It's a gift link, so there shouldn't be a paywall.

Turns out transit and density are good. Shocking.

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.

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

[deleted]

Gotta love the new puritans.

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

We’ll look at that, the Top 3 posts are hating on cars.

What does that mean I’m curious

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

Thank you

Mental gymnastics : the post

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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)

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

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.

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.

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.

So we should sink Long Island right?

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.

They way things are going it's sinking itself.

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

That’s not gonna work for either party

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.

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.

No, this is from the times.

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

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.

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

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.

It could, just expand the missing middle zone.

> both nice apartment buildings and single family homes

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

Source for the biggest culprit being skyscrapers?

Correct

??? 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.

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

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

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/

It seems the use of gas/oil heaters is the biggest problem here

Electricity, Fuel Oil, and Gas.

What you think I'm saying, I'm saying.

Very new York answer but im still confused