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 02-07-2013, 06:46 PM
 
48,516 posts, read 83,955,483 times
Reputation: 18050

Advertisements

I left the world of mass transit when a teen and have never looked or wanted to go back to that restricted life style.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2013, 07:21 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,697 posts, read 23,672,920 times
Reputation: 35449
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist View Post
I don't see the problem. Well, I see the problem for people who want parking, but they should have had the common sense to have rented or purchased where they could get a parking space. I don't think it's the city's job to mandate common sense, at least not when the lack of common sense isn't hurting anyone.
You don't see the problem? Allow me to enlighten you.

The problem is the severe lack of housing. People don't have the luxury of finding a place to live very easily. Competition for housing is fierce, especially an affordable place to live. With all the numbers of people wanting to relocate, the people having their homes forclosed upon, the very high ever increasing rental costs and the extremly low vacany rates one of the lowest in the country, these apartments have made renting and plentiful and affordable because they are relatively cheap.

It has more to do with desparation than common sense. The city is supporting these 100% and even subsidizing them. Our politicians in fact our current mayor pushed for these no parking structures when the idea first came into existence nearly ten years ago. They believed that not to provide parking on the ground levels would encourage people to have bikes instead of cars for the creation of cleaner air.

But now even he admits it was foolhardy and a moratorium has been called on any new buildings being built other than the ones that are going up. In my neighborhood alone there are 152 new units being worked on right now. We have good public transportation in my neigbhorhood even with the cutbacks that have been made over the past few years. So undoubtly some people will move into these units who may not have cars.

But many of the neighborhoods where these buildings have gone and are going up either have had severe public transportation cutbacks or no public transportation at all. A survey by one of our local newspapers revealed that in both neighborhoods where there was good public transportation and were there wasn't the majority of people who lived in these buildings, even those with bike lifts, still owned cars. Many owned cars and bikes.

People will opt for the cheaper more plentiful units and worry about parking later. And the state that this city is in, I can't blame them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2013, 07:22 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,018 posts, read 17,744,100 times
Reputation: 32304
r
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderkat59 View Post
Although you dont seem prone to understanding abstract ideologies, I'll give it a shot . . .
Every aspect of our society of based on accommodating cars. From our infrastructure, to the state of our economy, taxes, the impact on the school system, fake wars to feed them are given an OK 'cuz "Freedom isn't free", to even way-out peripheral stuff like the long-term effects of time spent in negative environments and committing low-level assaults on someone vis a vis you car due to the anonymity it provides. . . Car culture is the god of our society. People love cars, crave new ones and worship them, overall. When you are able to take control of all aspects of your life and wrest them away from dependance on your car, as in living close to your job, learning how to use alternative transportation etc, it is very, very liberating and the money you save will astound you. When you make the decision to break the chains of your cruel master--Over time, just like beating an unpleasant addiction -- you wonder how you suffered so long, why you didn't get a cure earlier. Some people need a car, but most people are simply lazy and spoiled by the convenience of it. All abstract, far-out thinking to the average suburbaniod, WAL*MART/ mall dwelling American, but very accepted in more hi-thinking and civilized places around the world.
O.K., let's analyse the above.
1. I do fine with understanding abstract ideologies. I have a master's degree in French literature from UCLA and we had to delve into philosophy in connection with that. The existentialism of Sartre, for example, is pretty abstract. That sentence of yours which I bolded is just an insult, a personal attack, which has no real content in relation to the topic of this thread.
2. "Negative environments". How so? What is negative about driving a car? If you don't like it, well yes, then it would be negative. Those of us who enjoy driving per se don't perceive it as negative.
3. "Committing low-level assaults". I am 68 and have been driving since I was 16. I have never committed a low-level assault on anyone with a motor vehicle. Yes, I have read in the newspapers about road rage incidents, and I would join you in condemning those hostile and immature jerks. But what does that have to do with car usage per se? The perpertrators would be just as hostile and immature without their cars.
4. "Taking control of all aspects of our lives". What about car ownership represents a loss of control? Control means making mature decisions after considering the facts. We buy clothing too, as society does not allow nudity in public. But no one is writing threads about "clothing dependence" or implying that the use of clothing is a loss of control.
5. "The money you save will astound you". Well, no it wouldn't astound me at all, because I know exactly how much I spend on my car, including all fixed costs such as insurance and registration. I can easily afford my car, and if I gave it up I would not know what to do with the relatively small amount of money saved thereby. If people wish to save money by not having a car, I have absolutely no quarrel with that. I know it is doable in many cases by living close to work, or close to a public transit line. But we are talking about the irrational resentment of cars themselves, as this is not the Frugal Living Forum.
6. "You wonder how you suffered so long". Well, your post did not explain what suffering is involved, other than the cost, and I have already discussed the cost issues. If you feel liberated from the costs of car ownership and use, well I can understand that. But again, that's not what is under discussion. There is simply no suffering involved.
7. "Hi-thinking and civilized places". Well, that's just some more arrogant feel-good talk. You hold a certain opinion about cars, and so you flatter yourself that your opinion puts you on a higher intellectual plane than people who hold a contrary opinion. Your post did not demonstrate in the least the validity of that supposition.

To sum up, you use lots of meaningless phrases like "the chains of your cruel master" without explaining what is cruel (beyond the financial, which would apply only to very low wage workers). It is rhetoric without substance, and you hide behind the fiction that it is so "abstract" as to be not understood by us peons. Can you say "SNOBBISH"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2013, 08:21 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
45,990 posts, read 41,989,613 times
Reputation: 14810
@Minervah

From what I saw of Portland, most of it (except for west of the river — NW Portland felt vaguely similar, I really liked the style of that neighborhood) was much more spread out than the cities I'm most familiar with, say for example Boston. Boston has large areas of older housing with no off street parking and people seem to manage. True, car ownership levels are lower, but the population density is several times higher, so the amount of cars per area is higher.

True, sometimes parking is inconvenient, but I hear on local forums people asking about how convenient parking is. Rather than taking it for granted, it's assumed some neighborhoods are better for easy parking just some might be more walkable or transit friendly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2013, 08:38 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,011 posts, read 102,621,396 times
Reputation: 33075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervah View Post
You don't see the problem? Allow me to enlighten you.

The problem is the severe lack of housing. People don't have the luxury of finding a place to live very easily. Competition for housing is fierce, especially an affordable place to live. With all the numbers of people wanting to relocate, the people having their homes forclosed upon, the very high ever increasing rental costs and the extremly low vacany rates one of the lowest in the country, these apartments have made renting and plentiful and affordable because they are relatively cheap.

It has more to do with desparation than common sense. The city is supporting these 100% and even subsidizing them. Our politicians in fact our current mayor pushed for these no parking structures when the idea first came into existence nearly ten years ago. They believed that not to provide parking on the ground levels would encourage people to have bikes instead of cars for the creation of cleaner air.

But now even he admits it was foolhardy and a moratorium has been called on any new buildings being built other than the ones that are going up. In my neighborhood alone there are 152 new units being worked on right now. We have good public transportation in my neigbhorhood even with the cutbacks that have been made over the past few years. So undoubtly some people will move into these units who may not have cars.

But many of the neighborhoods where these buildings have gone and are going up either have had severe public transportation cutbacks or no public transportation at all. A survey by one of our local newspapers revealed that in both neighborhoods where there was good public transportation and were there wasn't the majority of people who lived in these buildings, even those with bike lifts, still owned cars. Many owned cars and bikes.

People will opt for the cheaper more plentiful units and worry about parking later. And the state that this city is in, I can't blame them.
I fine it interesting that this parking experiment has been going on for 10 years and your mayor is just now coming around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2013, 08:42 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,697 posts, read 23,672,920 times
Reputation: 35449
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
@Minervah

From what I saw of Portland, most of it (except for west of the river NW Portland felt vaguely similar, I really liked the style of that neighborhood) was much more spread out than the cities I'm most familiar with, say for example Boston. Boston has large areas of older housing with no off street parking and people seem to manage. True, car ownership levels are lower, but the population density is several times higher, so the amount of cars per area is higher.

True, sometimes parking is inconvenient, but I hear on local forums people asking about how convenient parking is. Rather than taking it for granted, it's assumed some neighborhoods are better for easy parking just some might be more walkable or transit friendly.
Excellent example using NW Portland. The parking situation has gotten so congested there that in addition to the reserved pay for reserved street parking that now minimally exists more is going to be added. It was in one of our local papers last week. People who live there vying for parking spaces with people who shop there as well as people who have been going to the hospital complex and don't want to use the parking facilities have long been a problem that has gotten much worse over the years.

City fathers thought the streetcar that goes through it would help but hasn't. The business owners have long fought parking meters but they will probably be a reality soon.

Cars are a reality and if cities do not accomadate them they are going to have problems as Portland is facing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2013, 08:48 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
45,990 posts, read 41,989,613 times
Reputation: 14810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervah View Post
Excellent example using NW Portland. The parking situation has gotten so congested there that in addition to the reserved pay for reserved street parking that now minimally exists more is going to be added. It was in one of our local papers last week. People who live there vying for parking spaces with people who shop there as well as people who have been going to the hospital complex and don't want to use the parking facilities have long been a problem that has gotten much worse over the years.

City fathers thought the streetcar that goes through it would help but hasn't. The business owners have long fought parking meters but they will probably be a reality soon.

Cars are a reality and if cities do not accomadate them they are going to have problems as Portland is facing.
I was using NW Portland as an example as a place most similar to cities I'm familiar with. As I just said, Boston accommodates cars less than Portland, there's less space for them and far more housing without parking. I'm a bit shocked the commercial streets of NW Portland aren't metered!

While parking is scarce in NW Portland, it's also the liveliest neighborhood I saw in Portland. There isn't all that much space to put cars there. It's a bit of an either/or situation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2013, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,697 posts, read 23,672,920 times
Reputation: 35449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I fine it interesting that this parking experiment has been going on for 10 years and your mayor is just now coming around.
Well he was just elected mayor so up until now it wasn't his problem. Our former mayor didn't pay much attention. They didn't begin ten years ago, they were just in the planning stages. Then suddenly they seemed to appear one after another one at a time little by little where they didn't cause too many problems until they began to invade areas where they did.

Portland was a city that had high hopes for the bicycle taking over the car and many, many people do use the bike as a means of transportation. Some hearty souls do use bikes as car subsitutes but most use both. And as people have kids, although you see some parents take their kids in tandom with their bikes, most opt to put them in cars.

One problem it seems that no one foresaw is that when people use bikes and cars, they tend to leave their cars at home more which keeps the cars in parking spaces for a longer period of time while they are using their bike which makes that space unavailable for other people. This is especially a problem for business owners who would prefer to see a greater turnover in parking spaces with more people being able to park there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2013, 04:06 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,148 posts, read 3,161,184 times
Reputation: 2634
I bet you that you couldn't daily-drive many of cars parked in city; they would fall apart. Yet they're fine for an occasional drive. Plus they may be larger than DDs, since they are used for family travel or group of friends who go hiking on the weekend.

I see that quite a bit in NYC. You would think that everyone would want a Smart. Quite the opposite. I see one Smart in the neighborhood but plenty of minivans or large cars that only get moved for street-cleaning, and on Fri evening are being filled with luggage, kids, dogs, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2013, 07:19 AM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 11,105,609 times
Reputation: 3117
I found Portland pretty easy to get around by all modes: Driving, walking, transit, and bike. I never tried to drive and park downtown, but I never needed to, because even in the far NE where I have family there is pretty frequent bus service to downtown.

It's definitely not as anti-car as Spike would like:

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