Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-03-2012, 10:52 AM
 
2,664 posts, read 5,625,136 times
Reputation: 852

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jad2k View Post
On the scale of densely populated (world) cities, NYC is no where nearly as densely populated as Mumbai, Beijing., Moscow, Seoul or countless other places in Asia (and South America for that matter). So yes, there is room to grow particularity in the outer boroughs which is why I suspect neighborhood (re)development will come to play a larger part as the population increases.

As for traffic, it isn't as much of an issue- or shouldn't be as much of an issue- since so many NYers rely on public transportation.




Yes, but so many don't. 46% of households own cars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-03-2012, 10:55 AM
 
2,664 posts, read 5,625,136 times
Reputation: 852
Quote:
Originally Posted by jad2k View Post
I'm not a bike fanatic BUT I really do think making NYC more "bikeable" and bike friendly would go a long way in terms of intercity mobility and ease the noise, congestion, and pollution caused by all the traffic. If anyone has ever been to Amsterdam that city is remarkable in terms of how bikeable it is! I've been trying to dig up some history on how it got to be that way.
I hate bicyclists. I almost hit a few over the yrs cuz they don't care where they're going.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 10:58 AM
 
2,664 posts, read 5,625,136 times
Reputation: 852
What bout subways? Will they have enough room for everybody? You can only put so many trains on one station unless you build new stations of course.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
2,894 posts, read 5,895,944 times
Reputation: 2186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jad2k View Post
I'm not a bike fanatic BUT I really do think making NYC more "bikeable" and bike friendly would go a long way in terms of intercity mobility and ease the noise, congestion, and pollution caused by all the traffic. If anyone has ever been to Amsterdam that city is remarkable in terms of how bikeable it is! I've been trying to dig up some history on how it got to be that way.
Well, Holland as a society (in terms of culture and mentality) is a ahead of us about 20 yrs.
We live in a car-centric culture where motorists hardly respect cyclists and the infrastructure to encourage more people to bycicle is obviously lacking. There's been some progress in the last 10 yrs, but
they are baby steps to where we need to be.
Yet, I'm still confident we'll catch up one day....

Last edited by likeminas; 07-03-2012 at 11:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 11:26 AM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,380 posts, read 26,804,080 times
Reputation: 4580
Quote:
Originally Posted by OleSchoolFool View Post
What bout subways? Will they have enough room for everybody? You can only put so many trains on one station unless you build new stations of course.

The Subways can handle another 1-2 Million with a few extensions and improvements to the system such as new Signal tech and higher Capacity Trains. If all Regional Rail Expansions and Enhancements go ahead then the system can handle another 2-4 Million users a day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 11:27 AM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,380 posts, read 26,804,080 times
Reputation: 4580
Quote:
Originally Posted by OleSchoolFool View Post
[/b]


Yes, but so many don't. 46% of households own cars.

Theres also 25% who walk or bike to work....and Transit per population usage is 65% for New York , 55% for Newark and 50% for Jersey City the top 3 in the Nation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 12:56 PM
 
2,691 posts, read 4,320,467 times
Reputation: 2311
Quote:
Originally Posted by likeminas View Post
Well, Holland as a society (in terms of culture and mentality) is a ahead of us about 20 yrs.
We live in a car-centric culture where motorists hardly respect cyclists and the infrastructure to encourage more people to bycicle is obviously lacking. There's been some progress in the last 10 yrs, but
they are baby steps to where we need to be.
Yet, I'm still confident we'll catch up one day....
Couldn't agree more. Holland one hell of a progressive society. The US is very car dependent, which, if you ask me, opens up the doors for a whole host of problems. Cars are good in sparsely populated areas where the nearest store is 15 miles away, but in a densely populated city it makes a hell of a lot more sense to travel short distances (less than 5 miles, say) with public transit or bikes. And this is coming form a person that OWNS a car! Shoot, I base whether or not I'm going to drive somewhere on whether or not there will be traffic going there and if I can find parking once I get there! Much of time it's just not worth the hassle of driving around here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 03:37 PM
 
Location: London, NYC, DC
1,118 posts, read 2,282,559 times
Reputation: 672
Quote:
Originally Posted by likeminas View Post
NYC is a tall city. It can't keep growing horizontally, but vertically? Hey, the sky is the limit. I already see a lot of mini sky-scrapers poping up in LIC, Downtown Brooklyn and even the Bronx. Necessity is the mother of all inventions, and as such, tall, smart buildings will help the city cope with an ever growing population. As for transportation, techonology will completely overhaul the way we look at city traffic. With driverless cars equiped with sensors, traffic jams will probably be a thing of the past in 50 yrs from now. The rise of bicycles as viable method of transportation will also help deal with the population grow. We will manage and adapt as we have done throughout human history.
Techonology will be our main tool to achive those goals.
Since Manhattan is maxing out (apart from Upper Manhattan, but there issues surrounding how much those areas can be developed both physically and from the demand side), the Outer Boroughs have to be ready to absorb demand. Nodes such as Downtown Brooklyn, Long Island City, and Jackson Heights, for example, will be prime locations for upward growth. It won't be at a Manhattan scale, but certainly denser than the surrounding area by at least twofold. In doing so, the city can become less Manhattan-centric, or at least abate demand at the local level for Manhattan, relieving congestion into the island while stimulating growth outwards, with the result of less strain on cross-East River travel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jad2k View Post
I'm not a bike fanatic BUT I really do think making NYC more "bikeable" and bike friendly would go a long way in terms of intercity mobility and ease the noise, congestion, and pollution caused by all the traffic. If anyone has ever been to Amsterdam that city is remarkable in terms of how bikeable it is! I've been trying to dig up some history on how it got to be that way.
Amsterdam and New York simply aren't comparable. Quite frankly, I'm not sure biking will be nearly as feasible in New York as it is in Amsterdam for distance and capacity reasons. In Brooklyn and Queens I could definitely see there being an impact from CitiBike and improving cycling infrastructure, but for commuting I don't particularly see it being much better. The subway is better-equipped to handle those types of volumes, and the target should be improving its capacity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
The Subways can handle another 1-2 Million with a few extensions and improvements to the system such as new Signal tech and higher Capacity Trains. If all Regional Rail Expansions and Enhancements go ahead then the system can handle another 2-4 Million users a day.
Depends. On certain (trunk) lines, CBTC could be very useful, if only for reliability, but we're already at maximum capacity on most of the system. Apart from any shuttles or the 7 or L, the limit is likely to be 30tph on a given stretch to account for interlining, perhaps 28tph being a safer estimate. The 6 already runs at this rate, while the A and C can't add any more trains due to limitations as a result of the Cranberry Street Tunnel. The Second Avenue Subway will improve Q and, in turn, Broadway express service, but that's nowhere near as heavily used as other lines. The E and M are limited due to the 53rd Street Line and merging issues with the R, which also has to negotiate with the N. The likelihood of extensions that would have a significant impact on subway crush loads is slim to none, especially since the SAS after phase 2 probably won't be finished.

Remember also that subway route ridership is imbalanced, not just due to local and express redundancy. On the Queens Boulevard Line, where the MTA wants to implement CBTC, the M and R serve different riders at different levels, but many M riders switch to the E at Roosevelt to avoid a local stretch even though they get off at Lexington or 5th. Further, not many trains could be added. Between Roosevelt and Forest Hills, the E and F run every 5min each (12tph), or 24tph in total. CBTC getting that up to 28tph would represent an increase of 16%. The same would occur on with the M and R. While that's good, ridership growth will easily overpower absorption of new demand possible, so crowding isn't likely to be noticeably better. Again, I'm completely for these improvements for reliability, reduction in overall costs, and so that we don't need to buy vintage parts, but whether or not they really have much of an impact is up for debate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 03:55 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
3,921 posts, read 9,109,601 times
Reputation: 1671
I'm basically with the people who say that there are plenty of areas that can be further densified. Growth often leads to investment in the areas, and some of that might come in the form of new subway lines (say, having the Second Avenue Subway go up along Third Avenue in The Bronx and/or across 125th Street in Manhattan).

Aside from that, some lines like the (J) do have a decent amount of spare capacity, so maybe it would lead to growth along the areas near that line (instead of the (L) line).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 04:03 PM
 
1,110 posts, read 978,786 times
Reputation: 352
I live in a city where the population growS more than 600000 a year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top