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 04-02-2014, 01:48 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
45,985 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804

Advertisements

Note that Helenski grew faster in the last century than Chicago. Assuming no suburban population 100 years ago [maybe Ariete can add?]

1900: 93,600
1925: 209,800
2010: 1,176,976 [urban area population]

for Chicago

1900: 1,838,735
1930: 3,982,123
2010: 8,608,208

2010 is urban area, 1900 and 1930 are Cook County population. So the "American cities are newer" isn't the sole or main reason for less mass transit use.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-02-2014, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Mt. Airy
5,311 posts, read 5,328,925 times
Reputation: 3562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
If that's true, that is genuinely obnoxious.
It's a matter of priorities and perspective. I could say that most places in the US are obnoxious because they prohibit efficient/effective public transportation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:10 PM
 
333 posts, read 326,316 times
Reputation: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Locally the situation in Chicago where Drover and I are from can be summed up as two different worlds. The CBD (the loop, downtown) and the rest of the city(excluding maybe Gold Coast, River North and Lincoln Park). The parking situation in the CBD is similar in cost though you can get discounts that could lower it to around $200 a month if you arrive before 7 or need night time parking. The CBD lacks free parking and even finding an open meter can sometimes be hard.

Outside the CBD parking is usually free or if there is an employee lot there might be an optional charge included in the paycheck but it isnít hundreds a month. On the street parking may or may not be metered or restricted depending on area.

The only single lane roads are residential streets. Most thoroughfares are two way streets(one lane going each way) and an spattering of larger one way streets(two lanes) in the CBD. Some thoroughfares are two lanes in each direction not the mention the expressway system(limited access 3-6 lanes in each direction speed limit hardly enforced of 55MPH).


Lights are mostly not synchronized or if they are synchronized they are for traffic flow about 70% of households own cars in Chicago and outside of a few hot neighborhoods there is still plenty capacity.

For trips to the CBD during rush hour public transit can manage to hold itís own, elsewhere and at other times not so much. Also because there is so much traffic heading around the town, public transit can win if the trip if from burb to the CBD.
I swear IDot, and I'll throw in MODOT too, are the most incompetent people at programming lights. I don't understand why the light in front of me is green, but 100 feet ahead it'll stay read for another 2 minutes when traffic is still backed up. Also a major light of Algonquin in Mount Prospect is literally only 20 seconds long when it's green, but 4 minutes when it's red, and traffic backs up during rush hour.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:13 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,857,480 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Note that Helenski grew faster in the last century than Chicago. Assuming no suburban population 100 years ago [maybe Ariete can add?]

1900: 93,600
1925: 209,800
2010: 1,176,976 [urban area population]

for Chicago

1900: 1,838,735
1930: 3,982,123
2010: 8,608,208

2010 is urban area, 1900 and 1930 are Cook County population. So the "American cities are newer" isn't the sole or main reason for less mass transit use.
Bad Assumption for Chicago. There were burbs 100 years ago. Places like Oak Park, Evanston, Cicero that are just over the boarder and some more distant burbs like Naperville, Barrington, Crystal lake were where the well off lived or were farming villages and were served by trains. There was a fair amount of population outside of the city itself. The city itself would have been about 90% of it's current size, but they did annex a few more places post 1900.

What happened post 1950 is that people move out to the burbs due to both a rail system and due to having expressways. It became possible to live in the south burbs and make it to your south side factory with the car. Likewise for the Westside. Employment was spread around town. Jobs that used to be forced into the city by lack of transportation outside of it like Meat Packing closed up and moved out of town. Dairies likewise began to reduce in number as they went out of town and people stopped having milk delivered. In the 1970ies The steal mills faced foreign competition and began to decline and people as well a laws were less supportive of having polluting heavy industries in town.

Both jobs and population spread out.

Last edited by chirack; 04-02-2014 at 03:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:17 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,857,480 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
It's a matter of priorities and perspective. I could say that most places in the US are obnoxious because they prohibit efficient/effective public transportation.
They don't prohibit it, we just don't force people to use it. Adjusting lights to harm the flow of cars seems to cross the line to us. We might tolerate it if the light is adjusted for other reason like not enough time for people/Children to cross but otherwise not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:24 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
45,985 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Bad Assumption for Chicago. There were burbs 100 years ago. Places like Oak Park, Evanston, Cicero that are just over the boarder and some more distant burbs like Naperville, Barrington, Crystal lake were where the well off lived or were farming villages and were served by trains. There was a fair amount of population outside of the city itself. The city itself would have been about 90% of it's current size, but they did annex a few more places post 1900.
That's why I listed the population of Cook County not Chicago. Adding the collar counties would have added a few hundred thousand more in 1930, not a large enough to affect the overall picture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:34 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,857,480 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
That's why I listed the population of Cook County not Chicago. Adding the collar counties would have added a few hundred thousand more in 1930, not a large enough to affect the overall picture.
Not quite. Chicago is in Cook County, which is one of the larger counties in the country in size. However places that saw the most growth post WWII would have been burbs in the distant parts of cook county and burbs outside of Cook County. Places like Lombard, Naperville, and Crystal lake are outside of Cook County. Barrington is barely in Cook County.

Chicago's first ring of burbs are streetcar burbs that are highly urban. Places like Oak Park, Evanston, Brywen, Evergreen Park, Skokie, Cicero look a lot more like the city than like a leave to beaver burb. The auto fueled the growth of 2nd and 3rd ring burbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:47 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
45,985 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Not quite. Chicago is in Cook County, which is one of the larger counties in the country in size. However places that saw the most growth post WWII would have been burbs in the distant parts of cook county and burbs outside of Cook County. Places like Lombard, Naperville, and Crystal lake are outside of Cook County. Barrington is barely in Cook County.
I understand that, I'm not sure how this affects my growth numbers? Since the other counties mostly grew post-WWII, ignoring them shouldn't matter much, I estimated I missed a few hundred thousand in 1930.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 03:56 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,857,480 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I understand that, I'm not sure how this affects my growth numbers? Since the other counties mostly grew post-WWII, ignoring them shouldn't matter much, I estimated I missed a few hundred thousand in 1930.
What I am saying is that most of the growth of the burbs is post WWII and mostly outside of the county. American cities and burbs are newer in that most of them were not around 200-300 years ago and most of the burbs were often farm fields even 60 years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2014, 04:01 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
45,985 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
What I am saying is that most of the growth of the burbs is post WWII and mostly outside of the county.
Yes, that is why I posted Cook County population numbers for 1900 and 1930, and urban area population for today. I not sure at this point if you're arguing or argreeing with me.

Quote:
American cities and burbs are newer in that most of them were not around 200-300 years ago and most of the burbs were often farm fields even 60 years ago.
Compare with the Helenski numbers.
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