TeamMisha t1_jdrq41o wrote

I remember the multiple surveys the MTA launched the past 1 to 2 years felt like they were pushing you to rank safety issues and the entire focus was safety, but for me it has never changed being about service and reliability. I don't care if every station has a cop in it, what I care about is waiting 12 minutes for an N or R train, or god forbid I need to travel on the weekends and waiting up to 20 minutes.


TeamMisha t1_jdrphif wrote

Demolition is not an option, NYSDOT (state DOT) owns the highway itself meaning NYC can't unilaterally decide to tear it down, close it, or reduce lanes. This study is basically a band aid to look at mitigation measures (like capping) while not addressing the vehicles on the highway itself, so I doubt any measures which significantly change conditions on the highway will be proposed.


TeamMisha t1_jdrnqe0 wrote

I understand why this has to be done but the original timeline is insane, how does it take multiple years to basically pile up dirt? They built the Empire State Building in just over ONE year and it'll take 2 years to shovel fucking dirt and redo some lawns? This is why people get enraged, it's absolute insanity. This should be something they could finish in less than a year by starting in the autumn and do all the groundwork before freeze conditions. If you go in and tell people say goodbye to your park for literally 3 summers (we know it'll be delayed past 2025), of course they're gonna be upset


TeamMisha t1_jdeiq9x wrote

So the building is 121 years old and it makes me wonder if it'd be better/cheaper to just raze it and build a replica/similar style in its place using modern materials with perhaps apartments or event space (better for the odd floor plates maybe?). This is a good thought experiment moment on the nature of landmark preservation. If the interiors and facades are gut renovated anyways, is it still really the same building? If you completely rebuilt it you could make a new building that'll last another 100 years instead of constantly repairing the current one.


TeamMisha t1_jdeg7ew wrote

Absolutely. The transit planning sweet spot is usually a max of about 1/2 mile away from a transit station. While Queens has a lot of subway deserts, if you took all the areas just 1/2 mile from the lines it does have, there's a fuck ton of space, plus Woodside LIRR, and even Astoria on the N has a lot of untapped space too. What I mean to say is, yeah there is a lot of neighborhoods, especially in eastern Queens, that upzoning won't be as desirable, but we're no where close to realizing the existing potential. IBX may add even more areas, and also the potential LIRR station re-activation in Elmhurst one day. Woodside itself is hugely untapped, if you look at other contemporary cities, the areas near major transfer hubs are usually very developed, and Woodside is desirable since you can take one of a number of LIRR lines into Manhattan.


TeamMisha t1_jdefbu8 wrote

The only people nowadays looking to fill weird office space is maybe WeWork, this is gonna be riskier than investing in a quality, newer building that is in a better state of repairs and can more reliably attract tenants. Idt potential tenants are gonna be super keen to be stuck in a building with scaffolding blocking windows and endless reno work on it lol


TeamMisha t1_jbudgtv wrote

The cost will only keep going up. It's a valid question do we just plunge ahead anyways? The 2nd Ave did get opened after all, should we cease any expansions to the subway ever, or expand (at great cost)? I don't know the right answer, the costs are absurd and ideally work would be done now to reduce these costs through corruption investigations and reworking how the MTA does bidding and contracts. It also raises an interesting equity question, we spent all this money to connect the UES with the Second Ave Subway, plus largely white suburbanites with ESA, where's the billions to connect more minority neighborhoods like Harlem, and the future expansion to the Bronx?


TeamMisha t1_jbud0jd wrote

> someone explain how congestion pricing helps the MTA money problem

The legislation passed by the New York State Legislature mandates that the CBD tolling (congestion pricing) raise $1 billion per year that must go to the MTA's Capital Budget. The Capital Budget is what funds projects and construction, such as this proposed extension.

> Other than the net positive of reducing emissions, which could be achieved in a 1000 other ways

I think you are vastly underestimating the solutions available. Do you believe the city has unlimited money to convert private resident's vehicles into electric vehicles to address emissions? Also, one of the two primary goals of CBD Tolling is reduce congestion, which cannot be done easily either. You need an incentive to get people to not want to drive into the city. Either you make it physically impossible or harder to drive in (which will receive complaining and bitching, of course), or you enact a real cost to reduce trips into the CBD. The multi-year long Environmental Assessment analyzing CBD tolling was based on several goals, I cannot remember the exact numbers but I think it was around a 10% to 15% reduction in vehicles and vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) inside the CBD cordon zone, which are arguably real, quantifiable, net positives for the CBD. Hope that helps a little.


TeamMisha t1_jbub8jt wrote

I'm gonna fit the trope of how NYers always complain, but I can't help it, why does it feel like we're waiting unnecessarily fucking long for updated cars? Between both the LIRR and MTA it seems never ending. Look at the M9s, Kawasaki had the contract in 2013, and it took seven years before M9s were actually able to be ridden lol, is that really normal?


TeamMisha t1_jb7lay0 wrote

Another post cherry picking from that and the bike sub like the top reply to this comment does often. We can do the same with this sub and its asinine comments about car culture. Can't we be more civil? What does this hostility achieve? Is your goal to paint all cyclists as evil? You went out of your way to find that post, why?


TeamMisha t1_jb7kikn wrote

Why not regulate the batteries (as the city council is in the process of doing)? Many average people safely use ebikes too, cargo ebikes are becoming more and more popular with families to transport children around. A blanket ban seems excessive and heavy handed and cutting off a good transportation method. I feel like quality ebikes are an underrated method of helping people in subway deserts


TeamMisha t1_jb7fpyr wrote

> NW is trash now

Yep I mean they don't call the N the 'never' for nothing! Even during RUSH hours, I'm consistently hitting gaps where I'm waiting 7, 8, even 10 minutes for a train. Why are we still constantly getting cancelled trains? Insult to injury they cut R service too, so even if you're lucky enough to live in the parts of Astoria where you're equidistant to both lines, the R is no saving grace. Plus no M service on weekends by us, so you are STILL waiting minimum of 12-15 minutes on the weekends whether you go to something on the N or say Steinway St.