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)
 
Old 02-01-2013, 06:02 AM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 11,102,417 times
Reputation: 3117

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JR_C View Post
I'd say it was also probably true in the midwest, as well.
Basically true in most older eastern cities that developed pre 50s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-01-2013, 07:29 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
So you guys are saying the transit systems in New England, the entire midwest (all 12 states) and old eastern cities have not added one iota of service in say, 50 years? Perhaps you could offer some documentation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 07:40 AM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 11,102,417 times
Reputation: 3117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
So you guys are saying the transit systems in New England, the entire midwest (all 12 states) and old eastern cities have not added one iota of service in say, 50 years? Perhaps you could offer some documentation.
*eyeroll*

Here's an example of what I think is meant by "not added": Lots of cities are at a net loss for rail lines. Baltimore had commuter lines to many places (to Washington, up to York, PA, down to Annapolis), as well as at least 20 streetcar routes, probably more. All that was gone by the early 60s. So while they added a one-line subway in 1982, resumed commuter service to DC in the late 80s, and a light rail line in '92, there is still less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 08:13 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by HandsUpThumbsDown View Post
*eyeroll*

Here's an example of what I think is meant by "not added": Lots of cities are at a net loss for rail lines. Baltimore had commuter lines to many places (to Washington, up to York, PA, down to Annapolis), as well as at least 20 streetcar routes, probably more. All that was gone by the early 60s. So while they added a one-line subway in 1982, resumed commuter service to DC in the late 80s, and a light rail line in '92, there is still less.
You don't have to roll your eyes at me, I don't live in Baltimore, don't know what's going on there. I do know DC a little better and it seems the Metro extended service to communities that weren't served by transit before.

Here is a one-sentence synopsis of what transit was like in Denver pre-RTD:

Pre-RTD: The principal provider of public transportation was the Denver Tramway Company, which served the City and County of Denver as well as older portions of Arvada, Aurora, Englewood, Golden, Lakewood, Westminster, and Wheat Ridge and smaller suburbs.
Regional Transportation District - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Google Image Result for http://www.denverstreetcars.net/image/Denver%20-%20Streetcar%20Map%20(.jpg

There was also an interurban from Denver to Golden, and some sort of service from Denver to Boulder.

RTD Today. Compare and contrast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 08:19 AM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 11,102,417 times
Reputation: 3117
Is Denver an Eastern city? Is it an old city that was pretty much done growing by 1950?

No. Not at all. This is why I made the distinction was made. Did anyone say anything about western cities? About young cities? No.

The trotting out of Denver here is eyeroll worthy, but I'll resist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 08:24 AM
 
1,015 posts, read 1,542,136 times
Reputation: 746
In California, lots of places formerly had intercity rail service that no longer have it. The Northwestern Pacific went from the north side of San Francisco Bay all the way up to Eureka. There's freight service on part of that line, and there's a project underway to build a commuter rail line on the Marin-Sonoma County portion. Santa Cruz was made possible as a vacation resort by long gone passenger rail service. The Napa Valley had a rail line. The San Diego and Arizona Eastern railroad ran from San Diego to El Centro in the Imperial Valley

In the past, California was relatively generous with transit funding, and many of these places have bus service, but it's usually local service rather than intercity service. For a while Greyhound covered many of the routes, but they have greatly cut back service to smaller towns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 08:28 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by HandsUpThumbsDown View Post
Is Denver an Eastern city? Is it an old city that was pretty much done growing by 1950?

No. Not at all. This is why I made the distinction was made. Did anyone say anything about western cities? About young cities? No.

The trotting out of Denver here is eyeroll worthy, but I'll resist.
I see we're in for another day like yesterday. Oh, well.

Q #1-No, Denver is not an eastern city. Some say it is a midwestern city, which was mentioned.
Q #2-Yes, the city itself was pretty much done growing by 1950. Despite what you easterners think, western cities, including those in California, do not go out rapaciously annexing land on a weekly basis. The northwestern borders are relatively unchanged since 1896, when the area was annexed to Denver.

I posted about Denver because, unlike most people here on CD, on all forums, I like to post about what I know, which is the same thing the posters discussing New England, the midwest, and Baltimore did. Also, because I happen to live in the Denver area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
1,802 posts, read 1,653,735 times
Reputation: 1640
Bickering aside, this thread has been an enjoyable read. Having lived in suburbs our entire lives, we'd like to reduce our dependence on cars and move to a more walkable area (and plan to try), but walkability and cost of living are inversely correlated for the most part, and getting more so as walkability has seemingly become more desirable. The cost issue overrides (no where near offset by savings in vehicle ownership costs) many of the pros and cons that seem to be coming out here. We all know that cheap oil/gasoline and subsequently lots of roads created the suburban sprawl we have now, and that won't change meaningfully as long as people can buy the mobility/independence of car ownership at a price they're willing to pay/can afford.

And using NYC as an example doesn't make sense as it's not an option for 99% (or some large percentage) of the population, far too expensive. Many people would love to live in Manhattan, but very, very few could afford to. Unfortunately urban walkability is an elitist idea more often than most of us would like...

Last edited by Midpack; 02-01-2013 at 09:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 08:48 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
And using NYC as an example doesn't make sense as it's not an option for 99% (or some large percentage) of the population, far too expensive. Many people would love to live in Manhattan, but very, very few could afford to...
Thank you, THANK you, THANK YOU! This forum often gets bogged down in talking about NYC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 09:02 AM
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: Long Island / NYC
45,988 posts, read 41,967,271 times
Reputation: 14805
If we're going to talk about about transit-friendly walkable neighborhoods, NYC is the best example in the country. If you're talking about people not owning cars, a large proportion of them in this country (28%) live in the NY metro and that's where many "carless" people I know live. We could move on to other countries as well, but few seemed interested.

In any case, I have more to say about NYC than other large cities.
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.

2005-2019, 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