Pet peeve: how do you "reduce traffic by 3x"? Shouldn't this be "reduce traffic by 66%"
Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
71–80 of 187 posts
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#72The article doesn't make the claim in this headline. It makes the claim that NYC could theoretically have 3x fewer cabs. @dang
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are cultural reasons why what works in Europe won't work in most of the US. If I can't take my car or park for a reasonable fee, I simply won't go somewhere and most of the people I know are the same.
People are very adaptive
People are also very averse to chance.
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#74Any city building high-throughput transit corridors should take this into account. I think carpooling and on-demand, self-driven vehicles can help.
Some adjustments might include putting stations further away from each other, so total travel time decreases. If your last mile is solved by carpooling, you can go an extra block to get on a train / subway / etc.
Some transit agencies might even consider including these vehicles as part of their overall offering, especially if that replaces "park and ride". That land near stations is more valuable when developed with something other than a parking lot.
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#75I find the focus on congestion within the transport space to be perplexing. I'm guessing it is to do with the visibility of congestion. Waze recently did a survey and identified the Netherlands as the best place to drive ( https://www.waze.com/driverindex ). The Netherlands is also the only western country with a negative obesity trend expected to hit 8% by 2030, currently at 10% vs the UK's 25%. The USA I believe is…
I love the cycling idea, but for big chunks of the US it couldn't work. I live in Austin and ride my bicycle to work whenever I can, however my office has showers. Without showers here, I'd never do it (and would hope that nobody else would either).
Frankly though, the obesity problem is almost entirely about diet. More exercise would be great, but wouldn't address the actual problem.
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
NYC's problem is also distance. Depending on where you're coming from biking could take 1.5-2hrs each way. I enjoy it but the problem is with extreme rising housing costs people are pushed further and further. Though to be honest, a SAFE biking lane system would be a much welcome gift in NYC. Currently in certain areas I have to work doubly hard to not get killed daily.
Which is really a function of rent control. NYC heavily subsidizes a retired population while discouraging ultra high density development. Further, after changing jobs it's often better not to move. So, you sacrifice density on people who don't have a economic incentive for living in the city, discourage short commutes, and discourages increasing density. ED: Yes, that includes Rent Stabilized.
Huh? Rent Control apartments only represent 1.2% of the total rental stock in the New York City. That is as of 2014 and so its likely less now as that number only ticks down. How is that heavily subsidizing a retired population?
http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/hpd/downloads/pdf/2014-HVS-initia...
Also the idea of people paying peanuts for a rent controlled apartment is largely a myth. It is discussed in detail in this article:
http://citylimits.org/2015/03/09/nycs-endangered-species-a-r...
From the above article:
"Olive Freud, a retired schoolteacher, and her husband, Edgar, a retired engineer, also pay more than $2,000 a month in rent for their rent-controlled, two-bedroom unit on West 72nd Street"
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#77I find the focus on congestion within the transport space to be perplexing. I'm guessing it is to do with the visibility of congestion. Waze recently did a survey and identified the Netherlands as the best place to drive ( https://www.waze.com/driverindex ). The Netherlands is also the only western country with a negative obesity trend expected to hit 8% by 2030, currently at 10% vs the UK's 25%. The USA I believe is…
I love the cycling idea, but for big chunks of the US it couldn't work. I live in Austin and ride my bicycle to work whenever I can, however my office has showers. Without showers here, I'd never do it (and would hope that nobody else would either). Frankly though, the obesity problem is almost entirely about diet. More exercise would be great, but wouldn't address the actual problem.
showers are part of cycling infrastructure I guess.
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is really a function of rent control. NYC heavily subsidizes a retired population while discouraging ultra high density development. Further, after changing jobs it's often better not to move. So, you sacrifice density on people who don't have a economic incentive for living in the city, discourage short commutes, and discourages increasing density. ED: Yes, that includes Rent Stabilized.
Huh? Rent Control apartments only represent 1.2% of the total rental stock in the New York City. That is as of 2014 and so its likely less now as that number only ticks down. How is that heavily subsidizing a retired population? http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/hpd/downloads/pdf/2014-HVS-initia... Also the idea of people paying peanuts for a rent controlled apartment is largely a myth. It is discussed in detail in this art…
To qualify for "Rent Control" the apartments must be occupied since July 1, 1971 so that 1.2% is effectively 100% retired people.
Further 1,030,000 units are "Rent Stabilized". However, "Rent Stabilized" is really just another type of Rent Controlled with different rules.
PS: From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_control_in_New_York Non-regulated 2011: 39.1%.
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
NYC's problem is also distance. Depending on where you're coming from biking could take 1.5-2hrs each way. I enjoy it but the problem is with extreme rising housing costs people are pushed further and further. Though to be honest, a SAFE biking lane system would be a much welcome gift in NYC. Currently in certain areas I have to work doubly hard to not get killed daily.
Which is really a function of rent control. NYC heavily subsidizes a retired population while discouraging ultra high density development. Further, after changing jobs it's often better not to move. So, you sacrifice density on people who don't have a economic incentive for living in the city, discourage short commutes, and discourages increasing density. ED: Yes, that includes Rent Stabilized.
In NYC rent control refers to a program that freezes rents. It is all but gone, with less than 2% of rental units still in the program. Rent stabilization is a much bigger program that limits rent increases. That program has about 45% of rental units in it. Though it is worth noting that in many parts of the outer boros the market rent is less than the legally mandated rent stabilized rent, and so rent stabilization doesn't end up meaning much.
While I think eliminating rent stabilization would help, it isn't a magic bullet. What's really needed is more units. As compared to many other cities NYC is decent about greenlighting new units, but they can do better.
First, they need to reign in an out of control landmark process. Individual buildings are one thing, but when they start designating entire neighborhoods it is a problem. Second, there's some significant upzoning that can still happen. Related to the first point, it is one thing to preserve the character of parts of Greenwich Village that are quite nice, and another to preserve the character of the east village. The character of the east village is ugly dense housing. You can best honor that legacy by building modern ugly dense housing instead of "preserving" century plus old ugly dense housing. Third, the housing lottery is a affordable housing theater (a la security theater). It is a waste of everyone's time. Fourth, the city and state should not be putting their thumbs on the scale in negotiations between construction unions and developers. Construction unions have quite enough bargaining power as it is. Higher construction costs push developers towards luxury units. Fifth, the city needs to do its part in terms of developing infrastructure -- above all public transit, but also schools, water, sewage, etc.
Re: Study: carpooling apps could reduce traffic 3x in NYC
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this in Tokyo. Americans just stuck at home, stranded and helpless because of their culturally reasons. Oh no wait they just use the awesome public transport system. But it's very difficult for them to enjoy such efficience because...you..know...culture
Huh? Americans don't have a cultural aversion to using world class public transit when in a place like Tokyo. They have a cultural aversion to altering their cities in the radical ways that'd be necessary to build a functional public transit. They call this NIMBY.
A lot of Americans (in my anecdotal experience) have a very negative view of public transit. It's what you take when you are too poor or desperate to have a car. Chicken/egg, that's how it ends up, particularly in smaller metro areas (not your major cities, but cities).
I currently live in Seattle, and when I met guests and said we'd be taking the bus to my house (which involved a walk of about a block in good weather, with a bus line that ran every ~15 mins, would get us there in 30 mins, and I was covering the $3.50/person) they refused and called a $45 cab (they paid) to take the trip (still took 30 mins - the bus was an express).
I'm willing to bet a lot of city dwellers that DON'T use their public transit system have this negative view. They got it from somewhere else, brought it with them, and have no personal experience to change it. This will certainly impact how they vote on things like paying for transit and managing lines and stations.
From my own experience, I've lived in a place were the bus coverage was pretty good, but they ran in circles and were infrequent. So going from Point A to Point B might take 20 mins with a bus that came every 1.5 hours, but going from Point B to Point A would take over an hour, on that same bus that came every 1.5 hours. In another place (Richmond, VA) the coverage was TERRIBLE. Going to work from my apt (roughly 5 miles away) meant that I had a bus with 2 time slots I could catch (one at 6 something am and the other at 7 something - no buses ran after that until end of workday), it would take over an hour to make the trip, the bus was loud, smelly, and bouncy (I was unable to read on that bus, but have no such issues in Seattle), and if I had to work past 6pm, I had no transit options to get home, nor if something caused me to want to get home before the end of the workday. Needless to say, while there I drove myself and contributed to the traffic, parking, and environmental problems. I haven't even mentioned the other passengers on the bus, but let's just say all of us on the bus probably were on it for lack of other options. Very few people "elected" to take the bus, they were forced to.