Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynicism
Then again, I would be more concerned with subways that will not be able to explosive growth. If anything, is this is sustainable in the long run with century old infrastructure? I mean we're talking about a 100 year old system that has not changed much in the entire city.
Being packed like sardines on my Q train every morning? No thanks.
|
First of all, that site has an F/G train entrance right in front of it. Second, NYC having the best and most extensive mass transit system in the country is the best city to absorb and take in more people. If NYC decides to block out growth, those people would end up in other places like the suburbs or other towns and cities less capable to absorb people. (BTW, the dynamics doesn't exactly work out that way because newcomers with more money than the natives would displace the less affluent natives, who would then have to move elsewhere. This however is another topic altogether). The result? More suburban sprawl, more roads, more cars, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, etc. How is that good for anybody?
Better to funnel growth to dense cities like NYC that have the highest mass transit use.
Furthermore, the subways just like the roads, are really only crowded during rush hour and in the case of Brooklyn, only as you get closer to Manhattan. The further you are from Manhattan, the crowds thin out. You can't expect to live in any large city, let alone the largest in the country and one of the largest in the world, to be completely free of crowds. Very few cities don't have traffic congestion. Some have it even worse than NY.