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 last complete subway system to be built was DC's which started back in 1969 and finished in the early 2000s I believe. So why don't other cities build? Obviously they are expensive, but haven't the few cities that have subways proven that they are worth their price? What city will be next to build complete system?
In China there are quite a few cities building completely new subway systems.
For most American cities with relatively low density, perhaps it makes more sense to build one of these at $8M/km ("Sky taxis are about to become a reality").
I'm from PHilly and MOST people drove downtown. DECADES AGO. Obviously you KNOW that you have to take a BUS or CAR to even GET to the train stations. Or even the EL to get to the TRAIN Or connect on other lines downtown etc. THEN you get to WALK 10 or 20 blocks in your sweaty business suit in the rain, snow and be late. The ONLY people able to use the sub or El are those already living downtown and they can take buses, too. And they STILL have to walk FAR to get to the train.
I honestly have to wonder if you are really from Philadelphia. Because if you were, you would know that the city's three heavy-rail lines (Market-Frankford, Broad Street, and PATCO; four lines if you want to count the PATCO Spur separately) all converge in Center City, a.k.a. the Central Business District, a.k.a. that place with the big tall office buildings where thousands of people work. Thousands of office workers are within a one or two block walk of a Center City subway station. And more than a few people in North, South, West, and lower Northeast Philly live within walking distance of one of the lines.
It is true that most subway systems in lower-density areas depend on feeder buses and park & ride lots to attract a good share of their patrons. But there are plenty of walk-up customers as well.
Maybe true of one's that are already built. Highways are often built without question, but even subways need endless studies and debate over their use. And embedded in that discussion is question of subsidy for those who don't pay enough for their mode. NYC is one of the only anomalies that I've seen.
Maybe true of one's that are already built. Highways are often built without question, but even subways need endless studies and debate over their use. And embedded in that discussion is question of subsidy for those who don't pay enough for their mode. NYC is one of the only anomalies that I've seen.
New highways aren't built without question in the last few decades, though it depends on what region of the country. Subways usually are subsidized more than highway. I suspect DC doesn't get much subsidy discussion; neither does Seattle's light rail subway. Boston has few subway extension plans, but in the 70s an 80s when the transit agency did have extension plans, some of it got blocked by NIMBYS (more of the our suburb will stay quiet without rapid transit).
NYC subway proposals often ignore poor neighborhoods; the mayor earlier in the year suggested extending subway service on Utica Ave in Brooklyn; it's probably the best place for a subway extension outside of Manhattan but rarely mentioned but tends to get overlooked — mainly poor people live there.
New highways aren't built without question in the last few decades, though it depends on what region of the country. Subways usually are subsidized more than highway. I suspect DC doesn't get much subsidy discussion; neither does Seattle's light rail subway. Boston has few subway extension plans, but in the 70s an 80s when the transit agency did have extension plans, some of it got blocked by NIMBYS (more of the our suburb will stay quiet without rapid transit).
NYC subway proposals often ignore poor neighborhoods; the mayor earlier in the year suggested extending subway service on Utica Ave in Brooklyn; it's probably the best place for a subway extension outside of Manhattan but rarely mentioned but tends to get overlooked — mainly poor people live there.
I'm off topic here, but I went to Google Streetview to view Utica Ave. Ya, not great, but dropped down into another Brooklyn neighbourhood called Vinegar Hill. Looks like it's being " gentrified " ?
What potential that neighbourhood seems to have. Great old brick buildings and even some cobblestoned streets.
Any idea how it's coming along..that is..if I'm right in it being " gentrified " ?
I'm off topic here, but I went to Google Streetview to view Utica Ave. Ya, not great, but dropped down into another Brooklyn neighbourhood called Vinegar Hill. Looks like it's being " gentrified " ?
What potential that neighbourhood seems to have. Great old brick buildings and even some cobblestoned streets.
Any idea how it's coming along..that is..if I'm right in it being " gentrified " ?
It's mostly formerly industrial — I'm guessing it didn't go through much of a gentrification stage; just a short stage of artists transitioning to affluent. Stone paved streets aren't rare in or near former/existing industrial areas of Brooklyn.
It's mostly formerly industrial — I'm guessing it didn't go through much of a gentrification stage; just a short stage of artists transitioning to affluent. Stone paved streets aren't rare in or near former/existing industrial areas of Brooklyn.
Too bad. It seems to offer great view of Manhattan etc. I still think it's potential should be tapped.
A water ferry to and from Manhattan. A public market, with pubs and restaurants etc.
Play up the 19th century feel of the place.
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.