Here’s an update on the Fifth Ave story…
2 Likes
I saw this woman interviewed on NY1 this morning. She talked about the Fifth Avenue transformation.
This is very good news!
2 Likes
1 Like
The conspiracy direction really makes me cringe badly. However, I think sometimes the concept of a 15-minute city is highly idealistic, requires authoritarian measures to a certain degree to implement them, and lacks realism. Do we need high speed rail, walkable neighborhoods and all that? Yes. We also need robust highways and arterials. We lack accountability to each other today, and that ain’t right. How about the inner cities welcome highways, and the suburbs get denser, welcome mass transit, and act how they were originally intended; To house people.
No. Lol what. We’ve already been through this rodeo, that doesn’t work. It’s never going to work
9 Likes
mmmmm, no thanks, Inner cities and Highways were never intended to co-exist That was just a costly mistake that we are still paying for.
5 Likes
Inner cities welcoming highways is how many cities got essentially destroyed and rendered hostile to pedestrians. That is literally one of the worst things you can do to a city aside from things such as removing public transit and building excessive parking lots.
Yeah, we’ve been there and done that and it’s done more harm than good.
(Source)
8 Likes
It still seems like those blocks in Houston had sidewalks, though, so it could be argued that instead of highways turning inner cities hostile to pedestrians, they simply distributed demand over a much wider area of land than the inner cities have, and that the level of demand is simply catching up with supply now.
All pedestrians need is two things; sidewalks and street level commercial space. With the level of demand returning to inner cities for those shops, the sidewalks are still there. Just build the buildings for street level commercial space, and everything will largely return to proper order.
There’s the saying that all roads lead to Rome. All expressways lead to our cities in America as well. Every vein and artery needs its heart. Not having highways in our inner cities is tantamount to a heart that doesn’t have its atriums and cannot beat. Today, the demand isn’t a house of cards. The demand is there, it’s real, and you gotta satisfy it. You don’t have a choice.
Highways are inherently anti-urban and exceptionally destructive to “inner” cities. Sorry but your argument makes zero sense especially when it comes to NYC.
8 Likes
The entire idea of building massive highways and catering to automobiles is that pedestrians now have to fear for their life when crossing streets, and worry about being hit by cars what about cyclists who have to share the road with automobiles and the increased auto traffic further contributing to both air and noise pollution. Building or rebuilding a city with pedestrians and public transit prioritised will be a more healthy and safer place for people to be in. Highways alone also contribute to visual pollution because they are fundamentally visually unattractive as well.
Highways destroyed neighbourhoods and divided cities. There are absolutely 0 benefits to having major highways bisecting cities when robust public transport can get people from A to B comfortably and quickly.
This car-centric attitude is a 1950s mentality that destroyed many great cities.
NYC’s robust public transit system is the artery that keeps NYC moving. Without it, the city would be a wreck. Building more highways just creates pollution and terrible traffic. Anyone including myself who has travelled on NYC highways knows they’re terrible.
To me that sounds like highways took everyone out of the city, killing what was likely a vibrant downtown and the only reason demand is “catching up” is because people woke up and realised highways are destroying our cities, not helping them and are trying to reverse decades of damage.
6 Likes
Cycling is so overrated. Why push the pedals and sweat your ass off on a mode of transport that can only go as far as the human body is able to accommodate? Why not just hop in a car, with a/c and heating, a radio and a comfortable seat?
You think that because there were sidewalks that was good? Dude 70% of the downtown was a parking lot. That’s not good.
Highways in cities are just fundamentally bad. Fundamentally. They’re great for inbetween cities but they shouldn’t run into them.
5 Likes
If wanna get pedantic a bicycle can take you from Anchorage, Alaska to Panama City if you really wanted. Or London to Singapore.
Though that wasn’t even a major point of his.
3 Likes
I am going to assume you’ve never lived in or been to a reasonably urban area to realise that cycling or alternatives to a car in the city are quite practical when things are close together such as in NYC. There really isn’t any good excuse to drive in the city when there’s public transit that has heat, air conditioning and reasonably comfortable seats and can get you from point A to B quickly. A bike can also be stowed on a bus or train for travelling longer distances where it isn’t practical to ride it as well. Lets us also not forget not everyone is able to drive a car or wants to, so having viable alternatives such as public transit is crucial.
Your entire point on why cycling is “terrible” also bears no weight on your point proving why highways are “good” for cities either.
5 Likes
I could give you hundreds of videos of people doing the craziest stuff on the subway and pissing other people off. Not to mention the obvious incentives and ways to avoid paying fares, such as jumping the turnstiles, holding the exit door open for passengers going to the platform, and other ways. With a car, you own it, you pay the gas, and there’s zero strain on coffers unless the road needs repairs. Also, there’s a cost savings of around 10 bucks or so every 14 days switching from the subway to cars. I know plenty of people who would take an extra 10 bucks every 14 days driving rather than biking or subway riding, even if it means a lifestyle change.
And yet it’s still the main way to get around in the world’s biggest cities where a subway exist, many times in spite of the vast road network. I wonder why that is.
Unless you don’t own it because cars are expensive. A situation many in middle America find themselves in. Zero strain on coffers? Roads don’t pay taxes, and in the case of highways through cities, they take land that could be filled up by tax paying businesses and residences. And roads always need maintenance, it gets especially bad in middle America where the cities aren’t as dense which means a low number of people per road making each road individually more expensive to maintain per person.
Source? I like driving a car, but there are quite a few expenses that you get from a car that don’t come from a subway.
Initially buying of car
Leasing of car
Any loan taken out for a car
Gas for a car
Insurance
Maintenance
And god forbid you get in a wreck
6 Likes
Cars are fundamentally expensive and roads themselves do not provide any sort of income for municipalities despite the fact highways cut through areas in cities that can be filled with sources of revenue.
Why do people continue to ride the subway then? Clearly, all the insane stuff isn’t a deterrent for the millions of riders on public transit. You also forget the ridiculous things that happen on the road such as road rage and the nuances of driving. There are just as many videos of insane car wrecks and other driving-related things as well.
Citation for the “cost savings” remark, please?
For frequent riders of transit, the cost of 12 30-day unlimited MetroCards is $1524 and with an unlimited 30-day card, you can ride the subway as many times as you want for that duration before having to refill after the 30 days expire. It costs $127 a month for a single 30-day unlimited card which gave me the $1524 amount for the year in total cost. You pay infinitely more on car-related costs than riding the subway with unlimited cards for a year. Let’s not forget that MetroCard works on buses and the PATH too (now you can ride into NJ too!) which expands transit coverage and value for money.
For an example of a car costing more than transit, you pay more putting 40 dollars in gas in your car several times a month alone for a year than riding the subway or bus with a year’s worth of unlimited rides. Now toss in fees, for example, monthly parking fees in a garage, and the cost balloons even more.
There are more costs associated with car ownership than riding the subway with a yearly pass. @mcart mentioned some of the same things I listed but there are plenty more costs that can be found that I included in my list. Of course, all of these are subject to inflation more so than public transit or god forbid, a bicycle.
- Gas (Prices are volatile and subject to skyrocket)
- Insurance
- Registration Fees
- Car loans
- Leases
- Regular Maintenance
- Parts if something breaks or wears down
- Possible massive surcharges and repair fees if you get into a wreck
- Traffic Citation Fees
- Parking (if it is not free which it often is NYC)
- Tolls
- New Tires
All of those costs above which can be in the thousands are eliminated or reduced with public transit usage.
3 Likes
You have all these ideas of things you want to see happen here but yet you don’t seem to know the first thing about NY. The last thing we need are more cars clogging our streets and spewing vile chemicals into the air. What we need more of is a combination of heavy rail (subway) and Light rail (dedicated lane tram) where it makes the most sense following arterial roadways to edges of the city (some examples would be a tramway down Flatbush avenue all the way to the rockaways or a line running down Atlantic Ave or down 11th Ave in Manhattan, etc. There should be no transit starved neighborhoods within the city limits anymore.
6 Likes