• Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    3 days ago
    1. I think the congestion pricing zone is a step towards making the core of manhattan a car-free zone.
    2. Jason (NJB) already says in that video that some trams are often a precursor for larger-capacity metros. Ridership volumes across the city are beyond what trams can effectively provide. Much of Manhattan already is crisscrossed with metros galore, but need funding to keep it in a good state-of-repair and maximize service capacity and uptime.
    • Hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      He also says that trams serve a different role than metros, and treating trams as immature subways is a bad thing. Trams can have incredibly high throughput if run frequently.

      Everything needs funding, but as roads are incredibly expensive to maintain. Replacing cars with transit is less expensive for the city in the longterm.

        • Hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          They have significantly higher throughput than a car lane of the same size. That’s the comparison that really matters.

          Subways and trams fill different niches. That’s kind of a core point of this. Trams compete with cars for space at street level, while subways do not.

          • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            What? Subways definitely compete with cars.

            Surface roads should all just be converted to pedestrian paths or bicycle-only roads

            I see no need for trams