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 08-12-2008, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Weehawken, NJ
1,302 posts, read 4,012,073 times
Reputation: 353

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysocks View Post
That's where you're a bit wrong. With the exception of specifically rich neighborhoods like Garden City, LI--the same size house in the 'burbs would be cheaper than the same size house in a comparable neighborhood in any borough--except staten Island. While the city ends up more affordable in the end because of significantly lower taxes (so the monthly mortgage+tax expense is lower, not to mention that beautiful day when you've paid it off and everything after--whereas taxes go nowhere but up).

staten Island, because of its remoteness, has suburban-level pricing. But since it's in the city politically, it's got low taxes, too. so you get the best of both worlds, and s.I. ends up heavily blue-collar. In the end, it's the borough with both the cheapest real-estate and the highest median income. Odd, huh?

Yeah, that is interesting. So let me see if I got all this info right. SI is more suburban than the other boroughs and some cities in New Jersey, it is the least diverse of all the boroughs, it has the cheapest house prices along with a good tax rate, but doesn't have a lot of rental options, and has the worst public transportation and traffic of the whole city and parts of Jersey also.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-12-2008, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Confines of the 101 Precinct
19,341 posts, read 32,849,065 times
Reputation: 7661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian View Post
Yeah, that is interesting. So let me see if I got all this info right. SI is more suburban than the other boroughs and some cities in New Jersey, it is the least diverse of all the boroughs, it has the cheapest house prices along with a good tax rate, but doesn't have a lot of rental options, and has the worst public transportation and traffic of the whole city and parts of Jersey also.
i disagree about cheapest houses. that would have to go to the bronx.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence

Forum TOS: http://www.city-data.com/forumtos.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2008, 10:08 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,774,281 times
Reputation: 10455
As to the, shall we say, unevenness of public transportation in Staten Island, Staten Islanders haven't helped. There was a proposal to extend the #1 line from South Ferry to Staten Island, effectively replacing the SIRT with through service from Tottenville all the way up to 242 St. in The Bronx. Residents of the borough voted this down by a big majority. Apparently, connecting SI to the rest of the city by subway was seen as a disadvantage. So the connecting tunnel plan was shelved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2008, 10:48 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia,New Jersey, NYC!
6,967 posts, read 17,787,364 times
Reputation: 2617
so you guys can't accept the fact that the Wu put SI on the map
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2008, 07:55 AM
 
Location: Queens
536 posts, read 2,095,786 times
Reputation: 166
^^^

I guess they can't. When I lived in East Meadow, LI, I would've been prouder to say Busta Rhymes came from one neighborhood over (Uniondale--I lived right at the border by the Meadowbrook, too, spent a lot of time there) as well as Public Enemy (Roosevelt) than that Criss Angel is from my actual hood. Haha. But for people that don't like hip-hop, both those may be a bit easier to swallow than the Wu.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2008, 07:51 PM
 
Location: Queens
108 posts, read 244,212 times
Reputation: 34
They all think there gangsters out there..all watching to much Sopranos
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2008, 09:13 PM
 
Location: Now in Houston!
922 posts, read 3,413,004 times
Reputation: 662
Quote:
There was a proposal to extend the #1 line from South Ferry to Staten Island, effectively replacing the SIRT with through service from Tottenville all the way up to 242 St. in The Bronx. Residents of the borough voted this down by a big majority. Apparently, connecting SI to the rest of the city by subway was seen as a disadvantage. So the connecting tunnel plan was shelved.
WOW! That would have been one seriously long five mile tunnel - and extremely expensive, I would assume. It would seem to be much easier to extend the R train from Bay Ridge. It might even be feasible to lay tracks on the lower deck of the Verrazano and avoid tunnel construction altogether. Apparently there was a proposal when the Verrazano was built but Robert Moses nixed it.

Some interesting stories about various attempts to bring the subway to SI are here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2008, 09:24 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,774,281 times
Reputation: 10455
Quote:
Originally Posted by UpstaterInBklyn View Post
WOW! That would have been one seriously long five mile tunnel - and extremely expensive, I would assume. It would seem to be much easier to extend the R train from Bay Ridge.
Funny you should mention this! When the 4 Avenue line in Brooklyn opened for service in 1916, its terminal was 86 Street. The only reason it got extended to 95th (that happened in 1925) was on account of a plan to run the line into Staten Island. Another proposal that fell through!

If I'm not mistaken, the Verrazano was also designed to facilitate a transit line. Moses didn't care for that idea--he always fought any proposals to expand mass transit.

Yes, a tunnel across the harbor for use by the #1 line would've been long, and expensive to construct. But if there had been support for it, that project might actually have happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2008, 11:32 PM
 
Location: outer boroughs, NYC
905 posts, read 2,524,697 times
Reputation: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
Funny you should mention this! When the 4 Avenue line in Brooklyn opened for service in 1916, its terminal was 86 Street. The only reason it got extended to 95th (that happened in 1925) was on account of a plan to run the line into Staten Island. Another proposal that fell through!

If I'm not mistaken, the Verrazano was also designed to facilitate a transit line. Moses didn't care for that idea--he always fought any proposals to expand mass transit.

Yes, a tunnel across the harbor for use by the #1 line would've been long, and expensive to construct. But if there had been support for it, that project might actually have happened.
The V-N was meant to have a transit line. Hell, it was originally planned, back in the 20s, as a tunnel. I'm fairly certain that it actually is equipped to handle one - I think the structure was designed to allow it. Moses typically fought that stuff, but by the time the V-N was built his power was starting to wane and while he succeeded in getting the subway off the bridge, I don't think he managed to make it so that it could never happen (like he did with LIE, or the overpasses on the parkways).

A subway ride across the Verrazanno would be fantastic! One thing I wonder, though, is how long it would take for the train to, like, get up there. If you think about the way the N slows down as it ascends towards the Manhattan Bridge, you gotta wonder how long a trip up and over the V-N would actually take. A tunnel would undoubtedly be more efficient. Sadly, I don't think any of it will ever happen, at least not anytime soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2008, 07:00 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,774,281 times
Reputation: 10455
The trains don't slow down on bridge approaches because it's too steep. They slow down because of signal timers. That's a safety feature; they're not supposed to go barreling up onto bridge structures--which apparently happened, at some time in the past! If there was a transit line crossing the Verrazano, there wouldn't be any problem getting up onto the bridge.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top