Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't decide to make things high density out of the blue. People have to WANT to live there.
Cheap + quick commute to downtown takes care of that.
There is only a downtown if there are jobs there.
How far can you get in 40 minutes from each subway station in NYC?
201–207 of 207 posts
Re: How far can you get in 40 minutes from each subway station in NYC?
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just imagine if the public could capture the (financial) upside it produces... Like through taxes on the sale of the property or the increased business income it produces? The public will.
No, taxes on the unimproved value of the land
Property taxes include that, generally.
Re: How far can you get in 40 minutes from each subway station in NYC?
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just imagine if the public could capture the (financial) upside it produces... Like through taxes on the sale of the property or the increased business income it produces? The public will.
In a lot of places, due to tax revolts there are now property tax caps which effectively prevent this from happening.
Then the people have spoken. They can speak again and differently if they like.
Re: How far can you get in 40 minutes from each subway station in NYC?
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just imagine if the public could capture the (financial) upside it produces... Like through taxes on the sale of the property or the increased business income it produces? The public will.
This typically goes to the higher level of government. Not the local one that manage and build that transit system.
Why should the transit system butt into the jurisdiction of the traditional government just because transit is built somewhere?
As a silly dystopia, imagine that a transit agency could grab revenue as you suggest it might. Then everything becomes a transit land grab.
Re: How far can you get in 40 minutes from each subway station in NYC?
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
And also they have much less capacity than mass transit systems like a subway, so they are bad for most commuters who tend to travel at rush hour[1]. I guess they are great in tourist areas though. [1] In my experience, at least in the cities where I have lived
Worse in the outskirts, but better in the town center if you can hop off every couple 100m without 2 escalators/staircases
You could argue trams are more romantic. That is probably the major advantage.
I'd argue there are some limited places where classical trams on the road make sense, like some down town district. But you get almost the same utility with busses, passenger flow per lane is lower with busses, for a lot less money.
Re: How far can you get in 40 minutes from each subway station in NYC?
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
The highest frequency subway lines do 3 mins at peak, which is amazing.
There’s a tram line in Dublin which hits every three minutes at peak times, which is just bonkers (it’s not fully segregated, so if there’s any traffic problem at all then about four of them end up piled up one behind the other). Its most busy section was meant to be converted to metro, but due to planning permission nonsense it will just continue to be one of the world’s busiest tram lines until at least 2040 (it is…
Trams running every two to three minutes on a few central sections is nothing out of the ordinary in a number of tram systems.
Re: How far can you get in 40 minutes from each subway station in NYC?
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if there was a way to calculate how many more passengers they could serve if they had faster trains?
You just have to look at the peak ridership figures from 1949. They're running well under the capacity the system could handle 75 years ago. Faster trains aren't necessary.
The population of New York City in 1949 was 14,892,000
It's definitely under capacity by that metric.
https://www.wnyc.org/story/subway-ridership-hits-65-year-hig...
The only issue is that then it arguably had a much larger tax base than it does now to fund it.