# Times Square transformation



## xlchris (Jun 23, 2006)

What do you think of it? Today the first car free spots on Times Square and parts of Broadway are going to be opened.

If you look at Earth Cam (Cam5) you can see the new layout of Times Square.

I think it's weird, they are testing this. If it doesn't work out they will change it next year. But I hope they do, actually. This is weird :nuts:


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

It looks nice.

There's also a proposal to pedestrianize 42nd Street from the Hudson River to the East River and put a tram in for east-west transport.

http://www.vision42.org/


If Mike Bloomberg is re-elected for a third term, I believe this will happen.


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

For all of Midtown's greatness, it does seem overly car-dominated in the sense that there are too many giant arterials, and cars take all space whether legal or not, including crosswalks. Also, that's a neighborhood that could use a lot more room for pedestrians. I mostly like this idea. 

We have a similar problem at the Pike Place Market in Seattle. With the main sidewalk on Pike Place jammed (it's probably only 8' wide), pedestrians simply dominate the street instead, particularly on weekends and during the five-month tourist season. The difference is traffic is one lane going walking speed at most. Unfortunately the busiest interior walkway, a three-block length, doesn't have that "overflow" potential...I braved it yesterday and realized spent several minutes edging forward to get to a store just a half-block away. Hopefully they'll do some selective widenings as part of the seismic/mechanical renovation that's being phased building-by-building starting this month. 

Much of the problem is human nature. There's always some lady in front waddling along, or someone pushing a stroller, and too many people behind aren't taking advantage of openings, or accelerating when they get the opportunity.


----------



## Fizmo1337 (Mar 26, 2009)

It looks a bit weird to see all the chairs on the street (from the pics I saw) but if they eventually go ahead with the plans I'm sure they make it it quite cosy and a comfortable pedestrian area. I hope they go ahead with it.

btw that pic with the tram looks great!!


----------



## pixel2008 (Sep 18, 2008)

Wow. Manhattan is going Euro???


----------



## James Saito (Nov 6, 2002)

Wow, that looks so un-New York!


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

Fizmo1337 said:


> It looks a bit weird to see all the chairs on the street (from the pics I saw) but if they eventually go ahead with the plans I'm sure they make it it quite cosy and a comfortable pedestrian area. I hope they go ahead with it.
> 
> btw that pic with the tram looks great!!


What's being erected now is temporary. When this is agreed to stay permanently in place, there will be professional landscaping, etc., and it will look much nicer.

P.S.: I agree re: the tram. I predict that it will be built on 42nd Street first but will then be built on other major east-west streets (e.g., Houston, 34th, 57th and 86th Streets).


----------



## Euromax (Jan 5, 2008)

what ever , who cares if looks less "un-New York" cities need change, this one needs one fast and this is a brilliant idea for the better.


----------



## Taylorhoge (Feb 5, 2006)

Euromax said:


> what ever , who cares if looks less "un-New York" cities need change, this one needs one fast and this is a brilliant idea for the better.


Not really New York City needs to stay New York City


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

This article from Archpaper shows how NY is trying to emulate the European way.

http://archpaper.com/e-board_rev.asp?News_ID=3521

Here is a new, European bike lane on 9th Avenue in Chelsea.


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

The bike lane looks like an excellent solution for Manhattan's overly-wide avenues.


----------



## Mollywood (May 23, 2007)

dnobsemajdnob said:


> This article from Archpaper shows how NY is trying to emulate the European way.
> 
> http://archpaper.com/e-board_rev.asp?News_ID=3521
> 
> Here is a new, European bike lane on 9th Avenue in Chelsea.


Now that's how to do a bike lane! I wish they would do it that way in Toronto.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

I think those changes that are already taking place for quite some time all over Manhattan are simply great. Manhattan has the urbanity, if not there, you could nowhere in the US sustain a pedestrian / PT / bicycle oriented centre.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

Taylorhoge said:


> Not really New York City needs to stay New York City


Cities change and if they change towards more quality of life there is nothing wrong with it. Unless you consider traffic jam an endangered species in Manhattan. If you are into that there is still enough around these remodeled streets. 

Urbanity is about lively neighborhoods, at least for me. These plans will not lead to less livelyness, just a different more pedestrian oriented one.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

A Times Sq. ‘Sanctuary’ on First Workday Without Cars 
By WILLIAM NEUMAN

Published in The New York Times
May 26, 2009 

The difference between the old, frenetic Times Square and the newly reconfigured, still frenetic Times Square became clear on Tuesday: now you can pull up a chair to watch the show. 

On Seventh Avenue in Midtown Manhattan, there was plenty of horsepower on Tuesday. On Broadway, there was foot power. 
Traffic still flowed on Seventh Avenue, without any obvious bottlenecks, two days after the city shut Broadway to traffic between 47th and 42nd Streets. 

The electronic billboards still flashed, the news zippers zipped and the giant video screens played on. 

And thousands of people bustled by, as always, on what was the first workday test of the city’s new Times Square configuration. 

But hundreds of people also took the opportunity to pause, linger or even take up temporary residence at the Crossroads of the World — a previously inconceivable idea.

“This is like a sanctuary,” said Yesim Bilgic, 36, a Swedish novelist who was sitting in one of hundreds of lawn chairs set out in the center of Broadway, where vehicular traffic is no longer allowed. She had her laptop open and was trying to find a free Wi-Fi connection. “It is chaos and you have your oasis in the middle of it,” she said. “I love it.”

On Sunday, the city sealed off Broadway to traffic at Times Square and at Herald Square, from 35th to 33rd Streets, where it intersects with the Avenue of Americas. On Monday, which was Memorial Day, the Times Square Alliance, a group that represents local businesses, set out 350 lawn chairs and 26 chaise longues where cars had previously held sway. 

But there seemed to be an official holding of breath to see what would happen when people returned to work on Tuesday, accompanied by the usual rush of taxis, trucks and other vehicles. 

Seth Solomonow, a spokesman for the Department of Transportation, said that traffic seemed to be moving well at Times Square and Herald Square on Tuesday. Some spots that seemed like likely bottlenecks appeared largely trouble-free. One of those was 48th Street, where cars now have their last chance to jog over to Seventh Avenue before reaching Times Square. 

Greg Deans has been watching traffic at that intersection for 12 years, as a doorman at the Renaissance New York Hotel Times Square, on Seventh Avenue between 47th and 48th Streets. He said that traffic had been moving well, but that it was typically light early in the week. He wondered how well traffic would move as the week progressed, including on Wednesday, when many people visit Times Square to attend Broadway matinees. 

“It’s too early to tell,” Mr. Deans, 42, said. 

Keith Dawkins, 59, a cabdriver, thought he already knew what would happen on days when traffic was heavier. 

“It’s not going to work out,” Mr. Dawkins said. He predicted that there would be days when traffic would back up on Seventh Avenue from Pennsylvania Station to Times Square. 

But traffic was very light heading down Broadway north of Times Square on Tuesday, suggesting that many drivers had heard about the changes. Between 42nd and 35th Streets, where vehicular traffic was permitted, cars and trucks were so scarce it might as well have been Manhattan, Mont. 

Officials hope that by reducing traffic at some of the unorthodox intersections caused by the diagonal of Broadway, traffic will move more efficiently. At the same time, the traffic-free blocks will create more room for pedestrians.

Traffic theories aside, many passers-by reveled in the novelty of sitting or relaxing in the middle of Broadway. 

“I’m going to get rid of my apartment and I’m going to stay here,” said Brian Gianci, 35, an actor from Brooklyn who was lying in a chaise longue by Duffy Square.

On the block of Broadway north of 42nd Street, many people arranged the candy-colored pink, blue and green lawn chairs (bought through a Brooklyn hardware store for $10.74 each, according to the alliance) to face uptown to best take in the great madcap stage of Times Square. 

One of them was Brenda Ross, 60, a retired federal worker from Maryland. 

“It’s not calming,” she said, referring to the show unfolding before her. “But it’s satisfying.”


----------



## lokinyc (Sep 17, 2002)

I'm excited about this. I (like most New Yorkers) usually avoid Times and Herald Squares because the sidewalks were just too clogged. These changes should hopefully make the areas more tolerable.


----------



## JPBrazil (Mar 12, 2007)

dnobsemajdnob said:


> It looks nice.
> 
> There's also a proposal to pedestrianize 42nd Street from the Hudson River to the East River and put a tram in for east-west transport.
> 
> ...


I would LOVE to see that.


----------



## CityPolice (Sep 27, 2008)

dnobsemajdnob said:


> What's being erected now is temporary. When this is agreed to stay permanently in place, there will be professional landscaping, etc., and it will look much nicer.
> 
> P.S.: I agree re: the tram. I predict that it will be built on 42nd Street first but will then be built on other major east-west streets (e.g., Houston, 34th, 57th and 86th Streets).


Well they are not going to put a tram on 86st or any other major street that goes through central park unless it goes underground through central park but i doubt that.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

You're correct. Good point, but I can see it on 57th and on 34th and Houston.


----------



## Inkdaub (Dec 28, 2006)

Taylorhoge said:


> Not really New York City needs to stay New York City


What?


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

Kensingtonian said:


> ^^ maybe. Times Square should be crowded though - it's part of the allure. most places in Canada and the U.S. are the opposite of Times Square, so I can see how people would find it exciting. i, personally, can't stand Times Square and avoid it whenever i go to NY


All of NY is crowded due to its huge size.


----------



## aleochi (Jun 16, 2008)

I always thought Times Square must be closed for cars. Imagine how vibrant and crowded this place would be if they made a REAL square there, replacing this horrible streets. Car is a very old fashioned thing for a metropolis, specially New York City! There's no sense to divide the pedestrian with chaotic streets.


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

pixel2008 said:


> Wow. Manhattan is going Euro???


I think Manhattan has always been "Euro-er" than the rest of the USA.


----------



## Beware (Oct 30, 2007)

dnobsemajdnob said:


> All of NY is crowded due to its huge size.


:yes: *Thank You!* AND NYC didn't succumb to the, insane, " malling " and suburban exoduses of the 60's through the 90's that nearly-decimated every urban center in America. Do New Yorker's realize how fortunate they are? If only NYC residents knew what many American cities wouldn't give to have just a fraction of Manhattan's sidewalk traffic in their struggling, central business districts.... despite having spent hundreds of billions of dollars on urban renewal and master-planning?

*Times Square is a, civic, masterpiece! *Yes it's insanely crowded and chaotic. No dispute. But, it's also alive AND exciting! It's thronged sidewalks are THE personification of " the big city " in all it's urban glory. BEWARE, New Yorker's, of drastically altering it! YOU may not like the consequences. THIS (below) is amazing!










(image from flickr.com)​


----------



## Imperfect Ending (Apr 7, 2003)

They should cut Hollywood Blvd off too in Los Angeles. Traffic is always shit, no smart local would use it to get anywhere so might-as-well be walking-street.


----------



## Imperfect Ending (Apr 7, 2003)

philvia said:


> what looks dangerous? a street with no cars? LOL


The train


----------



## earthJoker (Dec 15, 2004)

Trams are only dangerous if you are not used to them. In Zürich many accidents with trams happen with tourists.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

Imperfect Ending said:


> The train


As someone living in Vienna I have to smile about that. Of course accidents can happen, as they can happen with cars as well. Trams are common in quite a number of cities within otherwise pedestrian zones. Zürich is a good example. Its working out fine.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

> Times Square is a, civic, masterpiece! Yes it's insanely crowded and chaotic. No dispute. But, it's also alive AND exciting! It's thronged sidewalks are THE personification of " the big city " in all it's urban glory. BEWARE, New Yorker's, of drastically altering it! YOU may not like the consequences. THIS (below) is amazing!


Sorry, but like you said, New York is different and this is a different age. The crowds at Times Square who complained about the awful traffic and noise, are not going to go away from an attraction that was already relatively unacceptable to traffic. This isn't the urban renewal days of the sixties. New York is not going to lose the crowds. It has the demand that most other US cities lack...people come there regardless of what happens. 

By the way, I went to Boston's downtown crossing, which is a pedestrian mall that is (mostly) closed off to cars, and even on a Saturday afternoon, it was busy and thriving. New York makes Boston seem like a village in comparison...I think it will do fine.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

Photo by Paradise


----------



## Anderson Geimz (Mar 29, 2008)

The chairs are ridiculous!


----------



## spongeg (May 1, 2006)

looks tsrange to see lawn chairs without lawn - neat idea though hope it stays


----------



## Onn (Oct 11, 2008)

I would go with the entire square being closed off, as long as Time Square stays as full as it does now. There would be nothing worse than having a semi-empty looking plaza in the very heart of New York City. If their going to do it, they would also need to take out the street and put in permanent structures. Lights, benches, planters, food and vending stations. None of these cheap lawn chairs...which are obviously only temporary. 

I thought I would hate the new Times Square, but it looks to be working better than I expected.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

Onn said:


> I would go with the entire square being closed off, as long as Time Square stays as full as it does now. There would be nothing worse than having a semi-empty looking plaza in the very heart of New York City. If their going to do it, they would also need to take out the street and put in permanent structures. Lights, benches, planters, food and vending stations. None of these cheap lawn chairs...which are obviously only temporary.
> 
> I thought I would hate the new Times Square, but it looks to be working better than I expected.


These things take time. They seem to make sure that it won't cause a traffic infarct, thats why its temporary so far. But I am confident that it won't take too long until they create something permanent which will be of course a completely different category in terms of quality and design.


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

Slartibartfas said:


> These things take time. They seem to make sure that it won't cause a traffic infarct, thats why its temporary so far. But I am confident that it won't take too long until they create something permanent which will be of course a completely different category in terms of quality and design.


True...

The shots you have seen are temporary closings, mainly to do traffic studies. They were really were worried about how closing Time Square off like that would affect traffic but it HASNT. 

This is because Broadway runs diaganol to the street grid and creates more complicated intersections instead of just a 4 way intersection. The grid is the most effecient way to channel traffic and closing off Broadway actually improves traffic flow.

Also another problem with this project is that business owners around Time Square are worried about how this will affect business and were complaining loudly to the Dept. of Transportation.

Personally i think i might miss seeing double streams of traffic flowing through, like others said Time Square really feels like the beating of heart of New York, the place were you can feel the pulse of the city the strongest. Perhaps my opinion will change when they completed design with benches and trees planted.


----------



## Mr Bricks (May 6, 2005)

Looks good!


----------



## Rebasepoiss (Jan 6, 2007)

Why did they even call Times Square a square before?


----------



## Troopchina (Oct 7, 2005)

I like the idea. It may actually become a square instead of just a busy road junction.


----------



## UrbanImpact (Jan 10, 2005)

Rebasepoiss said:


> Why did they even call Times Square a square before?


There are two squares (really triangles) at the x's that crossing streets make in the area, but they are quite small.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

It was originally called Longacre, like in London. It was changed to Times Sq in the late 1800's when the NYTimes moved its hq there.


----------



## Woozle (Mar 30, 2008)

Beware said:


> :yes: *Thank You!* AND NYC didn't succumb to the, insane, " malling " and suburban exoduses of the 60's through the 90's that nearly-decimated every urban center in America. Do New Yorker's realize how fortunate they are?




Well, actually it did. The vast majority of people who were born in NYC in the 50's and before now live elsewhere (or on Staten Island, which is suburban). 

The vast majority of today's New Yorkers are 1st or 2nd generation. Over 60% of today's New Yorkers are immigrants and children of immigrants. 

Old-time New Yorkers are no more and today's New Yorkers have very little to do with the population of New York of, say, 50 years ago. Hasidic Jews are staying put and Italian grannies can still be sighted in Bensonhurst, but virtually every middle class New Yorker who had children in public schools in the 1960's-90's has left for the suburbs.


----------



## JohnFlint1985 (Jun 15, 2007)

JPBrazil said:


> I would LOVE to see that.


I'd love that as well, but it is hardly possible to run the tram at grade at 42 street just like that. 42 st is crossed by 11 avenues and it will be a nightmare to accommodate traffic with tram going across. Though it is possible.


----------



## Ashtony (Jun 15, 2009)

I have been to times square... the traffic is horrible.. that's all I can say


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

JohnFlint1985 said:


> I'd love that as well, but it is hardly possible to run the tram at grade at 42 street just like that. 42 st is crossed by 11 avenues and it will be a nightmare to accommodate traffic with tram going across. Though it is possible.


Well it would be less bad than having to accommodate car traffic along it.


----------



## hoosier (Apr 11, 2007)

JohnFlint1985 said:


> I'd love that as well, but it is hardly possible to run the tram at grade at 42 street just like that. 42 st is crossed by 11 avenues and it will be a nightmare to accommodate traffic with tram going across. Though it is possible.


It wouldn't be that hard actually. There are already traffic lights at the major intersections with 42nd Street. Just keep them and when the tram crosses the street, the lights turn red for cross traffic.


----------



## bobbycuzin (May 30, 2007)

that tram idea, as practical as it may be, looks completely hideous


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

^^ How that?


----------



## snowman159 (May 16, 2008)

I think a tram on 42nd St doesn't really make a lot of sense.
You already have the Times Sq - Grand Central Shuttle (and the 7 train). From those two points pretty much everything along 42nd St is within walking distance. New Yorkers are used to walking anyway - that's why they're not as fat as the rest of America, and we don't wanna change that. 

If the trams were to get priority at traffic lights, that would screw up the light patterns on the crossing avenues and probably cause a lot more trouble than closing off Broadway. If they don't get priority and you have to sit at red lights all the time, why even bother? You'd be faster walking or taking the underground shuttle. 

Let's not forget how dense the subway system is around Midtown, something which most out-of-towners fail to realize (the map isn't drawn to scale). And then there's a very dense network of buses. 

I just don't think New York lends itself very well to trams and imho there's no real need, anyhow. :dunno:


----------

