Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

George4Mayor86 t1_j094lr2 wrote

Turns out transit and density are good. Shocking.

44

Miser t1_j09dami wrote

And r/micromobilityNYC of course. Bikes and scooters are the most eco-friendly vehicles on the planet and over a million people ride here regularly

0

TheZenArcher t1_j0baxyp wrote

fwiw I think trains and buses the major operating factor in this particular instance. Bikes and scooters are extremely important, but I don't think adoption rates are high enough to sway the data on this particular graph (compared with walking and transit)

8

chargeorge t1_j09qsma wrote

Ditmas park is an interesting one. Lots of money and big old houses make for lots o carbon

12

oreosfly t1_j09yosk wrote

America really has a missing middle when it comes to housing. You're either stuck living crammed on top of each other in a dense urban core or you're living in spread out suburban towns where you need to drive to buy a Kit Kat. It really should not be a choice between claustrophobic clusterfucks and endless strip malls, but that's pretty much it in the US.

I'm pretty sick of living around so many damn people, yet I would also like to live somewhere where my non-driving partner has the opportunity to get around without me. At this point it's pretty much a debate of what shit you're willing to put up with more - which is quite sad when you think about it.

In college I lived in a complex of duplexes, SFH, and rowhomes, along with a shuttle bus that ran to campus. It was a great combination of being able to get away from other people yet having campus always accessible - I often see that living situation as the one I enjoyed the most, but such a thing isn't really available when you're not a student anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_middle_housing

9

snowbeast93 t1_j0bj4cr wrote

This isn’t quite true in the NYC metro region, there are so many walkable town centers spread out along the various commuter train lines. The towns in NJ and the Hudson Valley do a great job of offering both nice apartment buildings and single family homes without too much sprawl. Connecticut is a different story though.

8

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_j0e5fcs wrote

> both nice apartment buildings and single family homes

Missing middle is...between these and those towns aren't new-building any of it

1

snowbeast93 t1_j0e7vjn wrote

??? What do you mean? There are plenty of new apartment buildings in those areas, not to mention the spread of density surrounding Manhattan. Downtown Brooklyn and Long Island City are practically unrecognizable compared to just a decade ago due to all of the new residential buildings, and the same can be said of Jersey City. Even Harrison, NJ is a major commuter town/transit-oriented development that has exploded in the past couple of years.

There’s lots more to do but there are countless projects in the NYC region that are filling in the gaps.

1

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_j0e92tt wrote

I was more thinking about Westchester County and non-NYC Long Island.

1

snowbeast93 t1_j0eat22 wrote

Long Island is a total trainwreck so I definitely agree with you there, they are insistent that there is no new residential being built along the LIRR corridors, it's nuts

1

Past-Passenger9129 t1_j0a9raf wrote

It's not just driving. Product and goods distribution, trash, water, sewer, electricity, transportation, etc, etc. Density is good.

The trick is to find a happy balance.

The utopia of a homogeneous university is not a real life comparison.

5

oreosfly t1_j0aaiyb wrote

The idea I meant to convey was one where moderate density housing surrounds an easily accessible town core. In this case, the campus is the core where everything is. No such thing really exists here. In America you're either in a city or you're out in the sprawl. There's no middle ground. Thus you are forced to decide what you're willing to give up when deciding on a place to live

8

Past-Passenger9129 t1_j0afk22 wrote

I get it and I don't disagree. But the problem with the university model is that the campus doesn't house the staff and goods production needed to support the community, and the staff and goods production that is required to support them. It's an unrealistic model.

0

mowotlarx t1_j097e6k wrote

That little orange cluster in Bay Ridge is where all the McMansions are located. Lawns, multiple SUVs per household, massive houses with two few people in them. Truly the worst.

8

lightinvestor t1_j0byu1v wrote

It's interesting that suburbs are worse across the board even compared to places in the middle of nowhere where you have to drive 30 minutes to go to the supermarket.

8

FedishSwish OP t1_j0bzldb wrote

I think that's because income has a pretty large impact on how the climate impact was calculated. You have to be wealthier to live in the suburbs than to live in rural areas, which means you likely buy more stuff, travel more, etc.

7

Die-Nacht t1_j0djvbd wrote

The suburbs is the worst of both world: the amenities of the city but spread out over a larger area, increasing the number of resources each person consumes.

Rural, by comparison, doesn't have the same amount of amenities. So overall, they consume much, much less.

This report also looks at things like, how many flights the person takes. A suburbanite will take a lot more than a rural person.

2

Die-Nacht t1_j0djvxt wrote

The suburbs is the worst of both world: the amenities of the city but spread out over a larger area, increasing the number of resources each person consumes.

Rural, by comparison, doesn't have the same amount of amenities. So overall, they consume much, much less.

This report also looks at things like, how many flights the person takes. A suburbanite will take a lot more than a rural person.

1

josepapiblanco t1_j0c6obs wrote

So we should sink Long Island right?

7

cdavidg4 t1_j0cdupp wrote

They way things are going it's sinking itself.

4

kapuasuite t1_j0cmxrn wrote

The best thing we can do, unfortunately, is make room for them all to live here instead.

1

josepapiblanco t1_j0cr5im wrote

That’s not gonna work for either party

0

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_j0e52nt wrote

Yes it will. 20% or more of LI is young people wanting a city life pushed out there cause city life is too expensive. Child free living is more popular than ever. Make city rent cheaper by building more units and they move here and some likely ditch their cars in the process, making traffic better. If they're child free, they contribute to taxes but not education spending = better services.

−1

Economy_Craft_3254 t1_j0awsh4 wrote

We need to build dense housing and not McMansions. We need better public transit including a good national rail system. It’s a tragedy that housing is seen by many as in investment; driving prices through the roof.

6

D14DFF0B t1_j0bic75 wrote

When I say "ban cars" it's because of this. Cars are an existential threat to the planet.

4

BarbaraJames_75 t1_j0b9574 wrote

Interesting, bits of orange in Midwood and Marine Park? Alot of green at Holy Cross Cemetery, it seems.

2

FedishSwish OP t1_j0c94ld wrote

Within the city the color variation mostly seems to fall along income lines. Higher income areas are more yellow/orange, lower income areas are more green. Not 1:1, necessarily, but a trend.

2

Olegovich t1_j0a64h3 wrote

Mental gymnastics : the post

1

tyen0 t1_j0e0fh9 wrote

No, this is from the times.

1

Olegovich t1_j0e2en3 wrote

Too bad the air in the city is so shitty / smoggy in reality compared to these “terrible polluting” outer suburbs and rural areas

0

tyen0 t1_j0e2y5b wrote

I don't know what that has to do with my silly post/times joke, but yeah, I agree. I have coughing fits when I walk around some parts of the city due to the exhaust fumes. People illegally idling in their cars waiting for the street sweeper especially annoy me.

2

Olegovich t1_j0e49sz wrote

Yeah, and the biggest culprit is actually all the skyscrapers and the HVAC exhaust too. I love leaving the city and breathing fresh air like “oh yeah - THIS is what it’s supposed to be like” lol

1

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_j0e5r9r wrote

Source for the biggest culprit being skyscrapers?

1

Olegovich t1_j0ehce8 wrote

https://nyc-ghg-inventory.cusp.nyu.edu/

I also work in Architecture

Logically speaking, think about the amount of energy being used by these office buildings. Constant cooling / heating or even server farms running 24/7

https://rmi.org/new-york-emits-more-building-air-pollution-than-any-other-state/

1