Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

caroline_elly t1_je2w1m8 wrote

Better public transportation.

Building more housing isn't enough, you need to build housing that people demand. The top criteria for many people is commute time.

If you improve public transportation such that every neighborhood currently 1h away from Manhattan is now 30min away, you just massively increased the supply of demanded housing.

Imagine being able to reach Manhattan reliably in under 30 minutes from West Side/Bayonne. That effectively increases supply and will take pricing pressure off downtown.

66

lastinglovehandles t1_je3kpga wrote

I was looking this up just now but what the fuck happened to all the bus lines? I was trying to figure out how to get to Lowe’s on 440. It seems there are only 4 lines from JSQ? Did they give ‘em up for VIA?

9

FinalIntern8888 t1_je5sx37 wrote

It’s really confusing. I think the private bus company does the 31(?) bus which is the 440 shopper. The private bus routes don’t track on the NJ Transit app, making them useless because I don’t know when they come or what the schedule is.

2

lastinglovehandles t1_je5ulaq wrote

It doesn’t make sense how they let go of the AC lines but didn’t replace it. The society hill, 440, Montgomery / Westside, actual 440 line and numerous others. Then they don’t want us to drive cars? The fuck outta here.

3

FinalIntern8888 t1_je68u15 wrote

Right, I’ve always wondered why the bus stop signs mention a Montgomery/West Side bus but I’ve never really seen one running. Does that one make a straight shot down Montgomery to downtown? That’d be so convenient.

2

lastinglovehandles t1_je697ga wrote

West Side to Downtown pass the old hospital.

2

FinalIntern8888 t1_je6nh2e wrote

That would be so convenient. I usually take the number 80 bus, but the fact it goes north to Journal Square before heading downtown makes it take a lot longer than it should.

1

paul-e-walnts OP t1_je2ykke wrote

I like this idea. I think even with less demand to work in the office, clearly, people still want to be near the city. Has there been any serious proposals for a north-south path line?

8

ribasad t1_je3olf3 wrote

This is so logical and reasonable when you explain it. Unfortunately I don’t see NJT or anyone else doing anything to help

5

HappyArtichoke7729 t1_je6irjf wrote

Anyone not wanting to help with something that is the primary thing their organization is in charge of.... should be fired. NJ Transit not wanting to help with transit projects? Replace them. PA not wanting to help with PATH expansion? Fire 'em. Replace them with a new organization, especially one that's accountable to elected officials.

1

ribasad t1_je6uth4 wrote

Who is firing who in your scenario? Not sure if I’m following

2

HappyArtichoke7729 t1_je6wp0n wrote

The public should be replacing an agency that isn't performing. So if, for example, the PA won't do anything to help expand PATH, then the NJ governor should work to dissolve the organization and replace it with a new one, a new one that has accountability.

It's like complaining that your grocer always has spoiled meat. You use a different grocer.

We should be killing organizations that won't do their job. Unfortunately, we will just keep having our elected officials take kickbacks and do nothing.

1

franciswilliambird t1_je58hva wrote

I mean this is a good idea that I entirely support, but wouldn't that just mean that Bayonne or whatever gentrifies instead of (or more likely in addition to) Jersey City?

1

caroline_elly t1_je59jsh wrote

I mean this is exactly the argument used in San Francisco to keep supply constrained and home prices high in a few select areas.

Improving any neighborhood makes it more expensive. But overall prices will fall if there are more livable neighborhoods. In this case, other parts of JC will be cheaper if Bayonne is seen as comparably attractive as DT.

4

franciswilliambird t1_je5b7er wrote

yeah maybe though I have a hard time imagining bayonne would ever be more desireable than JC even with better connectivity. But I think the point is doubly true for the real suburbs, what's the point of making their commutes easier if there isn't more housing there? Like if the goal is housing affordability without displacement, improving transport alone just shifts the displacement elsewhere

2

RosaKlebb t1_jeba6rl wrote

Pretty much why it's always been smoke being blown with how realtors for ages have been swearing up and down how "Greenville is going to be the next Williamsburg" and all that other nonsense when so many parts of the city are just a complete unnecessary science project to get to very simple point A-B places with how junk the public transit can be.

I hate to be so cynical but I just don't see much ever really changing despite how the state of public transit doesn't need to be so shit.

1

ohnjaynb t1_je3t9dm wrote

This is exactly why communities will never allow it. Why would someone build a train station in their town to drive up rents and allow the riffraff easy access.

−4