The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build • Hacker News Board

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#31

Post by xnx » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:35 PM UTC

jmyeet wrote: post #11

I've never seen an adequate explanation for why the 5 miles of the Second Avenue Subway cost $19 billion. I've seen blame placed on the cost of stations, 3 in particular. But these collectively amount to less than $2 billion. By comparison, Crossrail in the UK cost a similar amount with a truly massive amount of new track, new tunnels and new stations. London is a reasonable comparison to NYC. London may even be wors…

"How excessive staffing, little competition, generous contracts and archaic rules dramatically inflate capital costs for transit in New York." https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-...

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#32

Post by CensoredInSF » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:36 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #6

This report is basically just advance warning for people who live in NYC to start planning to not have it around. You don't put stuff like this into a final public report unless you think it's the most likely outcome. We know for a fact the US has neither the leadership, funding mechanism nor the incentive structures to actually build for BEYOND those 20 years anyway, so even if they were able to shore things up for…

The new socialists tax you at 40% and then give you no services and a huge payroll of government workers.

Socialism IS the problem.

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#33

Post by kouru225 » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:37 PM UTC

afavour wrote: post #28

downrightmike wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yall are going to need some elevated trains as building underground is just insane.

Ironically NYC used to have an absolute ton. In fact a number of the underground lines we have today were direct replacements for the overhead lines, which were unsightly and very noisy. These days I have to imagine we could create something much quieter but very few people are going to advocate for their sunlight to be blocked by an overhead train line.

We could build something quieter but I don’t think it would be compatible with the rest of the subway system

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#34

Post by kouru225 » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:39 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #14

School-Cotton wrote: post #2

I don’t think anyone needs reminding. Anyone who lives in NYC implicitly understands that we’re stuck with approximately the subway system we have now, forever.

Oh no, it will get far worse. The congestion tolls are both going to send tourists and business fleeing. Manhattan will be a beautiful playground for the people who live there until things start failing.

as if cars are the primary form of transit in NYC. The congestion tolls will make us more reliant on public transit, but that’s exactly the point. We don’t want to build car-centric infrastructure.

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#35

Post by marmaduke » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:40 PM UTC

afavour wrote: post #23

cyberax wrote: post #20

That's the fate of all large cities: infrastructure gets more and more complicated, and bureaucracy always keeps growing. The way to fix it is to stop building large dense cities. We need tax incentives for companies to create jobs in sparsely-populated regions and for remote jobs. Also probably something like cap-and-trade for dense office space. This way, eventually we won't need Downtowns with super-concentrated o…

Nope. NYC’s problems are specific to the city. Take a look at the transit Paris has built in the last decade or so. It’s been built faster and far more cheaply than any MTA project. Cities also appeal to people for reasons other than dense employment opportunities. Small towns are hardly free of bureaucracy. So on and so forth.

In another article about high speed rail, someone pointed out there's a big difference in France: once the govt votes the build, it becomes law and can't be preempted whereas the US, any entity can pause infra projects with a suitable complaint. Perhaps something similar applies to this comparison.

Edit: prolly this too https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37813487 does not apply to Paris

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#36

Post by kouru225 » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:40 PM UTC

decafninja wrote: post #24

ghaff wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>will be a beautiful playground for the people who live there Which is the attitude that a lot of people who live in larger cities have. "I don't want people driving or otherwise coming into my city." But most cities aren't sustainable on that basis.

Someone will inevitably reply that the suburbs are not sustainable and it’s the cities that are propping them up.

This is an objectively true statement. Suburbs do not pay for their own maintenance and cities have to carry their economic weight: https://youtu.be/7Nw6qyyrTeI?si=zYfcwVLx0DYoexnM

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#37

Post by Wowfunhappy » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:41 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #6

This report is basically just advance warning for people who live in NYC to start planning to not have it around. You don't put stuff like this into a final public report unless you think it's the most likely outcome. We know for a fact the US has neither the leadership, funding mechanism nor the incentive structures to actually build for BEYOND those 20 years anyway, so even if they were able to shore things up for…

The author of TFA has another post here: https://pedestrianobservations.com/2022/10/24/the-transit-co...

It concludes:

> The causes of high American (especially New York) costs are institutional, and fixable, without a revolutionary upending of the legal or social system. We can’t tell you how New York can build for the costs of Nuremberg or Turkey, both around $100 million per km, but $200 million per km, slightly higher than Italy and slightly lower than Sweden, is achievable.

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#38

Post by _3u10 » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:41 PM UTC

cyberax wrote: post #20

That's the fate of all large cities: infrastructure gets more and more complicated, and bureaucracy always keeps growing. The way to fix it is to stop building large dense cities. We need tax incentives for companies to create jobs in sparsely-populated regions and for remote jobs. Also probably something like cap-and-trade for dense office space. This way, eventually we won't need Downtowns with super-concentrated o…

Nah it’s North American thing lots of stuff gets built in South America reasonably efficiently, and certainly much more quickly.

Look at how much the Rio subway has expanded recently despite being about the same size as NY

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#39

Post by School-Cotton » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:41 PM UTC

jseliger wrote: post #4

School-Cotton wrote: post #2

I don’t think anyone needs reminding. Anyone who lives in NYC implicitly understands that we’re stuck with approximately the subway system we have now, forever.

Voters don't seem to vote in ways that are consistent with improving subway building functionality.

The problem seems to be with the fundamental structure of how the political/administrative system works, not with a particular party or politician.

Re: The NYC's MTA 20 year needs assessment reminds us they can't build

#40

Post by crazygringo » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 7:43 PM UTC

nerdponx wrote: post #26

Spooky23 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no, it will get far worse. The congestion tolls are both going to send tourists and business fleeing. Manhattan will be a beautiful playground for the people who live there until things start failing.

Tourists don't drive in Manhattan and businesses there don't rely on vehicle traffic. And delivery vehicles are not charged as far as I am aware in the current proposal. The people who will suffer the most are people who drive in for work and suburban families that drive in for weekend day trips. The latter can afford to pay for the privilege. The former tends to be people under-served by transit, which is unfortunat…

> The people who will suffer the most are people who drive in for work and suburban families that drive in for weekend day trips. The latter can afford to pay for the privilege. The former tends to be people under-served by transit

It's even less of a problem than you think.

The people who drive in for work are rich executives and lawyers etc. who can afford to park in Manhattan. Not maids or baristas.

They're not under-served by transit at all. If they wanted, they could commute like most people by driving to the nearest train station and taking the train into the city.