losses (estimated in the billions) could lead to cuts in maintenance or service expansions.
Free buses would likely increase ridership, which also leads to longer dwell times at stops as more passengers board and exit. Without dedicated bus lanes or traffic signal priority, buses remain stuck in the same congested streets, negating any speed improvements. The result is slower, less reliable service.
If the MTA ridership was to increase from this, wouldn’t they have to add more buses to ease congestion which would mean more money to pay for expenses? Another point I have is that free buses alone are unlikely to convince most drivers to abandon their
This plan sounds good on paper but in practice it the roi is too low to justify it. This massive expense prioritizes idealism over practical fiscal responsibility. There’s a reason why we haven’t seen this happen in any other cities besides ones where their transit is terrible or they have a small population.
4 Likes
Yes, I think this would probably create the problems you’ve described.
I did some research on fare free transit (FFT) in grad school and found it tends to work best on smaller, less used lines that can afford to be subsidized by other parts of the system or if they’re subsidized by some kind of federal program (an absolute non-starter in today’s climate).
4 Likes
True, I know that Westchester County (above the Bronx) sometimes do free bus services but that usually only last a season or during the holidays.
Amazing! thanks for posting this!
1 Like
I wish this wasnt something worth celebrating. Probably wont last the whole weekend.
8 Likes
no shootings but some stabbings instead
Considering the fact that from what I’ve seen in the news many other major cities in the US (some of which are far smaller than NYC) did have shootings and murders on the day, this is quite noteworthy.
Not quite, someone was shot at 11:46pm on July 4th. Almost made it
2 Likes
Will the Big Beautiful Bill increase the rate of skyscraper construction across the United States?
1 Like
It’s quite a massive stretch to call it the “Big Beautiful Bill” when it’s far from it, but I doubt it will benefit construction.
Most sources say it’ll have significant negative economic consequences, so if anything, it’ll probably reduce demand for more buildings as companies will want to save money rather than spend on new structures and take out loans with higher interest rates.
4 Likes
625 Madison avenue
Why not post in the thread for the building?
1 Like
I am not allowed to post in the thread
1 Like
655 Madison avenue
Per NYguy SSP https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10453207&postcount=123
Supertall
3 Likes