So you're saying the nurses should stop working essentially? Kind of like they'd do in a strike?

And if the hospital continues to stonewall and not negotiate in good faith?

What do you propose nurses do to have their needs met? What’s your solution?

Thanks for offering a bunch of answers to my question. I can definitely see idea 6 being perhaps the most impactful followed by idea 3. But they’d all add up and would certainly fall under the purview of the DOT.

There are a bunch of taxis that are often idle in the streets or just driving around looking for hails via apps. And they make up a substantial portion of car traffic. Even before the pandemic, there was complaining because the number of taxis increased and was impacting public transit ridership. The city froze the number of TLC licenses because it was actually causing less people to take public transit. This was all pre-pandemic. So yes I do believe that reducing taxis would force more people to take the subway and reduce traffic in the process in a much more meaningful way than bike lanes.

I thought the MTA was going to be responsible for the toll system and not the DOT.

Protected bike lanes and more bike lanes in general will lead to more biking. But will it lead to a meaningful decrease in traffic? I'm not talking about eliminating traffic altogether. And emphasis on "meaningful". It's possible that this is all that is within the purview of the DOT. But my point in my original comment that I was trying to illustrate is that the DOT isn't really going to be the department where we see meaningful impact on traffic congestion.

I do think reducing taxis of all sorts would definitely lead to less traffic. That would fall under TLC.

I think more and improved public transit options would lead to more people opting to use it. Increasing tolls into the city would also have an impact. Those would fall under the MTA which falls under the state. The NYC DOT can help here as it pertains to bus lanes.

There's the city ferry system that might also have some impact but I personally think it's a huge waste of money for the amount of people it can take and what we're spending but nonetheless it's a city controlled service.

I think more bike lanes (regardless if they protect them all) will be minimal to the impact the other options will have on traffic congestion.

That will provide alternative transit options but I don't believe it will make a meaningful dent in traffic congestion. But it's something the DOT should do regardless.

So what are you proposing the DOT do? They aren't in charge of the subways. They can help with dedicate bus lanes but that's about it.

I think it’s possible the current mayor is intentionally trying to bring up the number of detainees in Rikers when he can probably afford to use other means to track them. But it’s also possible that 3000 is not a sufficient capacity/number of beds. Seems like perhaps the thing to do would be to consider additional complementary jails or expansion of the current jails they plan on building to allow for more capacity. The latter might be less feasible given the timeline since that might be a major change to the scope of those construction projects.

Inevitably someone will ask why are they closing Rikers. You can read about it here: https://rikers.cityofnewyork.us/faq/

> “Yearslong demolition and construction will destabilize nearby buildings, devastate seniors living adjacent to the massive construction zone, and have vast economic consequences on local business,” Lee added. “These are only a few of the issues that will erase Chinatown off the map.”

Construction noise in a city is not an excuse to prevent a project. It’s got to be the worst excuse you could come up with. I remember hearing a similar excuse being used earlier this year when the MTA needed to pick a location for a new power substation in Manhattan.

I don’t have pets but apparently fireworks can be quite harmful to pets so I guess from that perspective it’s good that they don’t have fireworks popping off. But a drone show would be cool. Or if they considered having a ball drop in every borough to start a new expanded tradition.

> whereas every other public transport system in the world runs clean trains and stations, efficient, and self-sufficient.

Doubt the self sufficient part. Public transit needs to be subsidized with taxes to an extent. It’s just a matter of how much a government is willing to subsidize. Trying to make it break even or profitable will lead to a system that will price people out and just incentivize car driving. But I do agree that the MTA really should be restructured and their spending scrutinized more.

Rent prices will never go down with that approach. You’re basically suggesting we freeze development of new housing. That’s horrible.

Do you have a source for that number?

I know that’s the thought process but if other states were able to pass such reforms then I feel like NY can possibly figure out how to get it done as well.

None of those things you’ve mentioned are issues of concern in NYC. But two things worth pointing out:

1. In fact there’s been a huge 50 year project to bring water to the city. See here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Water_Tunnel_No._3 We’re not suffering from a drought.
2. Subway ridership is currently at ~60% of 2019 numbers (you’ll have to look up the official numbers but that’s the number I keep reading in headlines as articles). And we’re still improving things. Maybe not as much one would like with extensions to lines, but there are projects like bringing the LIRR to Grand Central which will improve transit options and new Metro North stations going to Penn Station that will get built in the Bronx.

We lack the infrastructure for a housing boom in NYC? What are you talking about? We literally have the biggest public transit system in the entire country. Do you mean something else by infrastructure?

> Similarly, New York state lags badly behind California, Massachusetts, Florida, Illinois and even neighboring Connecticut and New Jersey when it comes to state level land use reforms. In these other states, local governments were barred from refusing new housing, or were issued housing creation goals that they needed to meet lest they face state intervention. Meanwhile, New York’s localities have no obligation to create housing. Often, the wealthiest and most exclusionary locales are the worst offenders in resisting building new homes, shifting the task to lower-income areas with less political power. Statewide and citywide goal setting, backed by the power to intervene in local decisions, mitigates this inequity.

I hope our legislature can pass some reform forcing local governments to approve new housing. Particularly, areas near public transit options like the MetroNorth or Long Island Railroad. Likewise, I hope the city can get away from this bullshit where local reps are single-handedly able to block a proposal for new development.

Isn’t the city council subject to ranked choice voting? Or is it just the mayor?

> Closing the Situation Room might not have much of a practical effect on how schools respond to COVID cases. Not having to send the letters is a “reprieve,” said one middle school administrator. > > Schools should continue to report coronavirus cases to a “return to school” online form, and parents and staffers will still be able to see their schools’ positive cases by visiting the city’s daily COVID case map, according to the note. And officials said that the operations would continue but as part of the education department’s “emergency operations center.”

My understanding is if she signs or doesn't sign, thr bill becomes law either way. She would have to actively veto it for it to not become law. Unless she plans to veto it, then it seems this will become law before the end of the year?

I actually looked at the area to get a better idea of where they meant when they said Morris Park. That area basically is surrounded by medical buildings and centers. It's not residential at all. But it will probably provide quicker access for employees at those places to get there from Manhattan and further up north from the Bronx. It's a weird area in the Bronx where I guess there was a lot of planning to building out those lots (vacant for for years!!) to having all these medical centers. There's even a free shuttle to the Hutchinson Metro Center it's so out of the way. So unfortunately I don't know if they will work on mixing the area with residences but it's definitely quite transited so a way to get there more directly without taking a bus is great imo.

I'd be up for that. I'm not sure how a city ticket works though. I'm guessing that the usage might be too variable for the city to agree to it. I mean the city wouldn't agree to it outright anyways because they always want the state to pay as much as they can.

If you build it, they will come. A story I've been told is that Manhattan reached its peak population figures just before the subway expanded to the outer boroughs. That was back in the 1910s. That’s almost insane to think about. Once the subway system expanded, people felt more free to not have to live in Manhattan.

Where you build public transit options will shape where housing and commercial development takes place. Yes, ideally you plan things accordingly and tightly but hopefully the city will coordinate and re-zone that area. Best case scenario auto shop businesses will sell out to developers with bigger plans for housing and the auto shops can relocate. Or maybe the city just figures out a plan that works for all involved. Imminent domain? Not ideal but it would be quite appropriate if the city re-zoned and build bigger in that area.