People Who Live In Suburbs: Classy, Icky, or Dudes?

what light rail are you talking about lg? hoboken?

Also, rail infrastructure frees up buses to provide more service beyond the highest-ridership corridors.

Where is "here"?

Yeah, max. The one from Hoboken to JC to...Bayonne?? It was supposed to open up tons of housing to commuters from places the PATH didn't reach -- did that ever really happen?

I mean, yeah, if light rail (or any other mass transit system) is poorly implemented, then of course it's not going to be useful.

I've seen a lot of confusion about what constitutes a suburb, so I present to you, the definitive suburb

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C00cNNGbQWM

(also the best way of traveling around in a suburb)

well if it doesn't work in jersey then we might as well give up

lol

Rly? Given the amount of digging/upheaval/expense involved, I pretty much figure no new train lines will ever be dug in NYC. It just doesn't seem practical at all when there are perfectly good streets to run buses on.

― Back up the lesbian canoe (Laurel), Monday, April 25, 2011 6:02 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah i was gonna say unless there are existing right-of-way type things for rail lines it doesn't really work like that!

― call all destroyer, Monday, April 25, 2011 6:12 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I'm pretty sure they can take over land to build new/extend train lines, that's what they did here in Chicago recently for new stations and have kicked it around for future system expansions. Obviously way costly, but it can be done.

― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Monday, April 25, 2011 6:14 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

if you can dig under yorkville, you can dig in brooklyn. it's always been a combo of 'we're not willing to find/spend the money' + 'we can't build subways half as cheap as other developed countries for some mysterious reason' + 'nimbyism'

I posted about this on the bridge thread, but: http://transit.frumin.net/trx/TriboroRX

this is sorta the next logical step and the right of ways already exist. the MTA has even kinda once acknowledged the existence of the idea, not that they'll have the budget to even think about these things anytime soon.

I respect your bus-love laurel but the density in the far outer boroughs is way beyond what should be handled by buses alone. like, forget brooklyn - the borough of queens is denser than san francisco - would you be arguing that sf shouldn't build transit beyond buses if muni/bart didn't exist? and when multiple buslines in brooklyn have more ridership than other cities entire transit systems, well...and yeah it's expensive but it's the kinda expensive that's worth it - infrastructure that creates economic value and lasts 100 years.

also they make the streets marginally more unfriendly to cars, which is a plus imo

― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Monday, April 25, 2011 6:26 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

lol otm

here read this old article and look at the dreamy maps : http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/05/07/streetcars-for-brooklyn-a-new-life/

course, they just vetoed the red hook one

Another thing about streetcars vs LR: streetcars can take steeper grades, which is a big deal in Seattle when everything is at the top or bottom of a hill. When the First Hill streetcar is up and running, it will be able to provide street-level mass-transit service to First Hill & Capitol Hill (two of the densest neighborhoods in the city), whereas the only light rail station in those areas will be a single subway station deep under Cap Hill, because the light rail has to go under Seattle's hills, not over them.

more like shite rail

Listen, you've got me all wrong. I like buses, but buses are basically just big cars and I KNOW cars. But when I moved to NY, I had barely ever been on a train, only for one trip in my whole life, we had no passenger rail of any kind where I'm from, and trains were magical to me. Still are. I am all for trains of any description.

I don't dislike light rail, I just don't really understand it and I've only ever been on one system, and at the time, it didn't appear to GO anywhere that people rly needed. I think the system has been expanded since then, and looking it up today gave me the desire to go and spend a day just riding all 20 miles of it.

'why is there not a train that goes directly from my front porch to my sister's front door? idgi'

u r the perfect ilxor

there absolutely could and should be a train you should take for those trips.

what trips are these again?

from your porch to your sisters front door

iirc laurel sometimes leaves her house in brooklyn, to visit other parts of brooklyn, it is called brooklyning

i don't even have a porch SHOWS WHAT U KNO

xp The New York Times is going to do an article on it soon probably.

so like public trans trips that would be made shorter by connecting 2 existing rail lines?? or??

Well, no...new train lines that would travel horizontally across the boroughs connecting points east and west, not just running north-south into Manhattan, which is what most of them do now.

granny are you drunk

i don't understand how that's different from me wanting to go from my porch to my sister's door is the thing

laurel I think there's an important difference between 'lol I guess this is the best we can do...' light-rail and 'our small european town probably doesn't need a 10 line subway system, but hey isn't this nice' light-rail.

'gold coast' jersey is crazy dense, could easily support more heavy rail in a world where stuff like that happened - esp if it were better integrated w/ the ny subway system. a la the imaginary 7 train extension. so yeah the light-rail seems kinda shitty in comparison, but if you had to live there right now it's surely better than the alternative.

It's weird, I've lived in cities, old suburbs, and small towns (surrounded by corn/other small towns/cow/weird faketown suburbia), and i find that living in small towns is my favorite way of living. most people know each other, there's a lot of community-minded stuff going on, and if it's a liberal college town, it's kind of like living in a city, but one can actually bike everywhere. also, since so many of them tend to be in the midwest, they're cheap cheap cheap. i love SF and plan on moving there again after a few more years in Oakland, but if i had my druthers, give me a small liberal college town with a good bar.

also, i don't think i was taught to 'want' to live in the suburbs any more than i was taught to 'not want' to live in the suburbs. when my parents moved to the burbs (stone house, built 1929, one acre on top of an old nickel mine), i never really forgave them in one way (*west philadelphia born and raised* lol), but i also grew to like the fact that there were huge woods to walk through and lots of weird, old american history to think about.

that TriboroRX thing is fucking tear-jerking, that would be amazing if that happened.

I think iatee is saying that there's ALREADY the population density in the outer boroughs of NYC to support whole new train lines that would go to places people really need to go.

The problem, as someone already said today, is that when you build trains to connect suburbs, you still need a car to go where you're going when you get there. It's not that the trains wouldn't be useful AT ALL, they just are less useful overall and they don't substitute for driving within the suburban community. Or something.

It's weird, I've lived in cities, old suburbs, and small towns (surrounded by corn/other small towns/cow/weird faketown suburbia), and i find that living in small towns is my favorite way of living. most people know each other, there's a lot of community-minded stuff going on, and if it's a liberal college town, it's kind of like living in a city, but one can actually bike everywhere. also, since so many of them tend to be in the midwest, they're cheap cheap cheap. i love SF and plan on moving there again after a few more years in Oakland, but if i had my druthers, give me a small liberal college town with a good bar.

although not my thing personally (cities 4 life) having gone to a midwest liberal arts college i wholly support this as a viable alternative. extremely cheap living, small towns in the midwest are kinda dope, if you can deal w/ the small town thing

Small towns give me blind, scrabbling panic on some level. Or just the memory of when I used to feel like that. They have a lot going for them, though...if you can deal with the small town thing.

Otoh if it were a "liberal college town" it would already be nothing like my experience.

i mean, i spent 5+ years at lolOberlin. it's kind of the quintessential small liberal town. a little icky in parts, but overall, a very nice town with everything a small town comes with, just with a more friendly and libertine air.

I think iatee is saying that there's ALREADY the population density in the outer boroughs of NYC to support whole new train lines that would go to places people really need to go.

The problem, as someone already said today, is that when you build trains to connect suburbs, you still need a car to go where you're going when you get there. It's not that the trains wouldn't be useful AT ALL, they just are less useful overall and they don't substitute for driving within the suburban community. Or something.

but not everyone who lives off the subway system in ny owns a car - in fact many of these nyc 'suburban' neighborhoods are super dense as far as america goes and already have lower car ownership rates than most 'big cities'. lots of people do drive, but that might not work if you work in midtown. most people just have shitty commutes and unnecessarily inconvenient lives on overwhelemed bus lines.

can you explain how you're classifying Laurel's Brooklyn trips as different from my familial ones?

a. she is taking a bus or a train
b. she is in brooklyn so she is probably 'cooler' than you

in order to take the train from my place to hers it'd mean 1st going all the way to Union Station to transfer. Would be 2hr journey.

ia, my second paragraph was about Chicago, that was probably only clear inside my head. That's how the trips are different.

granny I'm sorry but the fact that your town has shitty transit access is not the killer argument you think it is

what is my argument?

why dont' you tell us instead of being snarky and having weird meltdowns

i'm just not getting why you're in favor of connecting east-west NYC via rail but connecting north-south Chicago is mockable.

I don't know how far out in chicago you live, but connecting two suburbs w/ passenger rail generally doesn't make sense as increasing service to urban areas because the density and ridership isn't there.

connecting two extremely dense parts of new york makes a lot of sense because there are a ton of people who are just waiting there for a train to come for them, even in really far out parts of new york city. eventually a bus comes for them instead and then they take that bus to a train.

make as much sense as*

and yet the planning commission has recommended just such a thing

well that's marvelous

thanks for contributing

American city planning commissions have been shown to act wisely, efficiently, and with the publics interest in mind in the past

oh god, now y'all know more than the planning commission. it never ends.

danny can you, in a few sentences, state what your position even is? i really have no idea

er 'granny'

...

I think he thinks I have it out for his imaginary train

I don't even know where he lives, also I am for all trains, ever

having a definable position on something like ~the suburbs~ makes no sense to me, but I agree w/your statement earlier: i don't think there is an optimal way of living! people should pay for what they're getting, is the point. because the real costs will be always be paid, somehow, in the end