Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 11-18-2012, 11:59 PM
 
Location: Berwick, Penna.
16,214 posts, read 11,290,935 times
Reputation: 20827

Advertisements

Public transit has been growing on its own at an increasing rate for a number of years now, and not so much due to centralized planning, but because of the growing number of single adults, closer to the two ends of adulthood than the prime of life, who have recognized that long-distance solo driving has become an increasing pressure on a diminishing amount of disposable income.

Here's a link to one of the best sites I know serving those wants:

www.routefriend.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-19-2012, 07:13 AM
 
5,546 posts, read 6,851,060 times
Reputation: 3826
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
yeah but move to where? in terms of walkable and transit friendly cities, the pickings are rather slim in the US. you also have to quit your current job and find another one. and there's no guarantee that you will find another job as good or better than they one you quit. or find any at all. that's a big gamble I think many people are not willing to take.

another idea would be to move to another country that is more friendly to walking and transit, find a local and marry them like I did. but that's only because I got real lucky. otherwise unless you have gobs of money it is very, very difficult and really virtually impossible for the average person to simply move to another (developed) country in the west and gain permanent residence there. not to go off-topic too much but as long as we're all venting. even if you work for a multinational company who is willing to transfer you and sponsor your work visa to work in one of their overseas offices its usually only temporary. you might get a work visa to stay and work for a few months, or a student visa if you're studying abroad, but that's not the same thing as permanent residence. its much harder to get permanent residence in another country, even if you just want to move to Canada.
While the US isn't known for its walkable cities, there are enough good options for those who are highly motivated for that type of lifestyle. As I mentioned in my first post, everyone has constraints, but if you prioritize it and plan for it, you can most certainly make a move. Going overseas is most certainly much tougher, as you pointed out.

My opinion of a good plan: 1) save enough money to pay rent for 1+ years (or as much as you want, especially if you plan to put 20% down on a house); 2) travel to the city you think you'd want to move to, enough so that you know what neighborhood you'd want to start off in; 3) job search early, contact employers ahead of time (if that's to your benefit), network (LinkedIn), etc.; 4) save any vacation time you can so that you can create a buffer for yourself; 5) apply for jobs before you move, hoping to get something before you go, indicating on your cover letter/resume that you're in progress of a move and will definitely be there; 6) if you can't get something before you go, you have vacation time saved up and money in your pocket, which gives you enough time to give it a good shot.

I consider where I live a big deal, so I'm willing to take the above approach. I think that cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, etc. are good cities, because the COL is much more reasonable than SF/Boston/NYC. If you can buy a house in the right neighborhood, you can be in a very nice spot for decades to come. There certainly are no guarantees, but it's worth the effort IMO.

Edit: One other point I didn't make is about housing. My thought on this is that cities that have good bones, are walkable and have good transit will get more and more expensive in decades to come. While renting is the only option for some, and a good option for those that move around, buying a reasonably priced house in a working class neighorhood is the more sustainable option IMO. While neighborhoods can go up or down in value/desirability, there are indicators that tell you where to place your bets. I see owning a house as a more sustainable option, especially in the bigger cities, because you are less likely to get priced out. Just my theory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,138 posts, read 10,999,679 times
Reputation: 7808
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55 View Post
Some metro areas are starting to get rail, but it almost takes an act of God to get good transportation, so it is proper to say a region is "blessed" with good public transport. Such metro areas include Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Portland, Washington and LA. Some that seem to be making a good effort to catch up: San Diego, Seattle, DFW, Denver, and Minneapolis. Honorable mention to Honolulu and Albuquerque/Santa Fe. I know a lot of you will disagree on the specific cities.
The problem with most of these new rail systems are that they tend cannibalize their bus service, to pay for the rail system. Examples Denver and Portland. Which means that you probably have to have a car to drive to the train station.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,084 posts, read 15,807,804 times
Reputation: 4049
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
funny thing about the LA metro rail. I know people who lived in the LA area all their lives and never knew a metro rail system existed until I mentioned it to them. or they heard about it but have never seen it or used it. the system doesn't seem to be of much practical use if people never even heard about it or have seen it in operation. I lived in LA county between 2002-05 but never knew there was a metro rail myself until years after I left. the same could be said for metro rail in san diego, dfw, etc. the systems are much too small to be of much practical use, except maybe for tourists. I think these metro areas are far too sprawled out for any practical form of transit other than a car.
What part of LA county were you in? That can have a huge effect on your experience. I would imagine there are way more people in Lakewood or Woodland Hills that have no idea that Metro Rail exists or have never used it compared to Hollywood or Koreatown. Definitely disagree that the reason it is less-known is because it is only useful for tourists.

I agree that there are people who do not know about Metro though IMO and experiences it has more to do with the age of the system than the practicality of it. Metro has won a few awards for its public outreach / marketing / advertising in the last few years and has greatly improved the visibility and notoriety of the system. The system hasn't had many new extensions since 2005 but has seen significant ridership increases since then. This has a lot more to do with the public outreach and maturity of the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 02:13 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: Western Massachusetts
46,009 posts, read 53,318,126 times
Reputation: 15179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Here's the Fastracks website.

FasTracks Home

It's very nice where it is available.

There is decent bus service from the NW zone into Denver for commuters.
I met someone who lived in Boulder years ago (20? maybe a bit more) and would take the bus regularly from Boulder to Denver then. Once, when he was coming back home from Denver on the bus to Boulder close to midnight the bus ran out of fuel on the trip.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 02:56 PM
 
4,019 posts, read 3,942,001 times
Reputation: 2938
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
What part of LA county were you in? That can have a huge effect on your experience. I would imagine there are way more people in Lakewood or Woodland Hills that have no idea that Metro Rail exists or have never used it compared to Hollywood or Koreatown. Definitely disagree that the reason it is less-known is because it is only useful for tourists.
I lived in culver city, a pretty typical and average LA city in the heart of LA county. nothing special about it. but I did traveled all over the county when I lived there but don't recall seeing any metro trains or stations anywhere. it was like trying to spot bigfoot or something. people hear about bigfoot but almost no one has actually seen him. makes you wonder if this mythical creature, or metro, actually exists or is it some kind of urban legend? I know now the LA metro is real but that's what I thought at the time.

back in the day the system was impossible to miss when it was known as the LA streetcar and boasted 1600 miles of track along with 90% ridership. practically everyone in LA used it. but since those glory days, the LA area has expanded tens of times larger in size while metro passenger rail has shrunk drastically with less than a 100 miles left in the system. making it very easy to miss, and hence useless for 98% of the population. they started rebuilding it in 1990 but since have managed to produce just 90 miles of track in 22 years. that's pitiful. at that rate it will take them 200 years just to equal the size of the old system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 03:34 PM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,138 posts, read 10,999,679 times
Reputation: 7808
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I met someone who lived in Boulder years ago (20? maybe a bit more) and would take the bus regularly from Boulder to Denver then. Once, when he was coming back home from Denver on the bus to Boulder close to midnight the bus ran out of fuel on the trip.
I remember that. I lived in Denver at that time. It was during the fuel shortage of 1978 or 79. The RTD couldn't get enough fuel delivered to meet their needs. So they tried to ration what they had, by filling the tanks only half full. Every night, busses all over town were routinely running out of fuel, before they could get back to the garage. It was getting to be a joke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,084 posts, read 15,807,804 times
Reputation: 4049
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
I lived in culver city, a pretty typical and average LA city in the heart of LA county. nothing special about it. but I did traveled all over the county when I lived there but don't recall seeing any metro trains or stations anywhere. it was like trying to spot bigfoot or something. people hear about bigfoot but almost no one has actually seen him. makes you wonder if this mythical creature, or metro, actually exists or is it some kind of urban legend? I know now the LA metro is real but that's what I thought at the time.
Yeah that is right in the heart of the city (well, at least the Westside). At that time there was no rail through Culver City, though now I think you would be quite impressed because there are a variety of elevated rail stations on the Expo Line between Culver City and DTLA (including one right at Washington and Exposition). They are quite visible. Other than that the Orange Line is in a dedicated path so is pretty hard to see, the Red and Purple Lines are underground so of course can't see them - in fact I think the Green Line is the most visible line as it runs down the middle of the 105.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
back in the day the system was impossible to miss when it was known as the LA streetcar and boasted 1600 miles of track along with 90% ridership. practically everyone in LA used it. but since those glory days, the LA area has expanded tens of times larger in size while metro passenger rail has shrunk drastically with less than a 100 miles left in the system. making it very easy to miss, and hence useless for 98% of the population. they started rebuilding it in 1990 but since have managed to produce just 90 miles of track in 22 years. that's pitiful. at that rate it will take them 200 years just to equal the size of the old system.
Still is, called the Metro bus system.

You are also omitting a few key details, such as the fact that Measure R passed in 2008 and will drastically speed up construction, doubling the system by 2038. Measure J was narrowly defeated (only due to CA's absurd tax law that requires a supermajority) with 65% of the vote - in fact it still has the slimmest chances of passing with mail-in votes. So your extrapolating is a little flawed.

Another thing to consider is that Los Angeles now has a commuter rail system - Metrolink - in place that did not exist during the Red Car era - many of the Red Car lines served as defacto commuter rail lines, so the difference is not all that drastic. Metrolink is quite extensive, going down into Orange County and actually providing a connection to get to Downtown San Diego. It also goes up into Ventura County and into Lancaster and Palmdale, and there is a line connecting Riverside with Orange County. None of the Red Cars could ever match the efficiency of the Red Line or Purple Line (Hollywood to DTLA in 12 minutes?) and probably could not match the efficiency of the current LRT, which pretty much runs on the same ROWs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 05:44 PM
 
4,019 posts, read 3,942,001 times
Reputation: 2938
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post

You are also omitting a few key details, such as the fact that Measure R passed in 2008 and will drastically speed up construction, doubling the system by 2038. Measure J was narrowly defeated (only due to CA's absurd tax law that requires a supermajority) with 65% of the vote - in fact it still has the slimmest chances of passing with mail-in votes. So your extrapolating is a little flawed.

I'd be a lot more impressed if they doubled the system every 5 years instead of 26.

I believe Measure R approves the expansion of the system but doesn't increase the rate of building it. its good that it passed but adding another hundred miles to the system in 26 years is still painfully slow. remember, it took 22 years to build the first 90 miles. to double that by 2038 means it would take 26 years to build the next 90 or so miles. so the speed of construction is slowing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2012, 06:08 PM
 
2,142 posts, read 1,897,617 times
Reputation: 1059
So you fancy yourself a slave, how melodramatic. Better hope your bike wheel doesn't break too, or your leg doesn't break, or anything else your a 'slave' to.
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. The time now is 12:58 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top