Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
A Former New Yorker

BQX Disenfranchise Low Income Neighborhoods

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, LGA Link N train said:

Here's the thing though. BQX is Not even a lightrail to begin with 

Streetcar to light rail is like russet potato to potato.

 

  • LMAO! 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Armchair urbanist and aspiring landlord here, gonna throw in my two cents,

For starters I absolutely detest the BQX, but I also hate this new narrative of "anti-gentrification (more on this later.)" I think an import note that this doc missed is that the BQX is barely affiliated with the (MTA). imo the BQX is a DeBlasio pet-project to try and prove to Prince Andrew that he city can do transit w/out the (MTA)

Gentrification is unfair, and I hate willyb hipsters as much as anyone else, but It is an inevitable part of the lifecycle of a neighborhood. New York is an ever-fluctuating urban landscape which has experienced a countless number of demographic shifts throughout its lifetime. By necessity, cities always have been and will continue to be morphing to suit the needs of a current culture. Cities are the cultural hubs of a society and they have a massive influence on the culture of said society. If you take a peek at history, you will see that almost all major cultural events sprung out of urban centers. Starting with the Greeks, the marketplaces of Athens are responsible for producing the groundwork of the philosophy that we have today, After that Rome was the seat of the (European) world for the next many hundreds of years. Skipping forward, the French Revolution was pretty much just the Paris Revolution, I could go on, but I think you get the point. Cities and culture are interlinked, therefore cities will always morph alongside culture. 

In my opinion, the push against gentrification is a result of a heightened racial awareness of Millenials coupled with a sort of "left wing conservatism" that we see in a lot of academia right now (ie Cultural appropriation, Racially segregated "safe" spaces on campuses, etc). The desire to anchor neighborhoods in place in order to stop demographic shifts is a dumb thing to do and shows a lack of understanding about how cities function. Trying to prevent demographic shifts in cities is also hindering the progression of culture, which I absolutely disagree with. Societies have to change in order to function properly.

Another thing I didn't like about the video, around the 8 minute mark where they are discussing how most people move east to west, not north to south. I think the reason for this is due to the fact that there is little infrastructure to carry people in a north-south direction, while there is tons of infrastructure to carry people east-west.

Anyway there is no need to worry because the BQX isn't going to happen. It's dead in the water.

Also peak real estate is a thing and I think we are soon about to hit it.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A Former New Yorker said:

Why is the BQX even a thing If people want to go from Astoria to Brooklyn They would take the (N)

If DeBlasio wants a lightrail in NYC that's not affiliated with (MTA) why don't you just have a light rail go from Co-op City to Woodside and Jamaica to LIC. They both go through "transit deserts"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kosciusko said:

Armchair urbanist and aspiring landlord here, gonna throw in my two cents,

For starters I absolutely detest the BQX, but I also hate this new narrative of "anti-gentrification (more on this later.)" I think an import note that this doc missed is that the BQX is barely affiliated with the (MTA). imo the BQX is a DeBlasio pet-project to try and prove to Prince Andrew that he city can do transit w/out the (MTA)

Gentrification is unfair, and I hate willyb hipsters as much as anyone else, but It is an inevitable part of the lifecycle of a neighborhood. New York is an ever-fluctuating urban landscape which has experienced a countless number of demographic shifts throughout its lifetime. By necessity, cities always have been and will continue to be morphing to suit the needs of a current culture. Cities are the cultural hubs of a society and they have a massive influence on the culture of said society. If you take a peek at history, you will see that almost all major cultural events sprung out of urban centers. Starting with the Greeks, the marketplaces of Athens are responsible for producing the groundwork of the philosophy that we have today, After that Rome was the seat of the (European) world for the next many hundreds of years. Skipping forward, the French Revolution was pretty much just the Paris Revolution, I could go on, but I think you get the point. Cities and culture are interlinked, therefore cities will always morph alongside culture. 

In my opinion, the push against gentrification is a result of a heightened racial awareness of Millenials coupled with a sort of "left wing conservatism" that we see in a lot of academia right now (ie Cultural appropriation, Racially segregated "safe" spaces on campuses, etc). The desire to anchor neighborhoods in place in order to stop demographic shifts is a dumb thing to do and shows a lack of understanding about how cities function. Trying to prevent demographic shifts in cities is also hindering the progression of culture, which I absolutely disagree with. Societies have to change in order to function properly.

Another thing I didn't like about the video, around the 8 minute mark where they are discussing how most people move east to west, not north to south. I think the reason for this is due to the fact that there is little infrastructure to carry people in a north-south direction, while there is tons of infrastructure to carry people east-west.

Anyway there is no need to worry because the BQX isn't going to happen. It's dead in the water.

Also peak real estate is a thing and I think we are soon about to hit it.

Peak real estate has already hit, at least in terms of rent anyway. Prices are finally coming back to reality.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Peak real estate has already hit, at least in terms of rent anyway. Prices are finally coming back to reality.

Just what I came in here to say.

11 hours ago, LGA Link N train said:

Well. These people are complaining about the BQX? 

It's no surprise that this project is a waste, just bring back the B71 and call it a day. 

Agree with the general opinion, but of course you realize both of these proposals aim to make 2 very separate commuting habits more feasible.....

10 hours ago, A Former New Yorker said:

Why is the BQX even a thing If people want to go from Astoria to Brooklyn They would take the (N)

.....to eradicate the time wasted "via Manhattan".

9 hours ago, A Former New Yorker said:

If DeBlasio wants a lightrail in NYC that's not affiliated with (MTA) why don't you just have a light rail go from Co-op City to Woodside and Jamaica to LIC. They both go through "transit deserts"

I'd say heavy rail is needed to connect Queens & (more of) the Bronx before any LRT system... TriboroRx would be a decent start.....

As for Jamaica to LIC, I don't believe LRT is all that necessary.... Current services simply needs to be improved (to address anyone's current commutes b/w the two points & any further/increasing demand that may present itself in the future [as LIC becomes more of a CBD]).....

Edited by B35 via Church
typose.... lol
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, A Former New Yorker said:

If DeBlasio wants a lightrail in NYC that's not affiliated with (MTA) why don't you just have a light rail go from Co-op City to Woodside and Jamaica to LIC. They both go through "transit deserts"

What your idea's for Routing? You'd be cutting some major Thoroughfares no? How do you navigate the Long Island Sound? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Just what I came in here to say.

I almost feel like kicking myself for overpaying, but I keep reminding myself that I did so for a longer lease and a new apartment. lol I will say this though... If this sort of project takes off, it will send prices up in the areas affected, both rentals and other properties.  

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I almost feel like kicking myself for overpaying, but I keep reminding myself that I did so for a longer lease and a new apartment. lol

Beats going back to SI :lol:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, B35 via Church said:

Beats going back to SI :lol:

It sure as hell does.  When we moved there it was actually nice. Not too crowded... People with manners.  Gotta say... Too many people from Brooklyn and elsewhere came and ruined it.  Now it's overcrowded and the developers are tearing down everything and putting in two and three townhouses.  Ruining the suburban character and overloading the infrastructure.  If things really go to hell in this city, I'd leave and move to Westchester. I could never do New Jersey... Hell no.

I don't have much faith in this BQX project though.  I'll believe it when I see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Beats going back to SI :lol:

And here I am debating if I wanna leave just for the convenience of not taking a boat, and if it's worth $400 more in rent each month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Deucey said:

And here I am debating if I wanna leave just for the convenience of not taking a boat, and if it's worth $400 more in rent each month.

lol... If you're in walking distance to the ferry that may be a good thing, but you need a car for everything else.  One of the main reasons I left was I got sick of the transportation and needing a car or having to call car service. I wanted to be somewhere where the car could be an option but not a necessity.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

lol... If you're in walking distance to the ferry that may be a good thing, but you need a car for everything else.  One of the main reasons I left was I got sick of the transportation and needing a car or having to call car service. I wanted to be somewhere where the car could be an option but not a necessity.  

Aside from the issues getting groceries (44 bus always being SRO from Forest or the SIE) or paying the $12 delivery charge, it's just really annoying that I have to leave 1.5 hours before I start work to be there close to on-time.

Not to mention - although I can't do much about it until we leave the accelerator, I have to take the Lex. (Manhattan just sucks.) And it's just real hard to do real estate as a side gig in Brooklyn when an 8pm showing means that I'm likely not home until 11pm - depending on which ferry departure I make.

So yeah, it's either pay $400 more in rent and avoid the 40 minutes of ferry and S52 to my house, or buy a car and lock in my still-low-for-NYC rent for 12 or 24 months.

Haven't decided yet, since I actually like my apartment and complex. But that yacht ride is a big obstacle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Deucey said:

Aside from the issues getting groceries (44 bus always being SRO from Forest or the SIE) or paying the $12 delivery charge, it's just really annoying that I have to leave 1.5 hours before I start work to be there close to on-time.

Not to mention - although I can't do much about it until we leave the accelerator, I have to take the Lex. (Manhattan just sucks.) And it's just real hard to do real estate as a side gig in Brooklyn when an 8pm showing means that I'm likely not home until 11pm - depending on which ferry departure I make.

So yeah, it's either pay $400 more in rent and avoid the 40 minutes of ferry and S52 to my house, or buy a car and lock in my still-low-for-NYC rent for 12 or 24 months.

Haven't decided yet, since I actually like my apartment and complex. But that yacht ride is a big obstacle.

Getting a place you like at a price you like is not easy these days. I'd personally go with the car option. The subways are so frustrating. I had to be somewhere yesterday. I gave myself 40 minutes and it took almost an hour for a trip within Manhattan. Ridiculous.  I was late and annoyed.  What I'm doing is basically cutting back what I do.  I'm looking to cut back on commuting as much as possible and that's exactly what I've been doing, even if it means a little less money in my pocket. My sanity is worth it.  I have people that want my consulting services during the week, and I'm like hey, whatever I have Tuesday through Thursday after work is it.  You can take Sunday or forget it because during the week after work, for the shortest distances, the subway is impossible.  For the Upper West Side or Upper East Side, I try to give myself 40 minutes from my office or more.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Getting a place you like at a price you like is not easy these days. I'd personally go with the car option. The subways are so frustrating. I had to be somewhere yesterday. I gave myself 40 minutes and it took almost an hour for a trip within Manhattan. Ridiculous.  I was late and annoyed.  What I'm doing is basically cutting back what I do.  I'm looking to cut back on commuting as much as possible and that's exactly what I've been doing, even if it means a little less money in my pocket. My sanity is worth it.  I have people that want my consulting services during the week, and I'm like hey, whatever I have Tuesday through Thursday after work is it.  You can take Sunday or forget it because during the week after work, for the shortest distances, the subway is impossible.  For the Upper West Side or Upper East Side, I try to give myself 40 minutes from my office or more.  

I got back from DC last night on the BoltBus at 9:15. (7) wasn't leaving Javits Center until 9:30 - let's talk about shitty service when there isn't an official GO.

I get to Penn at 9:30, (1) and (2) are running 1 minute behind the other every 12 minutes.

So instead of 6 minute headways between the two lines, (MTA) are deliberately bunching trains to have 12 minute service. Excluding the never-ending quest for a men's room at Penn and a store stop I made at 14th/7th, after a 9:15 arrival I would've gotten home at 11:30. because the trains weren't optimally scheduled for both rapid service and SI Ferry connection. (I read the (A)(C) line review and how they schedule both from 59th St or 125th because of the (B)(D) merge. Why they don't schedule (1) based on ferry arrivals/departures, I dunno.)

That's why it's almost worth it to deal with parking in Manhattan - cars might get stuck in traffic, but the trip is entirely within the driver's control, whereas the subway requires one to be willing to risk employment and happiness on someone else doing their job.

But the appeal of Brooklyn really is that with that 9:15 arrival, I could be home at 10:15. (But, if I still had my car, I could've left DC at 6 and been home at 9:45 crossing the Goethals Bridge, so yeah.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Deucey said:

I got back from DC last night on the BoltBus at 9:15. (7) wasn't leaving Javits Center until 9:30 - let's talk about shitty service when there isn't an official GO.

I get to Penn at 9:30, (1) and (2) are running 1 minute behind the other every 12 minutes.

So instead of 6 minute headways between the two lines, (MTA) are deliberately bunching trains to have 12 minute service. Excluding the never-ending quest for a men's room at Penn and a store stop I made at 14th/7th, after a 9:15 arrival I would've gotten home at 11:30. because the trains weren't optimally scheduled for both rapid service and SI Ferry connection. (I read the (A)(C) line review and how they schedule both from 59th St or 125th because of the (B)(D) merge. Why they don't schedule (1) based on ferry arrivals/departures, I dunno.)

That's why it's almost worth it to deal with parking in Manhattan - cars might get stuck in traffic, but the trip is entirely within the driver's control, whereas the subway requires one to be willing to risk employment and happiness on someone else doing their job.

But the appeal of Brooklyn really is that with that 9:15 arrival, I could be home at 10:15. (But, if I still had my car, I could've left DC at 6 and been home at 9:45 crossing the Goethals Bridge, so yeah.)

I hear ya.  Transportation is a problem citywide, not just in low income neighborhoods.  We need an administration that tackles it and these de Blasio folks aren't doing a damn thing. They're rezoning entire areas near the subways but aren't doing anything to address the severe overcrowding that's occurring.  It basically forces people to drive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I hear ya.  Transportation is a problem citywide, not just in low income neighborhoods.  We need an administration that tackles it and these de Blasio folks aren't doing a damn thing. They're rezoning entire areas near the subways but aren't doing anything to address the severe overcrowding that's occurring.  It basically forces people to drive. 

Chicken and egg.

What we need is a commission detached from City and State politics to run the entire authority and be directly accountable to the voters of the 9 county region.

Too bad the Con-Con was voted down.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Deucey said:

Chicken and egg.

What we need is a commission detached from City and State politics to run the entire authority and be directly accountable to the voters of the 9 county region.

Too bad the Con-Con was voted down.

I dunno. I actually support things like the new ferries and even this BQX project.  I think we need other means of transportation to get people off of the subways.  They're simply over burdened.  The problem with the subways are the work is slow, the results are slow and I see things getting progressively worse, which is saying something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I dunno. I actually support things like the new ferries and even this BQX project.  I think we need other means of transportation to get people off of the subways.  They're simply over burdened.  The problem with the subways are the work is slow, the results are slow and I see things getting progressively worse, which is saying something.

I'm not against those. The problem is because no politician who's actually or morally responsible for (MTA) actually exercises that responsibility, instead of being a proactive planning and service delivery firm, it's a bureaucratic maintenance organization that can't even do that right.

It's the bandaid put on a hemorrhage that everyone's ignoring because they believe clotting will ultimately work.

Or, in a California context, it's the old Los Angeles RTD - a waste of an organization that does nothing right but can do no wrong that no one will fix because it's a career-ender.

Then in '92, the State merged RTD with the LA County Transportation Commission, made the LACMTA (Metro), and now look at LA - it's possible to live in the LA basin or San Fernando or San Gabriel Valleys without a car.

That's what (MTA) needs - to be forced to become a regional planning agency and innovator, and being controlled legally by Albany and morally by City Hall precludes that. 

 

In all honesty, I'd merge (MTA) with NYCDOT, create a new org accountable to voters via Borough Presidents and County Execs, and do just that - institute ferries, construct streetcars and LRTs and all that.

But it won't happen unless the decision makers or the legislature get a kick in the ass to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Deucey said:

I'm not against those. The problem is because no politician who's actually or morally responsible for (MTA) actually exercises that responsibility, instead of being a proactive planning and service delivery firm, it's a bureaucratic maintenance organization that can't even do that right.

It's the bandaid put on a hemorrhage that everyone's ignoring because they believe clotting will ultimately work.

Or, in a California context, it's the old Los Angeles RTD - a waste of an organization that does nothing right but can do no wrong that no one will fix because it's a career-ender.

Then in '92, the State merged RTD with the LA County Transportation Commission, made the LACMTA (Metro), and now look at LA - it's possible to live in the LA basin or San Fernando or San Gabriel Valleys without a car.

That's what (MTA) needs - to be forced to become a regional planning agency and innovator, and being controlled legally by Albany and morally by City Hall precludes that. 

 

In all honesty, I'd merge (MTA) with NYCDOT, create a new org accountable to voters via Borough Presidents and County Execs, and do just that - institute ferries, construct streetcars and LRTs and all that.

But it won't happen unless the decision makers or the legislature get a kick in the ass to do it.

I think critics are skeptical of these sorts of projects.  The new ferry routes have very high subsidies and operating costs, and I believe this BQX project would too, but I think the money has to be spent using our waterways and other avenues, especially given how little building of subways we've done.  People sit on this forum talking about building out the subways here and there, but realistically, we'll be lucky if we get an extension of the SAS in our life times.  Until costs are reigned in, we'll be doing patch jobs of the subways for years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I think critics are skeptical of these sorts of projects.  The new ferry routes have very high subsidies and operating costs, and I believe this BQX project would too, but I think the money has to be spent using our waterways and other avenues, especially given how little building of subways we've done.  People sit on this forum talking about building out the subways here and there, but realistically, we'll be lucky if we get an extension of the SAS in our life times.  Until costs are reigned in, we'll be doing patch jobs of the subways for years to come.

And if planners had imagination, instead of building these glass phalluses to collect high property taxes from developers, these lots could be used to build parking garages to replace (and add) parking taken away by bus lanes and LRT tracks on streets. Money collected from resident permits; money collected from meter fees, etc.

And not to mention how much more attractive other neighborhoods would become knowing that theres an LRT or a BRT running down the street getting folks to a train quicker than the local bus - OR even how traffic is much better for people who drive.

 

It's that shortsightedness tho. Its why we need an (MTA) that listens to dreamers and has planners to actually figure out how to make some of those dreams feasible.

And to get a ferry from St George to Bay Ridge or Red Hook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.