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 02-16-2014, 08:13 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
That's true, but assuming suburbanites who move to the city will gain a shorter commute is an overgeneralization.
That's for sure! It depends on where work is, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkmani View Post
Not necessarily. If you live in the city, but work in the suburbs in most metro areas that's not a problem. In most big cities, rush hour traffic is caused by those who live in the suburbs but work in the city (morning rush hour is from suburbs to city and afternoon rush hour is city to suburbs). Therefore, the commute for a city-dweller to the suburbs would be rather short.

ETA: Without traffic, I live 20 min. above ATL and with traffic it's 45 min. to an hour.
In some cities, there's not much of a "reverse commute" any more. In Denver, yes, there's the commute to downtown, but there's also the commute to Boulder, Broomfield and the Tech Center as major employment hubs. Plus there's quite a bit of employment in Jefferson and Adams Counties as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-16-2014, 09:19 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,523,816 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
That's true, but assuming suburbanites who move to the city will gain a shorter commute is an overgeneralization.
That depends on the suburbanite. If they work downtown, it makes sense for them to move closer to downtown, if they work in the suburb it makes sense for them to move closer to their job in the suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 10:03 AM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,168 posts, read 29,669,595 times
Reputation: 26656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
That's for sure! It depends on where work is, etc.



In some cities, there's not much of a "reverse commute" any more. In Denver, yes, there's the commute to downtown, but there's also the commute to Boulder, Broomfield and the Tech Center as major employment hubs. Plus there's quite a bit of employment in Jefferson and Adams Counties as well.
Yup. The big problem in the Bay Area is that there are multiple job centers..and no one is going the same way so traffic sucks for everyone going almost anywhere. And since things are decentralized, it is hard to make efficient transit. And of course Silicon Valley is sprawl like suburbia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:02 PM
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 urbanlife78 View Post
That depends on the suburbanite. If they work downtown, it makes sense for them to move closer to downtown, if they work in the suburb it makes sense for them to move closer to their job in the suburbs.
That's the first time I ever heard an urbanist say that! I've been saying it for years on this forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
Yup. The big problem in the Bay Area is that there are multiple job centers..and no one is going the same way so traffic sucks for everyone going almost anywhere. And since things are decentralized, it is hard to make efficient transit. And of course Silicon Valley is sprawl like suburbia.
I don't see decentralization as a problem, and I don't see how that makes it hard to have "efficient" transit. What would the alternative be?
___________________________________________***____ ________________________________

BTW, for those of you interested in the US 36 BRT/"Ghost Train" issue, ie, no one, here's some entertaining reading.
Harsh words for CDOT at public meeting on 50-year U.S. 36 contract - Boulder Daily Camera
CDOT beaten up in Round 2 of U.S. 36 public meetings - Boulder Daily Camera
CDOT releases 600-page U.S. 36 management contract for public review - Boulder Daily Camera
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:14 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: Long Island / NYC
45,988 posts, read 41,967,271 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post

I don't see decentralization as a problem, and I don't see how that makes it hard to have "efficient" transit. What would the alternative be?
Transit works best for routes that are in high demand. It's much easier to have a transit system to services everywhere to one place really well rather than everywhere to everywhere. Generally, high commute transit usage correlates with stronger downtowns, for both positive reasons (as I mentioned) and negative (driving is less convenient in a centralized city as roads are more congestion and parking may be expensive or difficult to find.

We could argue over whether centralization or decentralization is better though maybe that's another thread.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post

In some cities, there's not much of a "reverse commute" any more. In Denver, yes, there's the commute to downtown, but there's also the commute to Boulder, Broomfield and the Tech Center as major employment hubs. Plus there's quite a bit of employment in Jefferson and Adams Counties as well.
But isn't the downtown commute more congested than the rest?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:20 PM
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 nei View Post
Transit works best for routes that are in high demand. It's much easier to have a transit system to services everywhere to one place really well rather than everywhere to everywhere. Generally, high commute transit usage correlates with stronger downtowns, for both positive reasons (as I mentioned) and negative (driving is less convenient in a centralized city as roads are more congestion and parking may be expensive or difficult to find.

We could argue over whether centralization or decentralization is better though maybe that's another thread.




But isn't the downtown commute more congested than the rest?
Maybe. I'm not sure, and I don't feel like looking up stats right now. The Denver Tech Center has a LOT of employees, as does the Lakewood Federal Center, the Interlocken Office Park in Broomfield, and the city of Boulder. Ditto the CU Health Sciences Center in Aurora.

Not to mention, people commute to downtown from all areas of the suburbs, whereas people who live and work in the burbs usually live fairly close to their work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Land of Free Johnson-Weld-2016
6,473 posts, read 13,951,748 times
Reputation: 6436
I do not think so. Cities are expensive. I think it costs more to get the same standard of living in a city that you would in a suburb. I do not think that most ppl with kids can afford a good school and safe and clean neighborhood in a city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:29 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
45,988 posts, read 41,967,271 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Maybe. I'm not sure, and I don't feel like looking up stats right now. The Denver Tech Center has a LOT of employees, as does the Lakewood Federal Center, the Interlocken Office Park in Broomfield, and the city of Boulder. Ditto the CU Health Sciences Center in Aurora.
One way to judge congestion would be to check google traffic at rush hour over a number of days.

Quote:
Not to mention, people commute to downtown from all areas of the suburbs, whereas people who live and work in the burbs usually live fairly close to their work.
Maybe, though if two spouses have jobs in different places, at least one might have a long commute. The first could be a plus, as a downtown is somewhat accessible for most of the region, while an office on one side of the metro may have difficulty getting workers from the other side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:38 PM
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 nei View Post
One way to judge congestion would be to check google traffic at rush hour over a number of days.



Maybe, though if two spouses have jobs in different places, at least one might have a long commute. The first could be a plus, as a downtown is somewhat accessible for most of the region, while an office on one side of the metro may have difficulty getting workers from the other side.
Most people here like to live somewhat close to their jobs b/c of the snow. The long commutes you read about in Cali are rare here. I've been in the situation of commuting in the opposite direction of my spouse, but usually for about the same distance. Neither of us was going downtown. In 33 years here, and 3 jobs in 6-8 locations, DH has never worked downtown. I had a couple of visiting nurse jobs where the office was downtown, but my area of visiting was not. I'd go into the office once a month or so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,062 posts, read 16,081,530 times
Reputation: 12636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
That's the first time I ever heard an urbanist say that! I've been saying it for years on this forum.



I don't see decentralization as a problem, and I don't see how that makes it hard to have "efficient" transit. What would the alternative be?
___________________________________________***____ ________________________________

BTW, for those of you interested in the US 36 BRT/"Ghost Train" issue, ie, no one, here's some entertaining reading.
Harsh words for CDOT at public meeting on 50-year U.S. 36 contract - Boulder Daily Camera
CDOT beaten up in Round 2 of U.S. 36 public meetings - Boulder Daily Camera
CDOT releases 600-page U.S. 36 management contract for public review - Boulder Daily Camera
Concentrated decentralization isn't a problem. You see that anywhere that transit is utilized, including the bay area. Lots of job centers are at BART stations in the East Bay, for example. Something like Los Angeles or Silicon Valley are difficult to handle for transportation. That's kind of changing, you're seeing some clustering around Caltrain. You might eventually see corridors around VTA light rail in San Jose.
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