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 12-16-2011, 12:41 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: NYC
46,051 posts, read 43,432,975 times
Reputation: 14885

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg View Post
Oh dear, not the "bus suburb" thing again...there is no such thing as a bus suburb.
This author said that a number of third world cities have bus-centric development:

Different Kinds of Centralization (Hoisted from Comments) | Pedestrian Observations

a few of his comments in this post also explain:

A Transit City is a Centralized City | Pedestrian Observations
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-16-2011, 12:48 PM
Status: "Happy New Year!" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
88,723 posts, read 105,120,266 times
Reputation: 34189
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg View Post
Oh dear, not the "bus suburb" thing again...there is no such thing as a bus suburb.

If workplaces and supermarkets (and schools, churches, parks etc.) in car-centric neighborhoods did not have parking spaces, people wouldn't park there. Add up all of the places you drive and how many of them have parking spaces. Your car doesn't need one reserved space at each place, but one has to be available.

No Such Thing As Free Parking - ABC News

Per this study, three parking spaces per car is a conservative estimate--some estimates ran as high as eight parking spaces per car.


Auto suburbs don't necessarily have to have super wide streets, but they generally do have them, because the engineers who have designed streets in the United States have done so using the basic assumption that wider streets are safer street because cars can drive faster on wide streets. But we would probably be better off with narrower streets, as they encourage traffic to slow down.


Narrow Streets Slow Traffic - Sprawl - Sierra Club


Wider streets were a feature of the motor age--one ushered in by Le Corbusier, Frank Lloyd Wright and other advocates of wide feeder streets and big, broad lawns, whose artistic renderings never bothered showing the parking lots that they would all require.

Similarly, auto suburbs don't necessarily require larger lots--but they tended to have them, with larger houses on them even as family sizes have dropped. Public paved roads and highways, which make the automobile more than an expensive novelty, is what made these kinds of neighborhoods possible.
Just because you don't think there are any "bus suburbs" that doesn't mean there aren't! I will argue this with you till the end of time. I'm the one who lived there, not you. In fact, I'd be willing to bet you have never been to Patterson Hts, Pennsylvania.

The ABC news link was very weak.

Chester pointed out that if there are 250 million cars in the country, obviously there must be at least that many spaces for people to park at home --

First, there's the "if", not supported by anything.
Secondly, it's not necessarily "obvious" that there must be at least that many spaces for people to park at home. We once had a house with a one car garage and we owned two cars. One car was parked on the street, which would have been there regardless. My daughter and her bf looked at an apt. in downtown Denver that provided exactly zero parking spaces. There are many such situations in "the city".

The next three scenarios examine what the group considers to be the most likely situation --

In other words, they just up and decided what was most likely. This is not scientific research. You wouldn't get an udergraduate research project approved with this thesis.

Second link:

It also appears that a greater number of accidents occur on straight, rather than curvilinear streets.

"Appears"? My nursing instructors would throw the paper in my face if I had written about what something "appears" to be!

This study indicates a clear relationship between accident frequency and street width and curvature. The findings support the theory that narrower, so called "skinny" streets, are safer than standard width residential streets.

Not so! I learned in a statistics class I took at a community college that "correlation does not equal causation". In addition, I would be hesitant to accept as unbiased a study from an interest group like the Sierra Club.

In conclusion, I grew up in a bus suburb, whether you like it or not!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 12:49 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: NYC
46,051 posts, read 43,432,975 times
Reputation: 14885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
No, he isn't. But he is claiming that a suburban home requires at least three parking spaces:
Yes, I was referring to Katiana's response about garages which I thought was a non-sequitir.

Quote:
Which is not true, because only the space in my driveway is reserved for my car alone. My car is not always in a parking space at work, at the grocery store, at the mall, at the post office, etc.; those spaces are shared with countless other cars.

The claim that "auto suburbs" require wider streets and larger lots is bogus as well. There are plenty of 'burbs with small lots, and if anything, the suburban driveway would allow for narrower streets. Lot size is a preference, not a requirement; if you don't want a big lot, don't move to a place that has them.
I think while auto suburbs don't require large lots, they don't work as well on small lots as non-autocentric development. The photos posted at the beginning of the thread by memph shows this well.

While a parking lot for "Joe's Diner" does not have customers that leave their cars for extended periods of time, they typically build their parking lot for the maximum number of customers they get. Ditto with most other stores. This leads to more parking than is actually used at any given time. A non-auto centric area the stores would not be expected to provide parking for their customers. At most, there would be a shared lot a short walk away for all businesses in the area. This would be less parking in total.

I dislike parking requirements. It lowers walkability and encourages additional car usage. Why should a business be required to pay to provide parking if it doesn't feel necessary?

Near me, I usually don't drive to the center of town. Besides usually preferring to walk, I can't easily park right next to the shops.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 12:55 PM
Status: "Happy New Year!" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
88,723 posts, read 105,120,266 times
Reputation: 34189
I didn't get what wburg was saying.

I think some parking requirements for businesses are necessary to keep people from circling the block and finally just giving up and going elsewhere. Go to "Joe's Diner" at 6 PM on Friday and try to find a spot. Sometimes it is difficult, IME.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 12:55 PM
 
8,332 posts, read 14,854,167 times
Reputation: 4066
Quote:
Originally Posted by HandsUpThumbsDown View Post
Not arguing, just wanted clarification. "Created as a result of" explains.

If anywhere, BRT may have created burbs in Ottawa, but I have no idea.
The urban form of cities and neighborhoods is driven primarily by their transportation. Pedestrian, steamboat, horsecar, steam railroad, streetcar, interurban and auto suburbs all have distinct characteristics driven by the speed and logistical requirements of the transit mode--the transit method determines the basic urban form. And generally, there was also an economic link between the suburban developer and the transit mode: the railroad sold the land around the tracks to real estate companies, the streetcar suburb developer owned both the real estate company and the streetcar company (and often the electric utility who sold power to both), the same company that advocated for highway construction also sold motor vehicles or gasoline or real estate, etcetera.

I suppose you could create a suburb served by BRT--since BRT in its true form (as opposed to jazzed-up buses running on auto streets) works pretty much like light rail, it would work a lot like a streetcar/interurban suburb with nodes of occupation based around the BRT stations: commercial adjacent to the station to be most handy for people getting off the bus, apartments above those stores, and then more strictly residential uses as you get farther from the train station. Proper BRT (dedicated right-of-way, enclosed stations, high-capacity/multi-door BRT vehicles) costs about as much as light rail to build, with higher operating costs due to the inability to MU, but has more flexibility since they can also run on streets (which takes away a lot of the advantages of BRT.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 01:02 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: NYC
46,051 posts, read 43,432,975 times
Reputation: 14885
It's difficult to drive fast on narrow streets. The ideal width of a residential street for me is one that is slightly too narrow for two opposing cars to pass each other safely, requiring one to pull to the side (true on my street). This keeps the traffic at under 25 mph or so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 01:06 PM
 
Location: The City
22,375 posts, read 32,932,590 times
Reputation: 7799
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
It's difficult to drive fast on narrow streets. The ideal width of a residential street for me is one that is slightly too narrow for two opposing cars to pass each other safely, requiring one to pull to the side (true on my street). This keeps the traffic at under 25 mph or so.

Honestly though One way streets flow better in more developed areas, two way streets create more bottleneck at more intersections.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 01:13 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: NYC
46,051 posts, read 43,432,975 times
Reputation: 14885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I think some parking requirements for businesses are necessary to keep people from circling the block and finally just giving up and going elsewhere. Go to "Joe's Diner" at 6 PM on Friday and try to find a spot. Sometimes it is difficult, IME.
If Joe's Diner believes the customers will go elsewhere if they can't find parking than they have the option to build more parking. They don't need to be required to do so. Customers can also park on the street a block away.

Parking requirements might be sensible if you assume that a car is the only option to get around. Otherwise, it makes it more convenient to drive and induces more car use (as the example I gave in my town) If parking is a necessity for stores I believe it should either in one communal lot rather than per store (except for maybe supermarkets) and the customer can walk between stores easily. This is the norm in most British suburbs and some old American inner suburbs. Otherwise, the store could put the parking in the back so the front is more walkable.

As an extreme example, I read somewhere that half of all traffic in Manhattan is cars driving in circles looking for a parking space (accurate for the times I've driven there). But if they built more parking, it'd be easier to drive there and traffic would increase.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 01:14 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: NYC
46,051 posts, read 43,432,975 times
Reputation: 14885
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
Honestly though One way streets flow better in more developed areas, two way streets create more bottleneck at more intersections.
One way might be more better for developed areas, but my idea is to purposefully slow traffic in residential areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2011, 01:28 PM
Status: "Happy New Year!" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
88,723 posts, read 105,120,266 times
Reputation: 34189
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
If Joe's Diner believes the customers will go elsewhere if they can't find parking than they have the option to build more parking. They don't need to be required to do so. Customers can also park on the street a block away.

Parking requirements might be sensible if you assume that a car is the only option to get around. Otherwise, it makes it more convenient to drive and induces more car use (as the example I gave in my town) If parking is a necessity for stores I believe it should either in one communal lot rather than per store (except for maybe supermarkets) and the customer can walk between stores easily. This is the norm in most British suburbs and some old American inner suburbs. Otherwise, the store could put the parking in the back so the front is more walkable.

As an extreme example, I read somewhere that half of all traffic in Manhattan is cars driving in circles looking for a parking space (accurate for the times I've driven there). But if they built more parking, it'd be easier to drive there and traffic would increase.
The diner I'm thinking of does not have any land to expand on.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:22 AM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 33, 34, 35 - Top