U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-03-2011, 09:18 PM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 10,085,320 times
Reputation: 3073

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Oh, come on! No one in my neighborhood drives a hummer. Very few even drive SUVs. That is an "urban legend".
I was not implying that you or your neighbors drive hummers, OK?

Again, another joke!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2011, 09:42 PM
Status: "On Break" (set 8 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
81,413 posts, read 91,857,189 times
Reputation: 28071
Quote:
Originally Posted by HandsUpThumbsDown View Post
I was not implying that you or your neighbors drive hummers, OK?

Again, another joke!
Sorry, I'm tired tonight. Not much of a sense of humor. My apologies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 11:00 PM
Status: "On Break" (set 8 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
81,413 posts, read 91,857,189 times
Reputation: 28071
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg View Post
It's amazing how fast Katiana goes from 0 to ridiculous from a standing start--of course I'm not talking about giving up antibiotics or women's suffrage, but somehow the idea of making use of any ideas from the past, even ones that worked, is lunacy! It is in fact just that sort of technical innovation (vaccines, medicine, sanitation) and social progress (suffrage, integration) that make our cities far more livable today than they were in the 19th century, or the early 20th century. Meanwhile, anyone who works at a trauma center can tell you some of the physical toll exacted by the automobile--30,000 or so deaths a year, hundreds of thousands of serious injuries. The suburbs are no longer the key to better health and safety; we cured disease, but you can't vaccinate children against being smashed into pieces by an auto accident (regardless of whether you're driving a Suburban or a Fit.)

Bikes and pedestrians use the public roads at serious risk of life and limb--and of course, they don't use the highways at all, a form of transit Katiana seems to scrupulously ignore, or pretend that her grandma took her horse and buggy on the Interstate to commute into Denver every day. The only place where those vehicles interact in anything like an equitable manner is in a neighborhood that resembles those 1910 neighborhoods: broad sidewalks, narrow streets, low speed limits. Just the sort of thing you don't find on a highway or a major suburban shopping street--or in an urban environment overcrowded with cars.
While we're on the topic, I"d really appreciate you canning the personal attacks.

My grandparents that used the horse and buggy lived in Wisconsin, not Colorado, something I have posted many times. If you weren't so quick to try to make fun of me, you might have read that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 11:41 PM
 
Location: Sacramento, Placerville
2,161 posts, read 4,456,715 times
Reputation: 1651
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR_C View Post
Every time I see posts like yours, I think to myself how lucky I am to live in a place as nice as Youngstown, Ohio. In addition to not having bums urinating on my sidewalk and destroying my landscaping, our real estate is dirt cheap because it's hard to find a job, and we're FAR behind the curve on re-embracing the concept of urban living.



I can't speak for wburg. But what I think he/she is advocating is a more balanced transportation system. But the system is heavily stacked in favor of the automobile at the moment. In Ohio, for example, ODOT has just raised the funds allocated to mass-transit from +/-0.4% of their total budget, to +/-1.7%. ($10 million to $50 million)

No one wants to eliminate the car, and make everyone live in apartment buildings. But more people would choose to use mass-transit and live closer to their employer, if transportation systems were all on a level playing field.

I would like to see improvements in public transportation too. But it actually needs to be somewhat of a pleasant experience.

The problem with thinking people are going to live near their employer is that many people don't make enough to live near their employer. The other problem is most people aren't going to move every time they are laid off and find another job 30 miles away. I've had six employers in the last ten years and have had to commute to all ends of the metro area for these jobs. It is cheaper to drive than go through the expense and hassle of selling and buying every time you go through the lay-off cycle, and this is the norm for several occupation now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 11:51 PM
 
Location: Sacramento, Placerville
2,161 posts, read 4,456,715 times
Reputation: 1651
Quote:
Originally Posted by R3ALTAWK718 View Post
No, $4 a gallon is only the beginning. Eventually people will begin to leave the suburbs in ever increasing numbers to areas that are not auto dependent. Where the percentage of money spent on commuting is lower. It's already happening slowly.
Many of the best jobs in the Sacramento area are in the suburbs. At the far end of the suburbs at that. Thus the reason behind the growth in Folsom and Roseville/Rocklin. Unless, of course, you have a job with the State of California in Downtown Sacramento.

Some of those areas are unreasonably expensive too. That is the price people are willing to pay so they don't have to live among a variety of social issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 12:18 AM
 
8,280 posts, read 13,224,065 times
Reputation: 3908
About that Chinese nine-day traffic jam: The Chinese government is responding by cutting vehicle registrations by two-thirds, to limit the number of cars on the road.

Beijing to Eliminate Gridlock by Cutting Vehicle Registrations by 2/3 | Inhabitat - Green Design Will Save the World

Obviously such a plan would never fly in the United States--not even the most ardent transit advocate would call for that (despite the accusations of some.) By comparison, either free-market pricing of roads (by eliminating subsidy) or increasing funding for public transit (balancing subsidy between transit and roads) seem like pretty mild steps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 07:18 AM
 
Location: Philaburbia
29,868 posts, read 53,244,264 times
Reputation: 49085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No one in my neighborhood drives a hummer. Very few even drive SUVs. That is an "urban legend".
Well, my neighbor has a 10-year-old Dodge truck , but the rest of us drive subcompacts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by R3ALTAWK718 View Post
Eventually people will begin to leave the suburbs in ever increasing numbers to areas that are not auto dependent.
At some point, you're going to have to acknowledge that people do actually work in the suburbs, or that not everyone who works in a city works in the central business district. Moving into the city and commuting to a suburban job would be kinda stupid, wouldn't it? Or is it OK, just because there's public transportation available, even though that public transportation does not extend into all suburbs or reach all suburban employers?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC6ZLV View Post
The problem with thinking people are going to live near their employer is that many people don't make enough to live near their employer. The other problem is most people aren't going to move every time they are laid off and find another job 30 miles away. I've had six employers in the last ten years and have had to commute to all ends of the metro area for these jobs. It is cheaper to drive than go through the expense and hassle of selling and buying every time you go through the lay-off cycle, and this is the norm for several occupation now.
All good points. Life is not black and white. There are no absolutes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 09:08 AM
 
Location: Youngstown, Oh.
4,594 posts, read 6,800,796 times
Reputation: 3882
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC6ZLV View Post
I would like to see improvements in public transportation too. But it actually needs to be somewhat of a pleasant experience.
Increased funding would allow more frequent (and so less crowded) service. The vehicles, whether train, bus, etc. would be maintained better, and could be kept cleaner.

Quote:
The problem with thinking people are going to live near their employer is that many people don't make enough to live near their employer. The other problem is most people aren't going to move every time they are laid off and find another job 30 miles away. I've had six employers in the last ten years and have had to commute to all ends of the metro area for these jobs. It is cheaper to drive than go through the expense and hassle of selling and buying every time you go through the lay-off cycle, and this is the norm for several occupation now.
As Ohiogirl81 points out, this isn't a black and white issue. All jobs aren't in the suburbs, not everyone changes jobs every 2-3 years, living near your place of employment isn't always more expenseive.

There are about 12 people that work in my office. 5 of us could easily use mass-transit to commute to work. But I'm the only one who does, because it isn't convenient enough for the others. (it is too infrequent/inconvenient to justify the cost savings) If people paid the true cost of driving, (or if gas prices continue to climb) I'm sure they will reconsider their choice.

Again: No one wants to eliminate the car, and make everyone live in apartment buildings. But more people would choose to use mass-transit and live closer to their employer, if transportation systems were all on a level playing field.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
44,595 posts, read 35,329,091 times
Reputation: 14273
Meh. There's been times I've ridden the bus to get to my office for the sole reason I could read my book on the way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Philaburbia
29,868 posts, read 53,244,264 times
Reputation: 49085
I'd ride the bus in a heartbeat if I could -- I miss my early morning catnap! Alas, transferring three times (at $1 a pop on top of the $4 fare) and a 90+-minute ride is just not worth it. My time is more valuable. If the bus ride were 45 minutes with one or no transfers, it would be a different story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top