As you said in your livestream, something like a London Overground type of service on the IBX would suit it much better than light rail, light rail has it's place but not as the primary means of transportation between different boroughs of a city, it can be used as an orbital system around a city, like in Paris, or in smaller cities but in a city like NYC, light rail shouldn't be the primary means of transportation between different boroughs outside of Manhattan.
I get what you are saying and on one hand I agree that just because someone is 'not from here' doesn't mean their opinion is invalid. Sometimes having an outside perspective on things, free of baggage, can be a good thing. It's a lot easier to be objective about something when you ultimately have no real vested interest in it.
But I also think that when someone critiques transit (be it positively or negatively) without having lived in that city for at least some period of time, and knowing the region intimately, there is a lot that can be missed. A good example of this is Ottawa's original O-Train pilot project, now known as Line 2 or The Trillium Line. A lot of people outside of Ottawa hold it up as a great example of how to do rail based transit really cheaply. But in reality, the line was only ever useful to Carelton students, and the new configuration of the line is going to make transit worse in a number of ways. It is a project that looks good from a numbers perspective and adding a line to a map. But from the perspective of people living in the city, its kind of trash and buses did a better getting to the south end of the city in most cases, something that wouldn't be obvious unless you lived in Ottawa for a long time. (The same could be true for all the people who preach about simply extending the line across the river as a 'well there is already a bridge' solution, ignoring the fact that it wouldn't actually get you to a lot of the places people would actually want to go to).
I would also add that it doesn't matter if you are 'from there' or not, if there is a backlash to what someone is advocating for, that can often be a sign that its not a good idea (and yes the public has the right to reject ideas), or that those selling the idea are just doing a bad job communicating the plan or the critique. This is probably why people 'not from here' have a harder time being heard because once again when you don't live somewhere you aren't going to understand a lot of the quirks and desires and local politics of a region or city that will ultimately dictate what kind of projects, or methods of selling a project, will actually gain public support.
Oh my point in this piece is really meant to be more the latter than the former. I always er on the side of "if someone knows what they are talking about geography is not super important" but I think it is worth considering that the local context really is very important!
Always be prepared to challenge. As others have noted, the natural defense mechanism may kick in but folks need to be shown respectfully that there may be better ways. Must never feel bad about highlighting best in class solutions - and spotlighting where projects fall short, for whatever reasons. The expression “penny wise, pound foolish” is an old one that illustrates that myopic thinking - such as on the IBX - is not new. Btw, on the subject of NYC, the Financial Times has a piece on the challenge of Penn Station. Financial Times. Sorry if the link may not work
Reinventing Penn Station: can New York still do big things?
Really interesting take that addresses an argument that many technical advocates either ignore or dismiss.
I would add that when you criticize a project as an outside, you also brush up against human egos: we all want to feel like where we bring a unique lived experience to the table, a large part of which is based on where we live!
However, "Not from here" is a common human response, akin to "Who are YOU to be telling me how to raise MY child?" As a "not from here" transit advocate, you are not a voter in a politician's district. (I wanted to Email a Congressman about the IBX project; however, his website rejects Comments from outside his new district. Understandable, but frustrating.)
Also, you are challenging authority. And, possibly challenging the hired consultants' livelihood. Finally, we transit advocates tend to be a bit nerdish, which puts some people off. So, we simply have to deal with it.
That having been said, ignoring outside ideas is analogous to ignoring history. “Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.”― Edmund Burke
As you said in your livestream, something like a London Overground type of service on the IBX would suit it much better than light rail, light rail has it's place but not as the primary means of transportation between different boroughs of a city, it can be used as an orbital system around a city, like in Paris, or in smaller cities but in a city like NYC, light rail shouldn't be the primary means of transportation between different boroughs outside of Manhattan.
I agree!
I get what you are saying and on one hand I agree that just because someone is 'not from here' doesn't mean their opinion is invalid. Sometimes having an outside perspective on things, free of baggage, can be a good thing. It's a lot easier to be objective about something when you ultimately have no real vested interest in it.
But I also think that when someone critiques transit (be it positively or negatively) without having lived in that city for at least some period of time, and knowing the region intimately, there is a lot that can be missed. A good example of this is Ottawa's original O-Train pilot project, now known as Line 2 or The Trillium Line. A lot of people outside of Ottawa hold it up as a great example of how to do rail based transit really cheaply. But in reality, the line was only ever useful to Carelton students, and the new configuration of the line is going to make transit worse in a number of ways. It is a project that looks good from a numbers perspective and adding a line to a map. But from the perspective of people living in the city, its kind of trash and buses did a better getting to the south end of the city in most cases, something that wouldn't be obvious unless you lived in Ottawa for a long time. (The same could be true for all the people who preach about simply extending the line across the river as a 'well there is already a bridge' solution, ignoring the fact that it wouldn't actually get you to a lot of the places people would actually want to go to).
I would also add that it doesn't matter if you are 'from there' or not, if there is a backlash to what someone is advocating for, that can often be a sign that its not a good idea (and yes the public has the right to reject ideas), or that those selling the idea are just doing a bad job communicating the plan or the critique. This is probably why people 'not from here' have a harder time being heard because once again when you don't live somewhere you aren't going to understand a lot of the quirks and desires and local politics of a region or city that will ultimately dictate what kind of projects, or methods of selling a project, will actually gain public support.
Oh my point in this piece is really meant to be more the latter than the former. I always er on the side of "if someone knows what they are talking about geography is not super important" but I think it is worth considering that the local context really is very important!
Always be prepared to challenge. As others have noted, the natural defense mechanism may kick in but folks need to be shown respectfully that there may be better ways. Must never feel bad about highlighting best in class solutions - and spotlighting where projects fall short, for whatever reasons. The expression “penny wise, pound foolish” is an old one that illustrates that myopic thinking - such as on the IBX - is not new. Btw, on the subject of NYC, the Financial Times has a piece on the challenge of Penn Station. Financial Times. Sorry if the link may not work
Reinventing Penn Station: can New York still do big things?
--
Joshua Chaffin in New York
--
Read the full article at:
https://on.ft.com/3T9obvX
Spoiler alert: the jury is still out.
Its a pretty good article! Thanks for sending!
Really interesting take that addresses an argument that many technical advocates either ignore or dismiss.
I would add that when you criticize a project as an outside, you also brush up against human egos: we all want to feel like where we bring a unique lived experience to the table, a large part of which is based on where we live!
Yes absolutely, this is an excellent point!
You are correct.
However, "Not from here" is a common human response, akin to "Who are YOU to be telling me how to raise MY child?" As a "not from here" transit advocate, you are not a voter in a politician's district. (I wanted to Email a Congressman about the IBX project; however, his website rejects Comments from outside his new district. Understandable, but frustrating.)
Also, you are challenging authority. And, possibly challenging the hired consultants' livelihood. Finally, we transit advocates tend to be a bit nerdish, which puts some people off. So, we simply have to deal with it.
That having been said, ignoring outside ideas is analogous to ignoring history. “Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.”― Edmund Burke
Yep, its a common response - I think like a lot of social effects it's important to understand and address!