https://www.ocregister.com/2015/11/04/tunnel-to-grand-centra...
How?
The Oyster Bay line has been hit particularly badly.
On top of that because of how far underground the gcs platforms are and the fact that the old Hunters Point Ave method wasn’t that bad, even people that work on the east side aren’t seeing big benefits, if any.
New York voters are increasingly anti development. The only thing that protects it from going San Francisco is (a) Manhattan is joint to the other boroughs and (b) developers existing as a voting and lobbying constituency to counterbalance NIMBY homeowners and misguided tenants. Much of e.g. the Second Avenue subway’s delays were due to community roadblocks, not Albany.
I took the opportunity to rant broadly, but I want to ask how that impacted the 2nd Ave Subway project?
Another would be making motorized individual methods of transit more and more painful and expanding bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure (this is often two birds with one stone). This will get the public to support politicians that make public transportation the priority.
It’s a public authority secured by bonds. Unless the feds decide to pump billions of dollars into NYS/NYC, nothing happens unless the organization is insolvent again.
But we're installing elevators everywhere and making all stations accessible, and that, plus the ridiculous running of trains overnight, are priorities.
Hochul just got a bunch of funding through:
> But the biggest lifeline arrived in April, when Gov. Kathy Hochul and state lawmakers agreed to include new and recurring funding for the M.T.A. in the state budget.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/06/nyregion/mta-nyc-subway-s...
And the mayor doesn't really have any power - although I haven't seen anything to suggest that Adams is anti-transit.
Cuomo did fuck up a good thing with Andy Byford. But fuck that guy
The MTA doesn’t need more money. At least not yet. It needs a complete and total overhaul in all aspects so it’s no longer the least efficient transit agency in the entire world.
It’s the same story all over the world where you have similar sectarian politics.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30770921
> I think this illustrates my point, though. In the primary, Black and Latino New Yorkers overwhelmingly supported Adams, while Asians supported Yang. But the Black, Latino, and Asian progressive activists mostly opposed both and sided with the candidates preferred by white progressives.
[1] https://www.gothamgazette.com/130-opinion/10656-latino-vote-... [2] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-eric-adams-won-the-... [3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/07/10/new-york-m...
> People vote along ethnic/racial lines (look at the primary voting for Adams versus Yang versus Garcia)
This seems to imply something quite other than a broad cross-racial constituency. It also seems to fit oddly with the fact that progressives of all races voted against Adams. And why mention Garcia if there "wasn't a major Latino candidate"?
Look, I'm clearly not inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt here. You make incendiary trolling claims, and when asked to explain yourself, backpedal into vacuous, but reasonable-sounding, contradictions. And you get leeway because you played the role of a Burkean foil for other popular commenters here. But at this point, it just seems like you're showing contempt for the site, and for its users.
What I’m trying to drive at is that this ignores indigenous leftist as well as minority (historically Ahmedis were never leftist with exception of 1970) movements.
https://fedsoc.org/federalist-society-review-new/the-ohio-co...
I might find Adams’ criticisms of white progressives amusing, but it’s not a recipe for building a city focused on getting the trains to run on time.
> It also seems to fit oddly with the fact that progressives of all races voted against Adams.
Progressives make up a small percentage of the electorate. The fact that racial conflict plays a major and destructive role in city politics doesn’t mean there aren’t also other issues in play.
I don’t know what makes you think I’m “trolling.” Show me a city that, like NYC, has an established history of ethnic partisanship in politics but also has an effective government?
The crux of our disagreement seems to boil down to him wanting to avoid the implication that New York’s racial politics is a bad thing for the city’s governance, and me not caring about doing so. That’s fine, we don’t need to defensively write around each other’s pieties.
Meaning that do you know that byford did not recognize what "anyone needs reminding" knew that nyc "can't build" is the problem?
He wasn’t there long enough to effect the solution to decades of poor investment and managing.
The congestion tolls are both going to send tourists and business fleeing. Manhattan will be a beautiful playground for the people who live there until things start failing.
There's absolutely no reason to expect any kind of collapse in anything other than asthma rates and traffic congestion.
Funny how people who tend to proclaim that they are pro-business also tend to oppose textbook classical liberal free market solutions to textbook externality problems.
The city already is and has been a playground for the rich for 10+ years. That's largely due to real estate. Small businesses in the city are also struggling due to real estate, as well as the chaotic and difficult regulatory environment.
It's even less of a problem than you think.
The people who drive in for work are rich executives and lawyers etc. who can afford to park in Manhattan. Not maids or baristas.
They're not under-served by transit at all. If they wanted, they could commute like most people by driving to the nearest train station and taking the train into the city.
And cops
Which is the attitude that a lot of people who live in larger cities have. "I don't want people driving or otherwise coming into my city." But most cities aren't sustainable on that basis.
Otherwise, why are city mayors desperately opposing WFH, with the goal of putting suburban commuters back into their hellish commutes into the city to patronize urban businesses?
You could argue the suburbanites need their urban jobs - but WFH has proven at least many of these jobs do not necessarily require workers to have their butts planted in urban offices to be productive.
City mayors still think that the suburbs are profitable because they're just as vulnerable to this propaganda as you and I are. The Feds help maintain this lie too.
From a tech perspective, until the West Coast companies started opening satellite offices in the city, it basically didn't have any tech companies any longer and was losing population.
And this is a city (Boston/Cambridge) with relatively good transit options. If driving in for the evening became any more difficult than it is today (which is not trivial) I simply wouldn't come in. So your comment boils down to not wanting people to come into the city for a night activity.
Of course we won't get that until the 2050s at best...
If it’s that much of a hassle, for most entertainment one commutes into Manhattan for, you are fine paying the toll on an Uber. People driving themselves in and sensitive to the toll are, by definition, not adding much to the local economy.
(And I'm not sure from a driving in perspective what's actually been gained relative to me taking my own car in and parking in a garage which is what I usually do.)
The congestion charge will be between $9 and $23. For certain parts of Manhattan. During certain hours. It sounds like your problem is where you live, fundamentally, not the charge.
> a thousand dollars at that point between hotel and transportation
You do see how, from a resident's perspective, you spending more money less frequently is not a downside?
> what's actually been gained relative to me taking my own car in and parking in a garage
A reduction in space wasted to parking. Also, congestion: your car adds a car to the road. (You're also a non-professional driver in a dense urban environment.)
The things that people want to deal with the PITA of living in Manhattan over depend on volume of people. COVID and WTF killed commercial office traffic - now that it's getting dark early take a walk up 3rd Avenue in the late afternoon - the offices are empty.
So the residents don't want to deal with commuters, don't want to deal with drivers, etc. Cool. I don't want to hear about bailing people out of their $2M mortgages on 800 ft^2 apartments when the cultural, dining and entertainment that brought them to Manhattan migrates to Brooklyn and Jersey.
Real estate crashing would save NYC from itself.
The MBTA commuter rail is commuter rail. And, outside the occasional other event, no one looks at it differently and it is empty (and probably loses a bunch of money) whenever it runs outside of rush hour.
Edit: it seems like you’re doing your calculations based on the idea that increased access via car leads to increased sales. The data actually shows the opposite: The more walkable the area is, the more sales at storefronts. Locations that shutdown lanes of traffic to increase walkability or increase bike traffic see a massive jump in revenue.
These days I have to imagine we could create something much quieter but very few people are going to advocate for their sunlight to be blocked by an overhead train line.