Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jcliment t1_j310pw7 wrote

Reply to comment by actualtext in Traffic study by former head of NYC DOT reveals what he says is ultimate cause of congestion by HEIMDVLLR

Protected bike lines. More of them.

14

actualtext t1_j31p5j5 wrote

That will provide alternative transit options but I don't believe it will make a meaningful dent in traffic congestion. But it's something the DOT should do regardless.

7

jcliment t1_j31ppod wrote

Traffic congestion is a problem of induced demand. With more protected bike lanes more people will bike around the areas where they exist and mobility will improve. The remaining car lanes will be congested no matter how small or large the amount.

I lived in NYC for 10 years and all of them i used my bike(s), and all the conversations i had when i encouraged other people to do the same were encountered with fear of biking in the city due to traffic and bike lanes not being safe.

3

actualtext t1_j31tlpt wrote

Protected bike lanes and more bike lanes in general will lead to more biking. But will it lead to a meaningful decrease in traffic? I'm not talking about eliminating traffic altogether. And emphasis on "meaningful". It's possible that this is all that is within the purview of the DOT. But my point in my original comment that I was trying to illustrate is that the DOT isn't really going to be the department where we see meaningful impact on traffic congestion.

I do think reducing taxis of all sorts would definitely lead to less traffic. That would fall under TLC.

I think more and improved public transit options would lead to more people opting to use it. Increasing tolls into the city would also have an impact. Those would fall under the MTA which falls under the state. The NYC DOT can help here as it pertains to bus lanes.

There's the city ferry system that might also have some impact but I personally think it's a huge waste of money for the amount of people it can take and what we're spending but nonetheless it's a city controlled service.

I think more bike lanes (regardless if they protect them all) will be minimal to the impact the other options will have on traffic congestion.

6

jcliment t1_j31u1y6 wrote

Again, the congestion is a problem of induced demand. You believe that less taxis will lead to less traffic. How so? And why more bike lanes, which means less people using cars, will not achieve the same results?

−4

actualtext t1_j31vxqx wrote

There are a bunch of taxis that are often idle in the streets or just driving around looking for hails via apps. And they make up a substantial portion of car traffic. Even before the pandemic, there was complaining because the number of taxis increased and was impacting public transit ridership. The city froze the number of TLC licenses because it was actually causing less people to take public transit. This was all pre-pandemic. So yes I do believe that reducing taxis would force more people to take the subway and reduce traffic in the process in a much more meaningful way than bike lanes.

8

jcliment t1_j31wgpq wrote

Or would encourage people to take their car because there will be "less traffic".

Without meaningful alternatives (more bike lanes, more MTA options) many studies tell us that removing taxis (or any other way of only reducing cars) is not a viable solution.

1