October 23, 2006
Subways and Development
As the recent debate over congestion pricing has made clear, the way New Yorkers get around is becoming a hotly contested topic. And for good reason: New York's transportation options determine the lifestyle of its citizens, and, by extension, the character of the city. How do transit options affect the way the city changes over time?
The majority of Brooklyn's subway lines were first built as elevated rail lines by private companies in the 1880s and 1890s, as competing services to the resort at faraway Brighton Beach. A massive building boom followed suit along the lines, creating most of the neighborhoods in central and southern Brooklyn in only a couple decades. Today, Brooklyn is the outer borough best served by mass transit, as well as most densely populated.
Queens, meanwhile, didn't receive any subway lines until after the city consolidated its mass transit system in the 1920s. Lacking funds to cover the entire borough, the City built only two physically separate lines: the main "trunk" line out to Jamaica, and the 7 train to Flushing. As in Brooklyn thirty years earlier, high density development followed these lines - but the rest of the borough wasn't to be built out until the highway network allowed car owners to easily commute. The result: lower-density, suburban-style neighborhoods throughout much of eastern and southern Queens.
Adam Brock, Gothamist's new mapper, is a GIS Specialist at the Pratt Center for Community Development. He'll be posting a new NYC-related map weekly.
|
New map every week? Awesome!
Interestingly, the 5th avenue elevated and the 4th avenue subway coexisted (and competed) nicely for years.
Thanks for the map. Great stuff for those of us who equate density with sane and responsible use of natural resources.
There's 3 lines in Queens, Astoria branch is the third.
Umm, Flushing line (7) opened in 1915, and Astoria line openned in Astoria line was connect to 2nd Avenue el in 1920. Neither of thes were built "by the city", only the IND (ie EF etc to Jamaica) was built by the city. Do you people know what fact checking is???
... not that I know what spell checking is! LOL!
Mean what you say, but don't be mean when you say it :-) !
WE WANT SUBWAYS IN BROOKLYN
SHAME ON YOU
WE HAVE TO TRAVEL TO MANHATTAN TO GET AROUND BROOKLYN
RETARDED!
DO SOMETHING NOW!!!!
THIS THE YEAR 2006 NOT THE FRICKING 20'S!
Also, the subway wasn't 'consolidated' until 1940 when the city took over all the subways - you may be referring to the city building the IND system starting in the 1930s (including today's E/F/G/V lines down Queens Boulevard.)
THIS THE YEAR 2006 NOT THE FRICKING 20'S!
Yeah, if it was the 20s you could build a subway line without 10 years of debate, studies, etc. Check the 2nd Avenue line for how long "modern development" takes.
Great stuff for those of us who equate density with sane and responsible use of natural resources.
Eh, I've lived in both. There's something to be said for living somewhere away from other people. The people who drive 2 hrs each way in an SUV are the exception, not the norm.
I suggest doing population density maps per acre of residentially-zoned land (available from RPAD) rather than per total acre.
Your map makes commercial and industrial areas look like low density suburban neighborhoods. Which is what people who move to such spaces, legally or illegally, often demand -- no more people, and the businesses have to move out.
great map. no one wants to take the frekkin' bus so they live near the subway. I wonder if Chicagoo has the same phenomenon. Dollars to donuts it does.
Let's see the Bronx. That will make your point even more effectively!
The Bronx shows the same trends, as does Chicago to some extent. You can see a map I made before for a paper here
sabinawolfson.com/misc/Figure04_CensusPop.pdf