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.
The East River crossings will not be free for long. They are going to toll them starting next year or 2021, and the tolls maybe even higher than going to NJ (we don't know yet). I am just curious, would that make downtown Brooklyn not part of the extended core metro, or would it still be in the core because you could in theory physically walk over the bridge?
Tens of thousands of people cross the East River bridges on foot or bike, every day. Brooklyn Bridge alone, averages over 20k/day in the spring, summer and early fall.
Tens of thousands of people cross the East River bridges on foot or bike, every day. Brooklyn Bridge alone, averages over 20k/day in the spring, summer and early fall.
Thank you, I know how busy the Brooklyn bridge is.
Then why are you dismissing the importance of pedestrian/bike accessibility in determining the core of an urban area. Simply illustrating why Brooklyn and Queens are part of NYC’s urban core, but Jersey City and Hoboken are not.
I'm from Chicago and I'm always trying to boost my cities ego. LoL!
This what I know, in the greater sense downtown NYC could include all of Manhattan and part of Brooklyn. Which is close to 2 million people vs Chicago's 250 thousand by extended definitions. I just want a detailed explanation of why they do or don't campare...
NYC -7,000 high-rises VS Chicago -1,350 high-rises
I love both skylines! In your heart felt opinions, how do these downtowns compare or don't compare, please?
In no way does Chicago even come close to comparing to NYC.
Thank you, I know how busy the Brooklyn bridge is.
Of course, most of the traffic is tourists. Even so, 20k is but a tiny drop in the bucket of daily traffic between Manhattan and Brooklyn. You probably have more people traversing the river every 5 minutes of the day via subway, bus, car and ferry.
Bajan has made some good points, and it is undeniable that Brooklyn and Queens are more connected to Manhattan culturally, psychologically and infrastructurally. Still, the reality is that JC/Hoboken are just a mile away, have 24/7 rail transit links, and they’ve been intimately connected to Manhattan for centuries. The brownstones of Paulus Hook and Hamilton Park date back to mid-19th century (a time when most of Brooklyn and Queens was still empty fields). So there is a historical dimension there as well.
So, for me, if you are gonna reach across the river to append some areas in Brooklyn and Queens to NYC’s “core” you should do the same on the other side where you have neighborhoods of similar character, density and close historic connection to Manhattan.
Then why are you dismissing the importance of pedestrian/bike accessibility in determining the core of an urban area. Simply illustrating why Brooklyn and Queens are part of NYC’s urban core, but Jersey City and Hoboken are not.
My quote you responded to asked this question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz
I am just curious, would that make downtown Brooklyn not part of the extended core metro, or would it still be in the core because you could in theory physically walk over the bridge?
I don't know how pedestrian crossing statistics answer this question. I am sure more people walk to 125th street for example, that doesn't make 125th a part of the core. And it doesn't answer my question.
Also, to be honest, I personally don't care how many people walk over the bridge, 99.99% of people in Brooklyn do not walk over the bridge as their commute into Manhattan. Those pedestrian numbers are insignificant in the grand scheme of things, that's why I, personally, do not value the pedestrian connection as much. I find it to be a completely arbitrary metric. If they closed off Brooklyn bridge to pedestrian traffic tomorrow, the connection between Manhattan and Brooklyn would still be the same. As a follow up question I'd like to ask, does downtown Brooklyn seize to be a part of the greater metro NYC every winter since practically no one is walking or biking over the bridge?
In my personal opinion, with megacities that have big cores, mass public transportation connections via metro/subway become much more important due to the geographic distances within the greater core itself. In Shanghai, metro and roads are what connect Pudong to the Bund, nobody cares or even knows if you can physically walk over the river.
I agree that New York City is dirtier than it should be and the roads are in worse shape than one would expect.
Those are about the only things I dislike about the city.
But the dirt and trash hit you in the face and make an impression in NYC, just like the cleanliness of Chicago makes a huge impression walking or driving in the city. There are days when I go out to lunch from my downtown office and am amazed at the lack of trash and sparkling clean condition of the Loop even with tons of people around.
I agree NYC has a lot to like, though, as you point out.
I don't know how pedestrian crossing statistics answer this question. I am sure more people walk to 125th street for example, that doesn't make 125th a part of the core. And it doesn't answer my question.
Do you know what "necessary but not sufficient" is? A physical link that maintains contiguity of the core may be a necessary prerequisite in the eyes of some, but that doesn't mean that that prerequisite is sufficient. In this case, we're talking about pedestrian links that arguably make the connection between two separate nodes relatively seamless. I think that's an argument that could be made for DT Brooklyn even though I think the East River is a more imposing and limiting boundary than the Chicago River is in the Loop or the Schuylkill dividing CC and West Philly.
If places like DT Brooklyn or LI City (to an even lesser extent IMO) only arguably qualify as part of the NYC urban core, then there's no way Jersey City should.
If you feel that Jersey City is the same as Brooklyn, then perhaps you should start a thread in the NY forum and see what folks have to say about it, then report back here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz
Also, to be honest, I personally don't care how many people walk over the bridge, 99.99% of people in Brooklyn do not walk over the bridge as their commute into Manhattan. Those pedestrian numbers are insignificant in the grand scheme of things, that's why I, personally, do not value the pedestrian connection as much. I find it to be a completely arbitrary metric. If they closed off Brooklyn bridge to pedestrian traffic tomorrow, the connection between Manhattan and Brooklyn would still be the same.
Walking commutes are a small percentage of commutes in any city. They are a small % of commutes within Manhattan itself. This doesn't matter. The point is that if people do in fact walk or bike from their residence in Brooklyn to their place of work in Manhattan (or vice versa), then that's evidence of some degree of continuity. Since it is literally impossible to walk from Hoboken to Manhattan, there is no such evidence of contiguity between the two.
I don't know how pedestrian crossing statistics answer this question. I am sure more people walk to 125th street for example, that doesn't make 125th a part of the core. And it doesn't answer my question.
Also, to be honest, I personally don't care how many people walk over the bridge, 99.99% of people in Brooklyn do not walk over the bridge as their commute into Manhattan. Those pedestrian numbers are insignificant in the grand scheme of things, that's why I, personally, do not value the pedestrian connection as much. I find it to be a completely arbitrary metric. If they closed off Brooklyn bridge to pedestrian traffic tomorrow, the connection between Manhattan and Brooklyn would still be the same. As a follow up question I'd like to ask, does downtown Brooklyn seize to be a part of the greater metro NYC every winter since practically no one is walking or biking over the bridge?
In my personal opinion, with megacities that have big cores, mass public transportation connections via metro/subway become much more important due to the geographic distances within the greater core itself. In Shanghai, metro and roads are what connect Pudong to the Bund, nobody cares or even knows if you can physically walk over the river.
125th street is absolutely part of NYC’s core, and it’s absurd to think otherwise. It seems to me as if your concept of NYC’s core is based on nothing more than demographics and the occasional skyscraper.
Here is something that you need to understand, Brooklyn and Queens are NYC. Jersey City and Hoboken are not. People who grew up there do not consider themselves New Yorkers. New Yorkers do not move there. As I said before, the average New Yorker can’t name two streets in either town. People who actually grew up in NYC remember when Hudson County was a long-distance phone call.
No one is saying that JC and Hoboken aren’t part of the metro, but they are satellites, removed from the core. I don’t know why that’s hard for you to accept.
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.
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.
