|
|
| New York is the city that never moves (1408495) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1408495) | |
New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Fri Dec 2 10:33:24 2016 Gridlock |
|
|
| (1408551) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Dec 2 11:29:52 2016, in response to New York is the city that never moves, posted by Dave on Fri Dec 2 10:33:24 2016. I can definitely understand tourists staying in Manhattan, especially if a visit to NY is a rarity or once-in-a-lifetime event for them. If I was only seeing the city once, I don't think I'd stay outside Manhattan unless there was an enormous difference in price, though I know one family from the Midwest that did the Brooklyn Marriott in Downtown Brooklyn and they were happy with it. |
|
|
| (1408559) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Dec 2 11:52:08 2016, in response to New York is the city that never moves, posted by Dave on Fri Dec 2 10:33:24 2016. Yeah. On tree-lighting day, in a steady rain, I had to walk an extra few blocks to the subway because my regular route was jammed with people. |
|
|
| (1408570) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Fri Dec 2 12:42:30 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Dec 2 11:29:52 2016. Traffic in downtown Brooklyn isn'tmuch better |
|
|
| (1408574) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Dec 2 12:53:16 2016, in response to New York is the city that never moves, posted by Dave on Fri Dec 2 10:33:24 2016. Need moar tunnels under the Hudson. And the Mid-Manhattan Expressway at least. |
|
|
| (1408578) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Dec 2 12:59:41 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Dec 2 12:53:16 2016. If you build, more will come. |
|
|
| (1408584) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Fri Dec 2 13:16:45 2016, in response to New York is the city that never moves, posted by Dave on Fri Dec 2 10:33:24 2016. NYC is already tired of ChristmasI thought they don't do Christmas anymore. I heard last year the windows sucked, and one store, I forget the boring chain, had skimpy and sleazy mannequins. Secondly, crying over traffic? what cry babies, I'll show you traffic. |
|
|
| (1408637) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Dec 2 16:09:21 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Dec 2 11:29:52 2016. +1I've stayed both inside and outside Manhattan, and price is roughly the same anyway if you're anywhere near a subway line. That said, tourists should learn to use the subway and not uber/taxi everywhere. |
|
|
| (1408638) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Dec 2 16:17:31 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Dec 2 16:09:21 2016. Really?My sense is that near an outer borough subway, you're in the $200 range, while in Manhattan for under $400 you get a dingy postage stamp. But that's all second hand knowledge, since I don't stay in hotels in NYC. |
|
|
| (1408652) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Dec 2 18:24:33 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Dec 2 16:09:21 2016. tourists should learn to use the subwayThere's lots of reasons they don't. And if you try to force them to, they just won't come back. |
|
|
| (1408654) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Dec 2 19:15:03 2016, in response to New York is the city that never moves, posted by Dave on Fri Dec 2 10:33:24 2016. Never mind the auto traffic, its the on foot traffic that really jams things up. Around Christmas time, from around 48th & Madison to Rock Center, its intense peoplelock. Lunchtime crowds combined with the seasonal Tourists dripping with cameras & mobile devices, going to St Pats, looking at the 5th Ave storefront windows & skyline (OOh AaH!!) and not where they are going make walking around an intense challenge.A few years back I worked at 347 Madison. I walked up to St Pats to pay a visit & light a candle & I couldn't get anywhere near the stations within the Cathedral due to the crowdsA skilled pickpocket could really cash in out there! BUT regardless, there is nothing prettier on this planet than NYC during Christmas time. In my opinion, of course:) |
|
|
| (1408657) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by ftgreeneg on Fri Dec 2 19:43:39 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Dec 2 19:15:03 2016. "BUT regardless, there is nothing prettier on this planet than NYC during Christmas time."+1 |
|
|
| (1408659) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Dec 2 19:51:39 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by AlM on Fri Dec 2 16:17:31 2016. I can stay at a nice hotel in Newport for $140, one near Queensbridge for $150, one in Brooklyn for $120, lower Manhattan for $120. Midtown they all go for ~$200.Obviously this is with 14+ days advance purchase. The rates get higher as the date is closer, and then drop precipitously for day-of rates as the hotels try to fill the rooms with paying customers. |
|
|
| (1408675) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat Dec 3 08:36:31 2016, in response to New York is the city that never moves, posted by Dave on Fri Dec 2 10:33:24 2016. I would guess that gridlock is even worse since the timing on the traffic signals was changed to slow down traffic to prevent speeding accidents.Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1408677) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Dec 3 09:13:59 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat Dec 3 08:36:31 2016. Meanwhile, accidents have gone up. |
|
|
| (1408711) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Dec 3 18:44:44 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Dec 2 19:51:39 2016. What's the Lower Manhattan one ?(Good to know so I don't have to get up at 5am to catch the Adirondack). Get the Chase IHG Hotel Mastercard. That'll get you one fee night per year regardless of your point balance and they'll start you at 50 or 60 K points. The Hilton Gateway at Newark Penn can be pricey, but there's the Ramada Inn near Journal Square. |
|
|
| (1408715) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Dec 3 19:22:00 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Joe V on Sat Dec 3 18:44:44 2016. I'm already pretty established with Starwood. As long as Mariott doesn't screw us over, I get ridiculous amounts of free nights in a year, which count towards status the same as paid ones.That said I often pay cash anyway. Looking at 2 day stays for weekends in January, for Manhattan hotels I'm seeing $104 for the four points in SoHo, $114 for the four points Times Square (which is pretty convenient for Penn Station because it is at 40th & 8th), $118 for a Four Points in Chelsea. And $123 for an Aloft and Four Points downtown. There *is* a sale going on which might explain the lower prices for Four Points, but that $123 for the Aloft is pretty common. |
|
|
| (1408725) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Dec 3 20:27:42 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Dec 3 19:22:00 2016. Are those rates because you have some sort of deal or membership with Starwood, or can anyone get that ? |
|
|
| (1408745) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Dec 4 01:43:35 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Joe V on Sat Dec 3 20:27:42 2016. Anyone can get those rates, I wasn't logged in when I searched. |
|
|
| (1408747) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sun Dec 4 06:14:11 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Joe V on Sat Dec 3 20:27:42 2016. Seriously? |
|
|
| (1408748) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Dec 4 07:05:12 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Dec 3 09:13:59 2016. Meanwhile, accidents have gone up.That's what would be expected for the Vision Zero paradigm. Crashes go up but their severity does not. The result is fewer deaths. This is analogous to the reduction in highway deaths since Nader's "Unsafe At Any Speed." Highway crashes have not gone down. However, the redesign of automobiles: crumple zones; seat belts; air bags; etc. has resulted in greatly increased survivability in a crash. Anyone can verify my statement regarding NYC. The NYPD crash reports are available from the City's Open Data Site. The data is from 7/1/2012. I've downloaded the data as of 11/26/2016. Here are the results for the same number of days for each year: "year","crashes","injured","deaths" 2013;184327;50278;263 2014,187093,46658,247 2015,196631,46229,218 2016,204305,52891,205 N.B. the police data does not describe injury severity. The salient statistic for most crash analysis is KSI or killed or severely injured. Also, the death statistic for 2016 may be artificially low. This isn't because of data cooking. There's sometimes a long delay between a crash and the actual death. Victims may linger for weeks or months before succumbing to their injury. Probably, the end of January 2017 would be a better date to analyze this data. |
|
|
| (1408848) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Sun Dec 4 22:20:50 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Dec 4 07:05:12 2016. Number of crashes is meaningless if you aren't also comparing total miles traveled. |
|
|
| (1408851) | |
Re: New York is the city that never moves |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Dec 4 22:47:16 2016, in response to Re: New York is the city that never moves, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Sun Dec 4 22:20:50 2016. Number of crashes is meaninglessIt's quite important, if the aim is to examine the number of crashes as opposed to the crash rate. Mr. Olog-hai mentioned number of accidents not the rate. if you aren't also comparing total miles traveled. The standard divisor for pedestrian/cyclist injuries/deaths rate is per local population not per vehicle-miles. Another metric is the number of injuries/deaths per crash. This gives some measure of crash severity. Remember the goal is to reduce fatalities to zero. To repeat, this can be achieved by reducing the number of crashes or crash severity. |
|
|
