It's time to ban cars from Manhattan? • Hacker News Board

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#71

Post by ido » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:16 AM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #69

maelito wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they want to ban cars due to effects on the environment, they should say that maybe promote electric vehicles. Electric vehicules are usually better than thermal ones, but they're still a big carbon emitter. Except if they're shared. No individual vehicule heavier than 50kg can be considered good in terms of climate impact.

>>Electric vehicules are usually better than thermal ones, but they're still a big carbon emitter My argument here is always that even if all electricity was produced from coal power plants(it isn't) surely it's much better to have one big carbon emitter far outside of the city, than thousands of smaller carbon emitters in the middle of the city. Yes, it is just externalising the emissions, but I think it's important…

Sure, but it's even more important to make a dent in how severe the incoming climate apocalypse will be.

(I'm not against electric vehicles, I'm for aiming most subsidies towards mass transit and cycling infrastructure & most externalities taxation at carbon emitters).

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#72

Post by nightfly » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:16 AM UTC

kachnuv_ocasek wrote: post #59

nightfly wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you ban regular cars you're still gonna have to deal with commercial/emergency vehicles (ambulances, moving vans, delivery trucks for local businesses.

Of which there are orders of magnitude fewer, though.

Yes, but they still need roads. Lots of these plans seem to include re-purposing the roadways, without considering the remaining vehicles that still need roads.

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#73

Post by lifeisstillgood » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:24 AM UTC

mattmanser wrote: post #65

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #64

Cars work because they solve for the first and last mile (50yards) problem. Public transport is great - but it is coarser than private cars. Even timetabled buses cannot drive down every road The "right" solution is presumably "sharing" car stack (no not Uber style sharing). But boy I am not sure the politics or even economics stack up.

Your legs also solve the first and last mile problem.

Most of the comments mentioned very good reasons were legs were an unsuitable solution - carrying art, cameras or other equipment. All of this produces economic value and cannot realistically be carried 5 blocks.

If you are an able bodied 20-something then public transport already solves the transport of your body.

But it's not just for transporting an adult - it's for children, economics and more

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#74

Post by manigandham » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:24 AM UTC

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #64

Cars work because they solve for the first and last mile (50yards) problem. Public transport is great - but it is coarser than private cars. Even timetabled buses cannot drive down every road The "right" solution is presumably "sharing" car stack (no not Uber style sharing). But boy I am not sure the politics or even economics stack up.

"Last mile" refers to actual miles of distance which usually requires cars. 50 yards is very walkable. Nobody would have a problem with public transit if it was that close.

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#75

Post by Isinlor » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:27 AM UTC

afarrell wrote: post #56

acd wrote: post #52

I think cars should be banned from most densely populated city centers in general. There is a word describing it "Pedestrianization" Reasoning: Cars pollute the air which makes the people living and walking in the city centers sick. Cars pollute with noise. Cars cause pedestrian and bicycle accidents. Its nice for peoples health to be able to walk and run in open areas. Streets which previously was used by cars can b…

What does someone do if they twist their ankle badly and are on crutches for a month?

You could use "electric mobility scooter"; In Netherlands they are widely available for people with the need.

https://www.google.com/search?q=electric+mobility+scooter+di...

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#76

Post by capableweb » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:32 AM UTC

nightfly wrote: post #72

kachnuv_ocasek wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of which there are orders of magnitude fewer, though.

Yes, but they still need roads. Lots of these plans seem to include re-purposing the roadways, without considering the remaining vehicles that still need roads.

No, not at least what I have seen. Even in the thread you are now answering in, there is examples (https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/sep/18/paradise-life...) where a mostly-car street turned into a mostly-pedestrian street, with still the option for vehicle to travel if they must.

Same if you take a look at the Superilles (Superblocks) in Barcelona (http://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/superilles/es/), they still have a way for vehicles to navigate, but the space for them is much smaller and has a lower limit of speed.

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#77

Post by speedplane » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:39 AM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #60

speedplane wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Manhattan also has a lot of fairly wealthy people driving, or even being chauffeured, on routes that have perfectly usable transit that they'd just rather not use. The classicist subtext you allude to above has no place in NYC transportation policy, and will likely make inequality worse. If you want to make the rich pay their fair share, then raise income or wealth taxes. A multi-millionaire won't be fazed by a $10…

The proposal in the linked article isn't a congestion charge, but to just pedestrianize many roads in Manhattan. I agree with you that congestion charges aren't an ideal solution for a bunch of reasons, one being that affluent people can just pay their $10 and drive through, as you note. Another problem with them is that congestion charges don't really make roads safe for non-automobile road users, in the way that pe…

> What annoys me personally about rich Manhattan types with cars is mostly their political influence. Fewer than a quarter of Manhattanites own cars, but the ones that do have historically been disproportionately well connected in local Democratic machine politics.

I've lived in Manhattan pretty much forever and don't own a car. Most "rich" people I know in this borough are rich because they bought an apartment in the 1970s and are now millionaires on paper based on their apartments current value. They may have outsized influence, but they've also lived here for a long time. While I can understand your irritation, they are not exactly an insignificant constituency (22% of a population is not trivial).

The super rich have always been in NYC, and will be able to get around however they want. Transportation policy should not mix with classicism on either side.

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#78

Post by maccam94 » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:43 AM UTC

erik_seaberg wrote: post #47

rocqua wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Induced demand means that more roads won't fix traffic. It will however, mean more people get to travel. There is real value in that.

Latent demand does exist (not "induced", it was always there!) but it isn't infinite. There's a point where you could actually have enough supply. They just don't want to spend that much money and knock down that many buildings (give up Manhattan's density), so they say it wouldn't work.

Demand is only limited by travel time. The amount of traffic will rise to the maximum amount of time people are willing to endure reaching their destination.

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#79

Post by pjc50 » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:45 AM UTC

afarrell wrote: post #56

acd wrote: post #52

I think cars should be banned from most densely populated city centers in general. There is a word describing it "Pedestrianization" Reasoning: Cars pollute the air which makes the people living and walking in the city centers sick. Cars pollute with noise. Cars cause pedestrian and bicycle accidents. Its nice for peoples health to be able to walk and run in open areas. Streets which previously was used by cars can b…

What does someone do if they twist their ankle badly and are on crutches for a month?

I know this sounds like a killer argument, and I don't know Manhattan, but in most of the cities I've been to you can't take a private car direct to a destination, park it nearby, and walk a short distance. The streets are already no-parking zones.

Re: It's time to ban cars from Manhattan?

#80

Post by speedplane » Sun, Oct 06, 2019, 9:45 AM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #68

speedplane wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And, it seems to have worked, at least from early indications! Buses now move much faster! The speed of buses is not the appropriate metric by which we should be evaluating policy. Speedy empty buses are not exactly a win. Instead, we should be asking how much time and money does it take to get from point A to B.

I agree, though weighted by actual people moved, not per-vehicle. A guess: I'd be very surprised if speeding up the buses doesn't end up a net win here, given the density. In fact I believe that was evaluated in the proposal to make this change, but I haven't read it. I have been reading some preliminary proposals for new bus lanes in Washington, DC, and on the 16th St corridor there (which is less dense than Manhatt…

> I'd be very surprised if speeding up the buses doesn't end up a net win here, given the density.

I'm not so sure, especially on 14th street. 14th Street is one of the few east-west streets that has decent crosstown subway service, the L train. Even with faster buses, I suspect it's still faster to hop on the train to get across 14th than to take a bus.

But this doesn't have to be an rhetorical argument, it can be clearly backed by data. If, in 6 months, the MTA shows that more people are moving more quickly across 14th St than before the car ban, I'd support it. If it can't show that, I'll be against it. If it just says that its buses are moving faster without citing the number of people moved, I'd be very suspicious.