Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Surprise surprise, students at New York‘s existing universities are choosing to go into computer science even without a bling-y contest over land, favors, and cash worth hundreds of millions of dollars! Reporteth the WSJ: When city officials launched a competition last year to build an applied-sciences campus on Manhattan‘s Roosevelt Island, they hoped an outpost of a top-tier school would draw elite students and boost New York‘s burgeoning technology and engineering scene. …
This post originally appeared at Neighborhood Effects, a Mercatus Center blog where we write about the economics of state and local policy. Next week, New York Governor Cuomo is likely to sign a bill that will marginally increase competition in the NYC cab market. The new rule will allow passengers to hail some livery cars in outer boroughs and add 2,000 additional medallions for yellow cabs with wheelchair access. The auction of these medallions is projected to raise $1 billion. This figure might seem outlandish, but last month two medallions sold at auction for over $1 million. That’s right, it costs $1 million for the right to drive a cab in NYC, not accounting for any of the costs associated with owning and operating the vehicle. The price tag of these medallions that are sold to the highest bidder demonstrates that in a free market, many more drivers would enter the cab industry. Artificially constraining the supply hurts both consumers and those who are not able to drive a cab because they are unable to purchase a medallion. Unsurprisingly, the Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade remains strongly opposed to this bill. The increase in the supply of medallions will lower the value of the medallions that cab drivers and larger medallion companies already own. Their lobbying efforts reflect their desire to profit through the political system. While this increase in the number of medallions available for yellow cabs and allowing some livery cars to be hailed represents a small improvement for New Yorkers, the reform does not go nearly far enough. For real reform, Mayor Bloomberg should look to Indianapolis. Before Stephen Goldsmith was elected as the city’s mayor in 1991, the number of cabs permitted in Indianapolis was limited to 392. Goldsmith created a Regulatory Study Council whose first […]
The sky's the limit for Dumbo! Last night I wrote a blog post about tech development in New York City, arguing that before the city pours money into a science campus for Cornell on Roosevelt Island, its planners should make more room for entrepreneurs in existing tech hubs like Union Square and Dumbo. …
What exactly is gentrification?
Stanford's (losing) vision for Roosevelt Island, with requisite acres of green Big news out of New York City: Stanford pulled out of Bloomberg’s applied sciences university “competition” after Cornell got an enormous donation, leaving the upstate university the front runner to build a new campus, likely on Roosevelt Island. This comes with up to $100 million in state subsidies, plus free land and invaluable planning acquiescence. …
It has often been suggested that one of the reasons that American subway construction is so expensive is that our laws are too friendly to NIMBYs. That is to say, contractors will be paid to engineer expensive, long-term solutions to avoid short-term disruptions to neighbors during construction. The most prominent example is avoiding cut-and-cover subway construction in favor of digging deep holes with tunnel boring machines that don’t disrupt the surface as much. …
At the Atlantic Cities, Anthony Flint writes on recent Tea Party activism in urban development arena. Tea Party groups across the country have spoken out against all manner of urbanist plans, from CAHSR to Smart Growth in Florida. Flint opines: What’s driving the rebellion is a view that government should have no role in planning or shaping the built environment that in any way interferes with private property rights. Both Flint and the Tea Party members that he’s writing about are seeing right past an essential property right. Don’t landowners have a right to employ their property as they see fit without explicit approval from their communities? Smart Growth tends to limit the right to build sprawl although its historic presercation component creates competing objectives. Traditional land use planning limits property owners’ right to build too though. In an article all about the Tea Part and land use, Stephanie Mencimer at Mother Jones quotes a Tea Party activist who said, “”We don’t need none of that smart growth communism.” I love this as a stand alone quote, but this activist is ignoring the other side of the issue. Traditional planning, at least as top down as Smart Growth, has shaped his or her presumably suburban neighborhood. How about, “We don’t want these socialist setback requirements,” or “Down with pinko minimum lot sizes?” Property rights in land use are, of course, a contentious and debatable issue. Charlie Gardner offers a summary of the court decisions that have led to a world where municipal governments are permitted to take away property rights without compensating land owners for these takings by limiting the density and uses that they are allowed to build. The suburbanist side of this debate is that property rights include the right to control a certain degree of land use for […]
"Made in USA"…and don't you forget it! United Streetcar, led by its former lobbyist, Chandra Brown, is ostensibly a manufacturer, though its greatest asset seems to be its ability to win government contractors….
From an interesting NYT analysis of Russia’s new protesting class – young, urban, and doing pretty well: It is a paradox, but one that has been documented by social scientists: the residents of Moscow and other large cities tend to express greater frustration with Prime Minister Putin as his government has helped make them wealthier. One explanation is the high level of public corruption here, which threatens new personal wealth….
The service the Silicon Valley is paying for but not getting Often when I talk about how high American capital transit costs are compared to those in Europe and East Asia, transit backers get quite defensive, and take it as an attack on transit. This couldn’t be further from my intention. My point isn’t that transit in America is expensive and should not be built – it’s that transit in America is expensive and this is why we get such poor service….