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 01-02-2013, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,045 posts, read 102,757,343 times
Reputation: 33099

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad View Post
The OP appeared to be contrasting the 1920s to today. I did not read him as contrasting the 1920s with the neolithic.

If that is the comparison, you are correct, the arrival of cities, in the Bronze Age, DID lead to the rise of herd diseases among humans. (see Guns Germs and Steel by J Diamond)

But on the flip side, we got writing, religion, philosophy, monumental art, and lots of other kewl stuff. Life expectancy may have gone down, but I think by the 1920s in the USA it was ahead of the neolithic average.
SEE THIS (from this thread):
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Don't know about politics, but there were political machines in many major cities. As for health problems, yes, overcrowding and primitive sewage systems were a direct contributor to many diseases. The link below discusses the situation in the later 19th century in US cities.

Immigrants, Cities, and Disease: Immigration and Health Concerns in Late Nineteenth Century America | US History Scene

Large waves of immigration in the nineteenth century, made New York City America’s largest and most diverse city, but also its most unhealthy, as the large spike in population made it more susceptible to disease.17 Compared to other large urban areas, such as Boston or Philadelphia, New York’s death rate due to disease was considerably higher.

By the 1920s, things had gotten better, but there was still a lot of TB and other diseases.

Diseases and Plagues in History and Modern Times, Part 2 | WordFocus.com
From their beginnings until the twentieth century, cities have been pestholes. In fact, only when towns became big cities did massive die-offs become a regular part of human life.

When farmers and villagers started crowding into cities, this immunologically virgin mass offered a feast to germs lurking in domesticated animals, wastes, filth, and scavengers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2013, 03:39 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,045 posts, read 102,757,343 times
Reputation: 33099
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I'd assume 10 minute service maybe a little less would have been the norm in any pre-automobile city, at least any large one except for maybe late in the day. Most city transit I've used especially in areas with significant non-car modes tends to be high frequency, so I'd guess most transit was at 10 minute frequencies then, too (in bigger cities).

When I said connected, I was thinking of more routes, so less long and clumsy transfers would be required. The private ownership of transit might have made some things a bit worse back then, due to the lack of coordination as you mentioned. Separate fares may have been an issue, too. On the other hand, the extensive railroad system meant that it was easier to get from small town to big city in say, New England or NY State without a car. At the same time, more lived near town centers a short distance from train stations.
The area served by our local bus system was quite small. Even with only every half hour service, my mom said she was often the only one on the bus for all or part of her trip.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 03:44 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: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,080,368 times
Reputation: 14811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
The area served by our local bus system was quite small. Even with only every half hour service, my mom said she was often the only one on the bus for all or part of her trip.
Though, by the 50s or 60s many were driving so it was hardly pre-automobile. But obviously, it wouldn't make sense for that bus to have more half-hourly service (instead, maybe it should have been cut to hourly). I also excluded smaller cities in my post, though I don't know how much size would make a difference as long a large portion of the population didn't own cars and there were a few main destinations in the area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,045 posts, read 102,757,343 times
Reputation: 33099
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Though, by the 50s or 60s many were driving so it was hardly pre-automobile. But obviously, it wouldn't make sense for that bus to have more half-hourly service (instead, maybe it should have been cut to hourly). I also excluded smaller cities in my post, though I don't know how much size would make a difference as long a large portion of the population didn't own cars and there were a few main destinations in the area.
No, it wasn't pre-auto, but b/c we did have the bus service, many families (such as ours for many years) did not have a second car. Also, you'd be surprised at how many women still didn't drive in the 1960s. My mom grew up on a farm, and did learn to drive at 16, but we didn't have a second car until I was in late high school.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 04:06 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: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,080,368 times
Reputation: 14811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No, it wasn't pre-auto, but b/c we did have the bus service, many families (such as ours for many years) did not have a second car. Also, you'd be surprised at how many women still didn't drive in the 1960s. My mom grew up on a farm, and did learn to drive at 16, but we didn't have a second car until I was in late high school.
Same was true of grandmother (on my mom's side); she didn't get a car unit my mom was high school age and was a housewife as well. I don't think anyone in the family were farmers, though. I don't know what bus service that area had, though it's only a few miles from where I grew up.

I do remember hearing a story mentioning using a bicycle and train combination.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 04:56 PM
 
1,682 posts, read 2,726,248 times
Reputation: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
There's no question that people in cities use non-auto modes more than people in suburbs. But I think there's usually no appreciation for how much people in cities (even NYC) use automobiles. Outside of Manhattan, a car is a more efficient means of transportation than a train or bus (cost is a completely different story) in practically every U.S. city. Yes, it makes sense to take transit to work (which probably accounts for the overwhelming majority of transit trips), but using transit in other instances is really just making things way harder than they need to be. That's why you see so many cars parked outside of Brooklyn brownstones and DC rowhouses. They aren't there for decoration.
I disagree.

Outside Manhattan, neighborhoods are mostly self reliant. All necessities are within walking distance. I would never jump in a car when everything I need is within a 15 minute walk. Anything else, I simply jump on the subway to Midtown/Downtown. There are exceptions but I speak for the vast majority of neighborhoods in the big 3 outer boroughs.

Row house neighborhoods in NYC actually have low car ownership rates, considering they were mostly developed along good transit and encouraged many nearby amenities due to high population densities.

DC is a different, the city is much more car oriented then NYC. Like you later mention, Adams Morgan lacks a metro station. DC also lacks as many multi-use developments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 05:06 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: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,080,368 times
Reputation: 14811
Quote:
Originally Posted by nykiddo718718 View Post
I disagree.

Outside Manhattan, neighborhoods are mostly self reliant. All necessities are within walking distance. I would never jump in a car when everything I need is within a 15 minute walk. Anything else, I simply jump on the subway to Midtown/Downtown. There are exceptions but I speak for the vast majority of neighborhoods in the big 3 outer boroughs.
This is true, but might sometime you want to leave your neighborhood to visit another neighborhood? [Visit people, see a particular event, shop, etc.] These trips aren't everyday, but some might want to make them every now and then. I don't live in Brooklyn but it seemed like it most cases transit would take extra time but still be manageable though car would still be convenient. Depends on the trip, of course. Back in the 20s I assume that most would have had no choice but take transit (or bicycle).

As to Williamsburg to Washington Heights, the one time I drove there I found parking easily, right in front of the apartment building I was visiting. Checking times, it looks like driving is a bit shorter than transit but the difference isn't enormous. I'd probably still take transit rather than drive more often than not.

Last edited by nei; 01-02-2013 at 05:44 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 05:14 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,305 posts, read 26,308,417 times
Reputation: 11764
Quote:
Originally Posted by nykiddo718718 View Post
I disagree.

Outside Manhattan, neighborhoods are mostly self reliant. All necessities are within walking distance. I would never jump in a car when everything I need is within a 15 minute walk. Anything else, I simply jump on the subway to Midtown/Downtown. There are exceptions but I speak for the vast majority of neighborhoods in the big 3 outer boroughs.

Row house neighborhoods in NYC actually have low car ownership rates, considering they were mostly developed along good transit and encouraged many nearby amenities due to high population densities.

DC is a different, the city is much more car oriented then NYC. Like you later mention, Adams Morgan lacks a metro station. DC also lacks as many multi-use developments.
There's nothing to disagree about. A lot of people in NYC own cars. And they drive those cars. The point is not that people in NYC drive as much as they do elsehwhere. The point was that New Yorkers drive much more than many people realize.

New York’s Car Ownership Rate Is on The Rise | Streetsblog New York City

Besides, the post you replied to is one in which I stated that a drive from Williamsburgh to Washington Heights is not "senseless." It's absolutely not senseless to drive from Williamsburg to Washington Heights (particularly on a weekend or weeknight when most people who own cars will be driving) because it takes half the time as transit.

Last edited by BajanYankee; 01-02-2013 at 05:25 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 05:30 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,305 posts, read 26,308,417 times
Reputation: 11764
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
This is true, but might sometime you want to leave your neighborhood to visit another neighborhood? [Visit people, see a particular event, shop, etc.] These trips aren't everyday, but some might want to make them every now and then. I don't live in Brooklyn but it seemed like it most cases transit would extra time but still be manageable though car would still be convenient. Depends on the trip, of course. Back in the 20s I assume that most would have had no choice but take transit (or bicycle).
Sure, there are trips in Brooklyn you'd rather make by car, if one is available to you. It's not as convenient as Manhattan where there's a subway stop within a few blocks of any given point. And train lines in some neighborhoods are not that reliable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 05:50 PM
 
1,682 posts, read 2,726,248 times
Reputation: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
This is true, but might sometime you want to leave your neighborhood to visit another neighborhood? [Visit people, see a particular event, shop, etc.] These trips aren't everyday, but some might want to make them every now and then. I don't live in Brooklyn but it seemed like it most cases transit would extra time but still be manageable though car would still be convenient. Depends on the trip, of course. Back in the 20s I assume that most would have had no choice but take transit (or bicycle).

As to Williamsburg to Washington Heights, the one time I drove there I found parking easily, right in front of the apartment building I was visiting. Checking times, it looks like driving is a bit shorter than transit but the difference isn't enormous. I'd probably still take transit rather than drive more often than not.
Most New Yorkers stick to their neighborhoods the vast majority of time (exceptions being work, entertainment or shopping for items not available locally (high end clothing for example) or to visit friends/fam. By comparison, suburbanites must leave their community in the vast majority of cases. Same to a lesser extent for even most other American cities outside NYC.

If someone does visit another borough, it all depend on where. I know if you live in the Bronx, visiting South Brooklyn is a pain even with a car. However visiting friends in Manhattan is easily achieved via subway. It all depends on where in the city you live.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
There's nothing to disagree about. A lot of people in NYC own cars. And they drive those cars. The point is not that people in NYC drive as much as they do elsehwhere. The point was that New Yorkers drive much more than many people realize.

New York’s Car Ownership Rate Is on The Rise | Streetsblog New York City

Besides, the post you replied to is one in which I stated that a drive from Williamsburgh to Washington Heights is not "senseless." It's absolutely not senseless to drive from Williamsburg to Washington Heights (particularly on a weekend or weeknight when most people who own cars will be driving) because it takes half the time as transit.
The link provided points out a slight increase. I can almost guerentee this increase was felt in neighborhoods in Eastern Queens, Staten Island, South Brooklyn and the fringes of the Bronx. Even then, most New Yorkers do not own a car.

And your right no argument here just pointing that out. I don't see too many people commuting between Wash Heights and WBurg.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Sure, there are trips in Brooklyn you'd rather make by car, if one is available to you. It's not as convenient as Manhattan where there's a subway stop within a few blocks of any given point. And train lines in some neighborhoods are not that reliable.
Some, but not most. I feel zip car is a better option in these communities far from subway stations. Most in the city however, do not need a car and in most cases the benefit a car would provide is negligible considering all factors.
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