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.
Environmental Impact Statement requirements have vastly increased the cost of all large-scale projects to the point where most are simply infeasible.
This is true but there is also a massive a.count of rent seeking behavior from special interest groups built into current government t contracts at almost every level. The workers unions get carve outs so that people are getting paid $80 per hour for general labor and the lowest paid guy sweeping up with a broom is making $35 per hour. There isn't much competition among the big construction firms as they have consolidated down to just a handful of big companies. Worse those companies all have big lobbyist operations for all levels of government insuring they get massive protected profits no matter how poorly they manage a project and finally corrupt politicians themselves are skimming a thousand ways including writing in specific companies for part of the contract because said company is bribing them, I.E. making "campaign donations" which politicians easily launder into their own pockets.
If we could cut out the rent seeming then we could easily cut costs in half and other countries manage to do this but it seems America's political system is just to corrupt.
Last edited by Think4Yourself; 08-15-2014 at 02:07 AM..
The Second Avenue subway project in NY is projected to cost over $17 billion when its done. Waste of money imo, and would be better spent on a surface streetcar system that gives you much more bang for your buck, plus NY subways are gross.
At 8.5 miles long the cost of 2nd Ave subway is a record $2 billion per mile, double that of the new Central Subway in San Francisco, and more than ten times the cost of the underwater Channel Tunnel between England and France, though construction of the latter was much more difficult and challenging from an engineering point of view. The cost of subways, and rail in general in the US is getting out of control. And seems to be doubling every few years.
At 8.5 miles long the cost of 2nd Ave subway is a record $2 billion per mile, double that of the new Central Subway in San Francisco, and more than ten times the cost of the underwater Channel Tunnel between England and France, though construction of the latter was much more difficult and challenging from an engineering point of view. The cost of subways, and rail in general in the US is getting out of control. And seems to be doubling every few years.
You are looking at it backwards. It is a typical American reaction to a price tag. It may cost $2 billion per mile but will probably account for $10 billion in new economic growth in the next 20-30 years when you factor in the productivity gains and cost-benefit vs. not having it.
You are looking at it backwards. It is a typical American reaction to a price tag. It may cost $2 billion per mile but will probably account for $10 billion in new economic growth in the next 20-30 years when you factor in the productivity gains and cost-benefit vs. not having it.
Fair point though one question no one is answering is the price and is there a technology that makes construction more affordable - a complex question but for example would going deeper with a boreing technology be more cost effective etc. I dont know the answer but pose the question Manhattan will likely be more expensive for many reasons relative to other areas cut and cover does not seem feasible today
The Second Avenue subway project in NY is projected to cost over $17 billion when its done. Waste of money imo, and would be better spent on a surface streetcar system that gives you much more bang for your buck, plus NY subways are gross.
A surface streetcar system would be near useless for Manhattan except for very short distances. It would be cheaper but offer almost no transportation improvement. You may find subways icky, but they're practical in NYC. People want to get somewhere in a reasonable amount of time, a streetcar wouldn't help. As in the link I showed, the Second Avenue Subway is very expensive for developed world subway construction costs.
You are looking at it backwards. It is a typical American reaction to a price tag. It may cost $2 billion per mile but will probably account for $10 billion in new economic growth in the next 20-30 years when you factor in the productivity gains and cost-benefit vs. not having it.
Streetcars are well known to attract economic growth and development,
and arguably more so than subways, but at a fraction of the cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
A surface streetcar system would be near useless for Manhattan except for very short distances. It would be cheaper but offer almost no transportation improvement. You may find subways icky, but they're practical in NYC. People want to get somewhere in a reasonable amount of time, a streetcar wouldn't help. As in the link I showed, the Second Avenue Subway is very expensive for developed world subway construction costs.
I didn't say all subways are icky, just the NY subway. Subways are necessary for a city like NY, but are not enough. The traffic on the surface is still crazy congested and there is way too much vehicle traffic. Streetcars would do a much better job of relieving some of this surface congestion then the overcrowded buses which just don't have the capacity to handle these ultra high volume urban corridors that you have in megacities like NY.
A surface streetcar system would be near useless for Manhattan except for very short distances. It would be cheaper but offer almost no transportation improvement. You may find subways icky, but they're practical in NYC. People want to get somewhere in a reasonable amount of time, a streetcar wouldn't help. As in the link I showed, the Second Avenue Subway is very expensive for developed world subway construction costs.
Seeing photos of the construction, including a cavern they carved out the size of Grand Central Station, I can understand why the 2nd Ave line is so expensive. Though I know prospective buyers and developers are buying up property along the future line for future growth.
I didn't say all subways are icky, just the NY subway. Subways are necessary for a city like NY, but are not enough. The traffic on the surface is still crazy congested and there is way too much vehicle traffic. Streetcars would do a much better job of relieving some of this surface congestion then the overcrowded buses which just don't have the capacity to handle these ultra high volume urban corridors that you have in megacities like NY.
The reason why there is vehicle traffic isn't always because the public transit isn't available but because public transit in any form can be unpractical and inflexible for some situations hence why people drive despite the availability of transit. Streetcars won't fix that.
Streetcars are also limited. They can only run where there are tracks, buses are able to run different routes and reroute. They can be an good upgrade where buses are available and passenger volume is high but an bad idea where there is rail available(and Manhattan has an lot of rail). The reason why they are building that subway is because it is to replace an elevated line they tore down in the 40ies. Rather than fix it they wanted an subway and the subway project stalled, then stalled again. The smarter move may have been keep the elevated.
Streetcars are well known to attract economic growth and development,
and arguably more so than subways, but at a fraction of the cost.
No.
Streetcars reduce surface street capacity. Subways do not. Subways also have much higher total capacity than street cars. It depends on the density requirements. For major cities, subways are the clear winner.
Streetcars reduce surface street capacity. Subways do not. Subways also have much higher total capacity than street cars. It depends on the density requirements. For major cities, subways are the clear winner.
But that's what subways do. They help reduce traffic and congestion on the street, same as what streetcars do. You need subways in NY but they are not enough by themselves. Trains and stations in the subway system often get horribly overcrowded and fill up way beyond capacity. Buses don't have the capacity to handle the passenger load on the surface and imo are not very well suited for a mega urban environment like NY. The noise and air pollution created by buses, also just adds to the general stress and crowding of the big city. Which in turn makes people want to flee to suburbia.
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.
Subways are necessary for a city like NY, but are not enough. The traffic on the surface is still crazy congested and there is way too much vehicle traffic. Streetcars would do a much better job of relieving some of this surface congestion then the overcrowded buses which just don't have the capacity to handle these ultra high volume urban corridors that you have in megacities like NY.
