"Streetcar suburb" is the name reserved for the suburbs built in the late 19th century, early 20th century around streetcar lines. The streetcar lines were the main connection between these suburbs and the urban area they were attached to. Sometimes, the streetcar companies were deeply involved in the construction of the suburbs themselves, they would buy land that had little value on the outskirts of cities, then build a streetcar line through them. The streetcar would highly increase the desirability of the area and increase the value of the land. The streetcar company would then either divide the land and sell the lots at much higher prices than they paid or build the real estate themselves and sell or rent it.

This is what is called "value capture" and it was a major way streetcar and rail companies would fund themselves in the "old days". Many of these companies would actually be created by real estate giants, just to feed their main estate activities. Electricity companies would also be involved, resulting in huge companies that had many activities feeding each other, the very definition of synergy. Estate companies would build streetcar lines to build more real estate around them, they'd build power plants later on to run electric streetcars and sell the excess electricity to consumers.

When antitrust regulations broke up these huge synergistic conglomerates, streetcar lines, that had been subsidized to feed value onto real estate activities, would struggle to survive, especially as fares were kept low by political pressure.

The bungalow became popular because it met the needs of changing times in which the lower middle class were moving from apartments to private houses in great numbers.

Bungalows can be found in the older neighborhoods of most American cities. In fact, they were so popular for a time that many cities have what is called a "Bungalow Belt" of homes built in the 1920s. These neighborhoods were often clustered along streetcar lines as they extended into the suburbs. Bungalows were built in smaller groups than is typical today, often one to three at a time.

Bungalows were modest, inexpensive and low-profile. Before World War I, a bungalow could be built for as little as $900 although the price rose to around $3,500 after the war. Bungalow designs were spread by the practice of building from mail-order plans available from illustrated catalogs, sometimes with alterations based on local practice or conditions. Contractors and builders would sell the catalogs at a low cost and in some cases, give them away for free.

The examples [с квебекскими мультиплексами] are a lot more dense than what are usually referred to as streetcar suburbs in the US. Usually they're neighborhoods of small-lot single-family houses with a mix of duplexes and small apartments, with some larger apartments and stores/mixed use buildings along the main thoroughfare where the streetcar ran. Because they're less dense, you don't usually see a continuous commercial corridor along the streetcar route, but it tends to be a bit more nodal with business districts at important intersections and denser apartments in between.

What I find interesting about it is that since density naturally wants to fall away the farther you walk from the streetcar line, it allows for a lot of variety in the built environment in a relatively short distance. It's not unlike the finger plan of Copenhagen, which although it's arranged around more of a rapid transit/electric commuter rail system, the space between the "fingers" of development along the rail line is much more rural in character with parks and preserves. Streetcar lines can do a similar thing, though on a bit smaller scale.

Anyway, the design of the street grid is of paramount importance, regardless of the density. It's still the same pattern if you have multi-story commercial buildings along the streetcar line with dense apartments and row houses on the side streets, or small single-story shops along the streetcar line with single-family houses on the side streets. The connectivity and spinal nature of the streetcar line is what's important.

Even neighborhoods that never had streetcars but were built in the 1930s and 40s can have this pattern, though I suspect they were laid out pre-Depression and just sat in limbo until the post-war period. Either way, maybe they figured buses would serve the same purpose, and that parking could be accommodated either on-street or in parking lots between the commercial buildings and the residential neighborhoods. They probably never foresaw just how tempting the new strip mall a mile or two out of town would be in luring those businesses or their customers away.

A reason streetcar suburbs worked is because they connected the residential suburban areas with downtown. Yes businesses grew along the streetcar lines, but they were usually for serving those local areas almost exclusively. All the major jobs, shopping, and service activities happened downtown, while the businesses along the streetcar lines were secondary convenience type businesses, like the local restaurant, butcher, convenience store, etc.

Such a pattern is similar to what you see along rapid transit lines and in a slightly more nodal form in commuter rail. The neighborhoods along the lines or around the stations are primarily residential with some local convenience type businesses, but the main economic engine is the big city downtown that all the routes converge at. This means you can have an effective transit system that's entirely radial, which is very easy to build, though unfortunately it's very unbalanced as far as time-of-day and directional running. The point is, since everyone for the most part is going to and from downtown, you don't need to worry about suburb-to-suburb trips because few people have any reason to make those sorts of trips.

In today's paradigm however, downtown is usually just one of many employment centers, and may not even be the single largest one anymore. At the very least, even if still dominant, there's so many jobs dispersed throughout the rest of the metro area, that to properly serve them with transit you need a comprehensive net, more of a spider web than a radial arrangement.

Однако в современной парадигме центр города обычно является лишь одним из множества центров занятости, и, возможно, даже не самым крупным. Как минимум, даже если он по-прежнему доминирует, в остальной части агломерации разбросано так много рабочих мест, что для их полноценного обслуживания транспортом необходима разветвлённая сеть, скорее паутина, чем радиальная схема.

Chicago is a perfect example of a city with a radial transit network, at least when looking at the 'L' and Metra. The bus system is much more gridded within the city itself though. Anyway, that radial network is great if you're living in the suburbs (or residential neighborhoods within the city) and commuting to downtown, but nothing else. It's very hard to get decent transit ridership to suburban offices even if they're near transit lines because they can only effectively pull people from the particular route they're on. Anyone else from the rest of the system will have to take an "in and out" route through downtown which can easily quadruple the time it takes. Plus with little major shopping going on downtown but in suburban malls and strip centers, there's even fewer people using the radial transit network that would have in the past.

A statistic that would be worth knowing is just how effective particular transit routes are at capturing the rides they actually serve. If you look at all of Chicagoland, transit [имеется в виду ОТ] ridership is pretty bad, in part because of massive job sprawl and suburb-to-suburb commuting. People can't take transit that doesn't go where they need to go, obviously. But I bet if you could find the transit ridership for suburb-to-downtown commuting it would be a much higher percentage.

За следующие 90 лет смогли худо-бедно построить ещё 33 станции, но состояние сигнальных управляющих систем, путей, тоннелей и самого подвижного состава оставляет желать лучшего. А разгул урагана «Сэнди» в 2012 г. с затоплением многих тоннелей и станций лишь усугубил ситуацию. В результате из-за растущего числа отказов в подземке последние четыре года действовал режим чрезвычайного положения, отменённый только в июне 2021 г. Для этого MTA пришлось приложить уйму усилий на «латание дыр», что хорошо видно из её инвестиционной программы.

Ньюйоркцы было разок попробовали взяться за дело и начать строить что-то новое, но оказалось слишком дорого. В 2017 г. после 10 лет строительства открылись первые три станции новой ветки нью-йоркской подземки, 2nd Avenue line, планы на которую вынашивались ещё с 1929 г. Открыли лишь первую фазу длиной около 3 км, предполагают продление линии дальше на север (+ 13 станций).

Президент Форд всерьёз полагал, что в банкротстве страшного ничего нет, финансовый центр «просто» переедет в Чикаго. Злопыхатели связывают это с дурным влиянием Рамсфелда, тогдашнего главы администрации президента, родом из штата Иллинойс. Уже потом на международных переговорах Форд услышал много нелицеприятного в свой адрес, последовательно от канцлера ФРГ Шмидта и президента Франции д’Эстена. Они втолковали ему, что Нью-Йорк — не только крупнейший и богатейший город Америки, но и икона для всего мира. И его банкротство многими воспримется как банкротство всей страны, и вызовет «эффект домино» с падением других глобальных финансовых центров. В итоге незадачливому Форду пришлось подписать пакет срочных мер финансовой помощи на три года вперёд, чтобы залатать дыру в бюджете города.

@ИльяГнездилов-р7ы
Уже писали, что всё таки поставят контактную сеть