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 04-06-2014, 08:29 PM
 
1,110 posts, read 908,316 times
Reputation: 1201

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Why shouldn't cyclists be on the road? I haven't had any issues with biking on the road where a bike belongs.
I have no problem with cyclists on the road. However, the law regarding road cycling needs to be more clear to both drivers and cyclists. I see too many angry drivers yelling at and flipping off cyclists when they themselves are in the wrong, and I see too many cyclists doing all sorts of crazy sh*t, basically asking to get hurt. I think bicycling should be a required portion of driver's education so all parties are informed, and law enforcement cracking down on bicyclists who think they are above the law. Personally, I think that if bicyclists are in the road, they should be treated like motor vehicles in the road e.g. wait at lights, stop for pedestrians, follow the right of way, stop before turning right on red, etc. Too often I see these rules broken, and luckily the act usually ends in a near-accident where both cyclist and driver leave unharmed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-06-2014, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,509,053 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by orlando-calrissian View Post
I have no problem with cyclists on the road. However, the law regarding road cycling needs to be more clear to both drivers and cyclists. I see too many angry drivers yelling at and flipping off cyclists when they themselves are in the wrong, and I see too many cyclists doing all sorts of crazy sh*t, basically asking to get hurt. I think bicycling should be a required portion of driver's education so all parties are informed, and law enforcement cracking down on bicyclists who think they are above the law. Personally, I think that if bicyclists are in the road, they should be treated like motor vehicles in the road e.g. wait at lights, stop for pedestrians, follow the right of way, stop before turning right on red, etc. Too often I see these rules broken, and luckily the act usually ends in a near-accident where both cyclist and driver leave unharmed.
I am not sure in your state, but I know in Oregon a bicyclist is consider the same thing as a motor vehicle in that sense, where they do need to obey traffic laws, and the police do issue tickets to people on bikes violating the traffic laws in the state. Though the dangers bikes pose are more low risk compared to vehicles so it doesn't always get the same attention.

Of course, think about this, how often do you see someone breaking the law in a car with no law enforcement in sight?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2014, 10:53 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,655,359 times
Reputation: 26651
I think that people overstate the risk of transit and encountering crazies. I find the number of crazies is highly correlated with the number of crazies in the surrounding areas. But you can encounter crazy people all over the place: sporting events, sidewalk, town square, parking lot, PTA, the strip mall etc.

One problem is, increasingly we live in our own little controlled bubbles. Rarely even interacting with people not like us. We shop in strip malls and shopping centers with private rules and private security. We drive in private cars. We go home to personal retreats and are less civilly engaged. All of this bubble lifestyle makes people much less compassionate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 12:09 AM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,857,480 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
I think that people overstate the risk of transit and encountering crazies. I find the number of crazies is highly correlated with the number of crazies in the surrounding areas. But you can encounter crazy people all over the place: sporting events, sidewalk, town square, parking lot, PTA, the strip mall etc.

One problem is, increasingly we live in our own little controlled bubbles. Rarely even interacting with people not like us. We shop in strip malls and shopping centers with private rules and private security. We drive in private cars. We go home to personal retreats and are less civilly engaged. All of this bubble lifestyle makes people much less compassionate.
Sporting events usually require tickets and PTA usually are parents. Strip Malls might have them if the strip mall lacks security. It isn't an issue of compassion. It is an issue when they violent. Smelly and acting a fool are just inconveniences.

People enjoy driving because:

1. You know you will have an seat.
2. It is usually faster esp. outside of rush hour.
3. You can control the heat, Air conditioning, music, as well as who are your fellow passengers.
4. You are less at risk of muggings and other serious crime.
5. You can stop off and reroute as needed.
6. You can carry heavy or bulky items.

Transit has it uses, but I find the idea of intentionally going car-free and patting yourself on the back for it strange to say the least.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 05:47 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,509,053 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Sporting events usually require tickets and PTA usually are parents. Strip Malls might have them if the strip mall lacks security. It isn't an issue of compassion. It is an issue when they violent. Smelly and acting a fool are just inconveniences.

People enjoy driving because:

1. You know you will have an seat.
2. It is usually faster esp. outside of rush hour.
3. You can control the heat, Air conditioning, music, as well as who are your fellow passengers.
4. You are less at risk of muggings and other serious crime.
5. You can stop off and reroute as needed.
6. You can carry heavy or bulky items.

Transit has it uses, but I find the idea of intentionally going car-free and patting yourself on the back for it strange to say the least.
Why do you find going car free strange? Millions do it and enjoy not being tied to a car, having to sit in traffic, worry about maintenance, worry about getting into an accident they can't prevent or causing an accident due to bad driving. Heck I prefer living where I can use transit or bike to work over driving because driving is aggravating and stressful. Also, everyone these days has an mp3 player and listens to their own music, so that point of yours is equal with a car and transit. Also the chances of getting mugged while taking transit is extremely low and can typically be prevented.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 06:43 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 3,348,447 times
Reputation: 3030
Quote:
Originally Posted by stateofnature View Post
Honestly your posts are so laughably ignorant and wrong that it seems like you've never even visited a city before. That's how off base you are. It's like an alien from another planet trying and failing to accurately describe a culture he has no familiarity with.
Then feel free to laugh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stateofnature View Post
First saying that city public squares appeal to no one but thugs and pickpockets, now saying that virtually no one can take transit to get from their start to their destination.
Didn't say they appeal only to thugs and pickpockets. If that was the case they wouldn't be good places for thugs and pickpockets now would they?

Transit doesn't take folks from door-to-door. Your "start to destination" is from one transit station to another, not actual start place to destination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stateofnature View Post
Have you ever even been to cities like New York, San Francisco, Chicago, DC, Boston, etc.?
A few of them. Any desire to live there? Absolutely not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stateofnature View Post
Put together these cities have millions and millions of people who use transit for all of their daily transportation needs. They can easily live without a car, or if they do have a car, they drive much less frequently than they would if they didn't have transit near them.

I should know, I am one of them. I live within walking distance of multiple public transportation options. I do have a car but I only use it a couple times a week because it is much faster and convenient for me to take the Metro to work, and use public transit or walking for daily errands. I do drive, but I drive a lot less than I would otherwise, so as a result I am less exposed to a less safe form of transportation. My risk of getting into a car accident is a lot lower than if I drove everywhere.
I think your numbers are optimistically high.
An NPR story with a highlight on Metra refers to 300,000 trips per weekday. Given that most folks make one trip in and another trip out, you're down to 150,000 people right off the bat. Maybe fewer if some make additional trips during the day
Commuters Ditch Cars For Public Transit In Record Numbers : NPR

San Francisco isn't really large, it's just extremely congested.
Try Houston. There's transit - and you need to drive to get to it.

I understand your point about lower exposure to auto accident due to lower miles. I'm not convinced, however that the proper statistic to use is "average incidence" for folks traveling to a 'park and ride' in order to use transit. But you can enjoy your bus or train and all that comes with it.

Quote:
Now is this a model for EVERYONE in the country, or even most people? No, I would never suggest that. But it works for a heck of a lot more people than virtually no one. How can it not work for "virtually everyone" when millions of people do it?
Closing in on 400 million people in the U.S. even if one simply accepted your "millions and millions" you are talking about an immaterial number of people. Moreover, you might be close enough to be reasonably door-to-door but that is likely true only for a small fraction of riders.

Quote:
I've never suggested that we should expand an NYC model of transportation to sprawled out suburban "cities" like Houston, Phoenix, etc. But I will defend my lifestyle against the ignorant people who try to pretend like transit is no safer than driving and that it's an unworkable lifestyle. Yes it does work, and works very well for millions of people.
Enjoy your lifestyle. Just don't try using mortality rates or silly irrelevant claims along the lines of "more people die in car accidents than from cancer" to try to promote transit.

Quote:
That's totally fine if a driving lifestyle works well for many millions more people.
It works for far more than those that take transit but apparently it's not "totally fine" with participants in this forum given the diversion to mortality rates and bogus trivia that would have no relevance even if were true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 07:08 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 3,348,447 times
Reputation: 3030
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
No, your original point was trying to blame transit for potential accidents that might happen when someone is driving to and from a park and ride, we call that a strawman argument.
You need to re-read the post. You are obviously a collectivist/communitarian. There was no "we", just "you".

The question as to category is a fair one for me to raise as was the point that using transit does not inherently reduce death rates.

The point of the post is that transit doesn't necessarily reduce death rates when people have to drive to get to a 'park and ride' to begin with. The issue of mortality rates was brought up in the first place as a "strawman argument" by the pro-transit crowd.

In case you haven't noticed the title of the thread is "why people don't use transit" and there are plenty of reasons.


Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Portland doesn't seem to have a problem with building a bike infrastructure, and who said anything about letting bikes on the highway with 55-70mph vehicles? That is another strawman argument from you. If any form of bike lane is provided on an interstate, it should be a dedicated route for bikes to keep them separate from speeding cars, though most cities don't need to provide any bike system on our highways because there are usually better routes for bikes to go.
I understand that you want to try to re-live your past in Portland. I can also speculate as to why you move and change jobs so often given the amount of time you spend arguing, attempting to tell everyone else how terms must be defined, and the number of times you post during the day when folks of your obvious age would ordinarily need to be diligent at work. Moving back to Portland is not likely to solve all your problems.

No strawman arguments here. You are the proponent of "downtown" and if one doesn't live "downtown" the most direct way to get there is by highway unless you also plan to make bicyclists drive further. As far as your interstate solution - it is expensive to implement compared to the number it would serve. You also haven't addressed how many miles out you would carry this scheme or who would pay for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 07:28 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,509,053 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight View Post
You need to re-read the post. You are obviously a collectivist/communitarian. There was no "we", just "you".

The question as to category is a fair one for me to raise as was the point that using transit does not inherently reduce death rates.

The point of the post is that transit doesn't necessarily reduce death rates when people have to drive to get to a 'park and ride' to begin with. The issue of mortality rates was brought up in the first place as a "strawman argument" by the pro-transit crowd.

In case you haven't noticed the title of the thread is "why people don't use transit" and there are plenty of reasons.




I understand that you want to try to re-live your past in Portland. I can also speculate as to why you move and change jobs so often given the amount of time you spend arguing, attempting to tell everyone else how terms must be defined, and the number of times you post during the day when folks of your obvious age would ordinarily need to be diligent at work. Moving back to Portland is not likely to solve all your problems.

No strawman arguments here. You are the proponent of "downtown" and if one doesn't live "downtown" the most direct way to get there is by highway unless you also plan to make bicyclists drive further. As far as your interstate solution - it is expensive to implement compared to the number it would serve. You also haven't addressed how many miles out you would carry this scheme or who would pay for it.
Yes, you have stated that you don't use transit, the counter argument is that millions of people do use transit everyday and millions live in those cities you would never live in. That is not something that is hard for anyone to comprehend or argue against.

As for your assumption that you somehow know my life is completely false based on how you state it. My wife and I are moving back to Portland because we wish to be closer to family, especially when we have a kid. My love for Portland hasn't changed and I will spend more time on my bike and less time having to commute a long distance to work everyday allowing us to enjoy our lives more. Not a hard concept to understand.

Again false, how much do you think it would cost to put in a bicycle infrastructure? You seem to think it is too costly, yet it would be a fraction of what we spend on automotive infrastructure and have a greater impact around those that live within a 5 miles distance from where they work.

Finally, no one is saying you personally need to ride transit because I am riding transit, I just want you to understand that millions of Americans commute by transit every day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 07:46 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 3,348,447 times
Reputation: 3030
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Why do you find going car free strange? Millions do it and enjoy not being tied to a car, having to sit in traffic, worry about maintenance, worry about getting into an accident they can't prevent or causing an accident due to bad driving. Heck I prefer living where I can use transit or bike to work over driving because driving is aggravating and stressful. Also, everyone these days has an mp3 player and listens to their own music, so that point of yours is equal with a car and transit. Also the chances of getting mugged while taking transit is extremely low and can typically be prevented.
No, in your own car you can listen to radio/conversation/music and still be aware of ambient noise around you. Moreover plenty of drivers enjoy not being subjected to the "music" of others. Unless you are one of those who wants to "share" your music with those who really don't want to hear it, then you are one of those wearing ear buds which means you are oblivious to the sounds around you (e.g., car honking because you veered into the car lane or because you are cycling erratically).

As far as the rest of the argument about "worrying" - the world is full of folks that don't want to have to worry about anything. After a while they are just drones. But perhaps it is better if you are not driving a car since you find it so disconcerting.

As far as your claim that the chances of getting mugged are "extremely low" and "typically can be prevented", the former depends in what part of the country/city you are talking about and the latter is just silly as it sounds like the blame the victim defense used in rape and other cases. There are certainly other defenses that can be employed when a mugging appears imminent but cities like Chicago and New York City criminalize being prepared to defend ... But thanks again for illustrating the naivety and lotus-eating nature of the urbanist pro-transit crowd.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 07:52 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
45,985 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight View Post

No strawman arguments here. You are the proponent of "downtown" and if one doesn't live "downtown" the most direct way to get there is by highway unless you also plan to make bicyclists drive further. As far as your interstate solution - it is expensive to implement compared to the number it would serve. You also haven't addressed how many miles out you would carry this scheme or who would pay for it.
The most direct way to downtown is by public transit, especially if rail.
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