Should NY make Times Square Pedestrian Mall permanent?- Page 4

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/8/10 at 11:40pm

One of the reasons they may charge double is to pay the obscene rents for anything in Manhattan.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/8/10 at 11:42pm

Oh, I LOVED that smoking sign, SNAFU! Which Woody Allen film featured it so often when they went up on the roof of the nightclub? Oh, Radio Days, right?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/8/10 at 11:46pm

The neon signs of the 30's & 40's put todays to shame.

[Plum]

Posted: 2/9/10 at 2:49am

The pedestrian mall has allowed me to walk on Broadway and 7th Ave. again. I abandoned them years ago in favor of walking along 8th to get to most theaters, but now I can use the extra space to maneuver around slow tourists. It doesn't feel nearly as congested to me in those areas as it used to be when it was the same number of people squished into a third of the space with 52 street vendors, guys advertising comedy shows, and people handing out flyers for tour buses.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/9/10 at 9:29am

As a little boy, I remember visiting NYC and thinking the smoking sign was so cool. Today's billboards are nothing compared to back then. Today's billboards just try to be edgy and shock in a sexual way; no creativity at all.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 12:34pm

It's officially permanent.
Pedestrian Times Square

[WestVillage]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 12:39pm

And it is still officially ugly and stupid. It has caused southbound traffic to move SLOWER than before it was there. A failure becomes permanent.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 1:02pm

"And it is still officially ugly and stupid. It has caused southbound traffic to move SLOWER than before it was there. A failure becomes permanent."

One person's opinion doesn't make it official. So what that it slows traffic down? There's too many cars in NY as it is and it isn't a pedestrian or bike friendly city. Now that it's permanent they can bring in landscaping, art, etc. Sure, it's mostly for the tourists, but they fuel our economy, and for most of us who work in Times Square, it's much easier to get around now.

I never liked Bloomberg, but I'm behind him on this one. I also think they should revisit the traffic congestion tax. Less cars, less pollution, and more walking and biking. Most major cities have pedestrian areas in tourist-heavy areas. Why shouldn't we?

[WestVillage]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 1:22pm

"So what that it slows traffic down?"

One of the goals of the mall was to SPEED up traffic/

Where is the money going to come from to pay for this landscaping?

Tourist would flock to NYC with or without the pedestrian mall. I hardly think its a driving force to get them to visit the city.

I don't at all think it's easier to get around. Before the pedestrian mall, I would bypass all the tourists by walking in the street .. now the tourists are all over the place and it's impossible to get around them.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 1:57pm

unsightly as hell. I've been avoiding that area, now I guess I'll permanently take 8th ave.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 2:07pm

If you are in a car trying to drive through Times Square, I think you're a moron.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 2:32pm

What SonofRobbieJ said, plus, I used to take 8th av all the time, but now I don't have to, because there's more room to move in Times Square.

"One of the goals of the mall was to SPEED up traffic"

Nah, that was just one of Bloomberg's BS lines to push the project through and to try to push through the traffic congestion tax - all steps in the right direction, IMO.

"Tourist would flock to NYC with or without the pedestrian mall. I hardly think its a driving force to get them to visit the city."

Of course it's not a selling point, but it could encourage them to hang around to see two shows on two show days. It gives them a place to see ads for other shows.

"Where is the money going to come from to pay for this landscaping? "

Jesus! Taxes, of course. I'd much rather my taxes be spent on landscaping than a lot of other crap the city uses it for.

"Before the pedestrian mall, I would bypass all the tourists by walking in the street"

Yah, that was great for traffic and a really safe and sane thing to do - there's been a 30% decrease in pedestrian accidents since the mall was installed (I'll provide a link later).

"now the tourists are all over the place and it's impossible to get around them."

Odd. I don't seem to have that problem, and I deal with it six days a week.

eta: realized the link regarding the decrease in pedestrian injuries since the mall was added is already in the link in my previous post


Updated On: 2/11/10 at 02:32 PM

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 3:51pm

I don't understand how the pedestrian mall is ANY more unsighty than regular old Times Square, LOL. I mean, come ON, people, it's the same exact land area, just closed off the cars now. It doesn't drastically change the way that area of the city LOOKS, save a couple of items to block the streets and corners and chairs. And who cares about traffic in NYC? What are you people doing in a car in Manhattan anyway? This is a pedestrian city people! I can finally walk through Times Square without injuring multiple tourists and slowpoke locals.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 3:56pm

"I don't understand how the pedestrian mall is ANY more unsighty than regular old Times Square"

Well that's what makes the world go round, isn't it?

I'm sure I wouldn't understand why you think certain things are unsightly.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 6:05pm

R.I.P. The Times Square of old

Welcome to Disneyland east.

[TimesSquareRegular]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 7:34pm

Just love the way people will automatically criticize with a "disney" reference ...... great insight, and a thoughtful contribution to the conversation, meaningless as it may be.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 7:52pm

We criticize it with a Disney reference because it feels like a Disney amusement Parks version of what New York should feel like. Gone is the real flavor of NYC. Gone the wonderful Neon, Gone the smoking sign, gone some of the great old buildings and theatres, shops and old eateries to be replaced with cinder block constructs with tacked on facades much like Disney or a Las Vegas casino.
Now we can go to Times Square and partake in Red Lobster, Olive Garden et al. which can be found in any shopping mall in the US. It is a sad homogenizing of what was unique to Times Square and NYC.

Updated On: 2/11/10 at 07:52 PM

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 7:54pm

Snafu

I could not have said it any better.

[TimesSquareRegular]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 8:31pm

So.... maybe we can bring back some of the old places ..... like the Wienerwald (next to the Palace - any of 'em still out there around the country?) or Howard Johnson's (that was so unique to New york, right?) or if you want some theme nostalgia, how about the South Seas theme restaurants that dotted the area (remember Hawaii Kai?)

Things change, and not all the changes are BAD, or can be recapped with a "Disney" label.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 8:39pm

Yes, things change, this is true. New York is a living city. Everything NEW however is not better (Madison Square Garden for example). The Disney label for Times Square fits however. It was Disney that worked with Gulianni to revamp the area, remember? I remember one of the hotels was supposed to shoot Pixy Dust in one of the earlier models of what the area was to ultimately be. It is very much like an Epcot version of what Times Square is or should be. Sorry if you think the Disneyfication of Times Square is a slight. It is just an observation.

[bdwaygirl]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 8:53pm

When they build a Space Mountain there, then I'll consider it Disney.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 8:55pm

"It is very much like an Epcot version of what Times Square is or should be. Sorry if you think the Disneyfication of Times Square is a slight. It is just an observation."

It's an observation, but IMO, an inaccurate one. It's not even close to Epcot. I was around for "the good old days" back in the '70's, the hookers, the drug dealers, the empty Broadway houses. Many of you are romanticizing things that never really were.

Restaurant chains are everywhere - Serbo-Croatia - hell, Paris has McDonald's now - welcome to globalization. It's still NYC. It's still Times Square. It's still Broadway, and you're making a ridiculous fuss about a few blocks being closed down to cars?

"Now we can go to Times Square and partake in Red Lobster, Olive Garden et al. which can be found in any shopping mall in the US. It is a sad homogenizing of what was unique to Times Square and NYC."

Sure, there's those places, but there always have been, as TimesSquareRegular has pointed out. There are also many, many places that have been around for decades - just walk a few more blocks. Look a little harder. The Hourglass, on restaurant row, has been there for 30 or more years. Mont Blanc, on W 48th, the same. Jesus! Just open your eyes a little to see what still is and accept a little bit of change. Times Square has always been an area of change. I honest to God don't see what all the fuss is about.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 9:47pm

I too was around the area in the late sixties and the early seventies. I remember the closed houses with the dark triple X marquees. I even went to a few when they were still showing the porn movies ( Devil in Miss Jones and Deep Throat and who could forget The Stewardesses in 3-D?), feet sticking to the floor, the whole 9 yards. I am not romanticizing. Even bought some um... smoking materials from a guy on the corner to enhance the experiences There was a gritty feel to the place that was a feeling of New York. The feeling of old grandure gone to seed.
I much prefer the tarnished elegance of Urban decay from that period to the Garish Blade Runner by way of Disney esthetic that is going on there today. Give me a hooker. a drug dealer and a porn theatre to a Hello Kitty superstore any day.

eta. the early 70's found NYC with lots of empty buildings, not just the theatre district. The city was bankrupt. All the buildings of Ladies Mile were empty shells as many in the area the area of Soho.

Updated On: 2/11/10 at 09:47 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 10:20pm

There are many pedestrian-only, city center zones in Europe. This is nothing new.

Autos have been banned in the center of Florence, Italy, for a decade or more now. Other cities have followed suit.

New York is actually late to the party with this plan.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/11/10 at 10:50pm

"New doesn't have to mean better."

So true. New can mean worse, as is evident with this event.

I'm glad I was around for the "real" Times Square era. The new one has no character, no charm. Just another mall.