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.
Does Dallas really have any secondary job centers dense for enough for significant transit ridership? I suspect most of those light rail have few residents nearby nor many jobs but mainly park and rides, which will only get high ridership if the downtown is hard to drive and especially park in.
There are some job centers. But if you have a car, and you can park for free at your job, then what's the point? You would have to be the type of person who really wants to ride transit bad and most people don't fall into that category. The 15-20 minutes it may take you to get to a station and then on the platform could have been better spent in a car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
Suburban Toronto, which is much denser than Dallas gets much higher non downtown ridership. Even nassau county long island has 2.5 times bus riders (which cant be center city commutes) than Dallas has transit riders.
If it's denser and built differently, then yeah, that's not a surprise.
Charlotte finished a light rail line in 2007. The metro went from 16,049 transit commuters to 17,573 transit commuters. Build it and they will ride it. With a few more $462 million investments, they might reach 28,000 riders some day.
That's only $300,000 per rider. Sounds like almost as good a bargain as LA which paid $100,000 per rider. A small price to pay while enjoying your romance novel about misplaced Monarch butterflies confused by climate change... especially if you're not the one paying it! Taxpayer money is free money.
There's even more traffic on the Washington Beltway, which is not in the city. So traffic woes have little to nothing to do with the people living in DC. Your contention is that urban dwellers are doing things that suburbanites complain about, but I fail to see how traffic is one of those things that the former is "doing."
Ok, but are you saying that suburbanites are not concerned about highway access to the city center or parking when they work there? Wasn't the article about exactly this? A guy who said transit sucks so he like to drive his car to work instead. People who live in cities want less highways (checkout the "impact of highways" thread) and less surface parking. There have been several threads of non-city people complaining that urbanites want these things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
And that's why I said that "Creative Class" was not sufficiently precise. Forget I even said that. My point was that urbanists fit a certain profile. There are not many working-class whites (or Blacks or Hispanics) among their ranks. They are often upper middle class with some bleeding into the middle class. And their politics and tastes are virtually identical across the board. It doesn't matter whether you're in the Haight or in Adams-Morgan.
I'm really referring to urbanists (who strongly overlap with SWPLs who also strongly overlap with "Creatives"). They are indeed a small minority. They just don't see it that way because they don't see too far beyond that bubble.
I'm not surprised that this is your focus. I guess the massive amount of reinvestment into cities or cities posting a population gain for the first time in 60 years isn't a reason to think that there's something going on. I guess all those rich white people are just naive self-involved fools who don't even look to the edge of their own neighborhoods.
they dont like being mugged. when the streets become again safe, the buses and trolleys will fill up with people.
please dont say they ride the metro in paris, when they have to yes, but otherwise anybody that can gets a small car & does so bek of the thug element there.
the issue friend is crime. in america if you got a car and can pay high rent you just dodge it, but not on public transport-- that is the preferred transport for the gang banger. and he is dying to get next to you.
^^^^Ladies and Gentlemen, THIS is why people don't use mass transit.*^^^^
(*I'm not pointing him out because he's right, I'm pointing him out because he is a textbook example of how many in America view mass transit.)
Ok, but are you saying that suburbanites are not concerned about highway access to the city center or parking when they work there? Wasn't the article about exactly this? A guy who said transit sucks so he like to drive his car to work instead...I'm not following your point.
I thought what I said was pretty clear. I said that urbanists focus a lot more on suburbanites than the suburbanites focus on urbanists. And for the third time, this is the case because urbanists need suburbanites in order to make their dream of an urban utopia possible. Suburbanites really don't care if urbanists ride buses, eat at different restaurants every night, have access to museums, etc. I think the attitude is "good for them." But urbanists clearly have an issue with the way suburbanites live. I even recall one poster in this forum once saying that living in the suburbs was morally wrong.
So getting back to traffic, I don't see how traffic is something suburbanites complain about urbanists "doing" since it's not really urbanists causing traffic. The traffic is largely caused by people commuting from suburbs into cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
I'm not surprised that this is your focus; and seemingly your ax. I guess the massive amount of reinvestment into cities or cities posting a population gain for the first time in 60 years isn't a reason to think that there's something going on. I guess all those rich white people are just naive self-involved fools who don't even look to the edge of their own neighborhoods.
It's not an ax. I just think it's important to put things in perspective. You can go on any forum for any number of things and people will swear up and down that that particular thing is "booming" and taking over America. And they'll offer data to back up their claims. According to posters in the soccer forum, the sport is just a few years away from overtaking American football in the U.S. (look at MLS attendance!). And if you talk to tennis fans, tennis is not too far away from overtaking basketball in popularity (Wimbledon 2008 was the most watched match in history!). Yes, it's good that cities are no longer losing population, but we're talking about a small population out of 315 million Americans that are moving into American cities and gentrifying them. Sorry, but I don't see that as "revolutionary."
Wow! This thread really took off while I was at work today. Frankly, it was a nice break to be thinking about ear infections, croup, asthma, pertussis and the like and helping people. Anyway, I'm kind of brain dead. I started multi-quoting, but I wanted to quote just about every post. I'm going to choose a few gems and commnet.
Getting items delivered is usually inconvenient. As many have said, you often have to be home. There's often, in fact, I'd say, almost always, a delivery charge. And having stuff delivered to a FedEx center, or a UPS center is awful. Then you have to go get it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408
But the biggest problem with this perspective that "mass transit sucks, it is never better than a car," is that it assumes everyone has access to a car. Depending on how you calculate things, 20-30% of Americans cannot drive at any given time. If we only build infrastructure assuming everyone will have access to a car, then the people who are carless by choice, circumstance, ability or age are stuck without mobility.
Well, really, almost everyone does have *access* to a car. **Nationwide, roughly 8 percent of the U.S. population resides in a household with no access to an automobile.** https://www.google.com/search?q=hous...en-US:official
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
While the author makes some good points, like valuing time, I feel like his inexperience with mass transit leaves him seeming a bit naïve. For example, he talks about value on time. I agree that it’s usually faster in most places in the US to drive vs. transit (except for large cities with good/extensive transit systems, and even then…). However, he ignores the fact that he’s already living someplace and wants the transit system to just work for him. What I mean by this is that when people buy a house or rent an apartment, they consider their commute. He’s always been driving and now he wants to switch to transit and is seemingly disappointed that he can’t walk out the door and find a direct route via transit directly to his workplace.
Now that’s a real factor and cars do have an advantage there, but not all the time. If I buy a house knowing my commute on transit (to a busy downtown), and then I want to switch to driving. I could say, “the downside of a car is that while it can take me to exactly where I want to go, I now have to pay for parking, tolls and traffic is terrible.†Those may be real issues, but the perspective that I would be complaining from would be very narrow, because there are lots of places where traffic isn’t bad and parking is free.
He also assumes that all transit commutes disallow you to use your time productively onboard. I can very honesty say that I value my time, and in doing so, I get some exercise and outdoor exposure (which are very valuable whether people realize it or not) while taking transit (or biking). I also don’t RUSH from place to place. I find that my health has been better now that I take a little more time to get to work enjoyably (yes, this is subjective). So, it’s not really as straight forward IMO.
[FONT=Tahoma]Other things like “exact change†are stupid. He obviously has no logistical empathy for what it’s like to run a bus through a busy neighborhood and have a fare machine that’s going to break your $20. Imagine pennies, dimes, etc. pouring all over the floor while the bus pulls away (not all bus drivers wait for you to get seated). It takes a little planning to adjust to the fare system when starting to use transit, and it’s a ****load easier than buying a car, getting a driver’s license, registering a car, etc. [/font]
Cargo? Well, it may not work for everyone, but it takes a little planning too. I had to go out and buy a messenger bag (some choose briefcases, etc.) in order to transport my stuff comfortably back and forth. Some things I leave at work to make it easier. Obviously, you can’t expect it to work the same way on transit.
Bold #1: That's what a lot of urbanists on this forum want to. One person said she didn't think the transit was adequate unless the routes ran every 10 minutes.
Bold #2: Walking to the bus stop may be a good form of exercise. However, I have rarely seen anyone reading, etc. on a bus. Maybe people use their smartphones these days, but it's hard to read a book or a newspaper in a cramped space.
Bold #3: When I was a college student in Pittsburgh, the "exact change" issue was a real thorn in everyone's side.
Bold #4: Who wants to do all this "planning" all the time? Good grief, it's nice to be able to be spontaneous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg
Delivery of parcels became less efficient when people split for the suburbs--suddenly completing a route through a low-density subdivision became a less efficient solution. That's why a more traditional "streetcar suburb" development pattern makes life easier for delivery services as well as residents, in terms of access to transit and delivery vehicles' access to their delivery locations.
Well, maybe we should just blow up the suburbs then and start all over.
I refer to streetcar suburbs as "free-market suburbs" because, during the era when they were built, governments were less involved with the expenses of paving and providing transportation networks. The private developer paved the roads, but the main transportation system was a local streetcar network that was either owned by the developer or another private business paid by the developer to provide transportation to their subdivision.
Still trying to sell that one, eh? No matter how many times people post about how publicly funded roads have been with us since antiquity, you still try to get people to believe otherwise. "If you say something untrue often enough, people will believe it".
Yes, part of why we don't have milkmen anymore is because of changes in technology--but technology is still changing, and in some ways making delivery services more practical than they once were. If home delivery wasn't practical, Amazon.com wouldn't make quite so much money. Today I can order groceries online from Safeway, as well as flowers, pizza and lots of other things--to the point where we're getting close to "delivery drones" to deliver burritos!
And you're paying for this delivery service. Always have, since the days of the original Sears catalog.
Other technological advantages we have now include real-time tracking: a modern app can pinpoint the exact location of a delivery truck, updated in real time, so someone expecting a package could look up where their package is, and know whether they have time to step out for a minute before they arrive. Currently this is used by "people delivery" services like Lyft and Uber, high-tech variants on taxi service, so you can see exactly where the taxi coming to pick you up is, and how long it will take to arrive.
Big whoop! You still have to stay home to take delivery of the package. Makes it kind of hard if you have a job you have to go to, and don't have the flexible hours that *some* people seem to have.
Car-sharing services also limit the need for a car and parking spaces while still providing its convenience. Sure, there are times when you want a cargo vehicle to carry stuff from Point A to Point B. But if you only need that service a couple times a month, why be responsible for its care and feeding the rest of the year? Pay for a few hours of Zipcar service to carry that Christmas tree home.
High-tech apps and geolocation also make transit easier to use. A growing number of cities have real-time information at bus stops and light rail stations, so instead of just staring at the sign and hoping the bus arrives based on the schedule, you can look up and know exactly where it is, and how long you will have to wait--including alerts about service interruptions.
And you can call your boss and tell her just how late you'll be b/c the bus was late!
(Mine in teal)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
Laundromats are usually pretty local from my experience. However, very poor neighborhoods may not have those types of amenities as frequently.
Actually, you see more laundromats in poorer areas where people can't afford their own washers and dryers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg
Over the past few years I have shifted from using a car to get groceries to making more trips on foot. I notice I get a little more selective about what I buy when on foot, due to the knowledge that I'll have to walk it home, which in some ways has resulted in better dietary and economic choices. For example, instead of multiple 2-liter bottles of soda, which weigh 4 pounds each, cost $1-1.50 and last a day or two in my household, I buy boxes of tea. The tea weighs a lot less than the soda, costs less (50 cents per 2l) and is healthier for me (just tea and water) plus I have a lot fewer plastic bottles to put in the trash. So it's better for the environment, better for my pocketbook and better for my own health.
I also notice that when I do take a car (maybe one trip a month) I tend to buy a lot more stuff because I can, which results in the stuff that I buy and take home but don't use, so I just throw it out, or eat more so it won't get thrown out. More waste, more waist.
SOME of us recycle our plastic!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
The folks who love driving, low density development, big box stores, etc. must care. I mean, you see some people come into this forum casting a lot of disdain at anyone even talking about closing a dense urban street (far far from their house) down from auto traffic. That seems like concern to me.
Who said this? Name names.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
I personally make huge trips (or rather my wife makes huge shopping trips). I'd rather spend one evening buying a whole bunch of stuff instead of taking several trips to the store to grab things on an as needed basis. The lines in the market can get long, so if I'm going grocery shopping (rare), I'm going to take my time and get everything I need.
Exactly! I can find a lot better things to do with my time than go to the grocery store every day or every other day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
Haha. See, I consider hipsters to be a subset of SWPLs. I have a checklist I usually run through to assess SWPLdom. A person need not have all of these to be a SWPL, but will likely have most of them.
NPR (check)
Obama voter (2008 Primary) (check)
Whole Foods/TJ shopper (check)
NYT/New Yorker/Economist subscription (check)
Patagonia/Helly Hansen/Canada Goose (check)
Degree from prestigious liberal arts school (automatic)
Microbrews (check)
Indie films (check)
Fair trade coffee (check)
Farmer's market (check)
Vespa scooter (check)
Backpacking in Europe (check)
That's the short list.
I agree. And they have publications like Atlantic Cities and Streetsblog that function as one gigantic echo chamber.
Hmm, I guess I'm not white.
NPR (check) Yep
Obama voter (2008 Primary) (check) Not in the 2008 primary
Whole Foods/TJ shopper (check) Nope
NYT/New Yorker/Economist subscription (check) Nopre
Patagonia/Helly Hansen/Canada Goose (check) Nope
Degree from prestigious liberal arts school (automatic) Is the University of Pittsburgh prestigious?
Microbrews (check) N
Indie films (check) N
Fair trade coffee (check) N
Farmer's market (check) Yes, plus grow my own
Vespa scooter (check) N
Backpacking in Europe (check) N. Who would want to backpack in a built up urban place like Europe? I have gone backpacking, in national forests, parks, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg
Picking up one or two items from the store on the way home from work is no less possible for a pedestrian or cyclist. Even 40 lb. bags of cat litter, if you have a rolling cart or a cargo bike, and unless you are trying for "crazy cat lady" status, that's not a trip you're going to make very often. Also, the one-item purchase is the dumb way to order groceries online, especially if the online delivery service charges a flat fee. Ordering one item at a time and getting charged $10 per order would be pretty dumb--so, the key is, don't do that.
Also, using your car isn't "free," it still costs money to operate and burns gas. You still have to insure and register and maintain the car. You're just optimizing its use by combining trips, which is a smart strategy to use if you want to drive less. And if ordering online, the better strategy is to order multiple items to mitigate the expense of that $10-15 shipping fee. The point of online ordering vs. a car-based shopping trip is to provide an alternative for someone who doesn't have a car, not to prove that it costs less in all circumstances. In everything, there are choices--we choose what we do (or don't want to do) to suit our circumstances, which aren't all the same.
It's a freaking waste of time!
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
Charlotte finished a light rail line in 2007. The metro went from 16,049 transit commuters to 17,573 transit commuters. Build it and they will ride it. With a few more $462 million investments, they might reach 28,000 riders some day.
Delivery? Get real. Unless you live in a doorman building or (ironically) in a very safe suburb, or there's someone home all the time (something which was usually true when delivery was much more common, and rarely true today), you're out of luck getting most things delivered at home.
Most of my city-dwelling co-workers have them delivered at work, which means they've got to lug them home via public transit or on foot. Was pretty funny watching a co-worker cart boxes of diapers and other baby junk out of the building; fortunately he lived close and didn't have to take the subway (he's moved to a suburban area though)
As for dragging that 40lb bag of cat litter home on a hand cart... better you than me.
Exact change (or metrocards or tokens whatever odd form of payment the city requires, particularly when they're hard to get as is true in Philadelphia) are a major problem for the casual rider. And exact change in particular can be a pain for the regular commuter too, having to constantly hit the bank for change and carry it around.
I thought what I said was pretty clear. I said that urbanists focus a lot more on suburbanites than the suburbanites focus on urbanists. And for the third time, this is the case because urbanists need suburbanites in order to make their dream of an urban utopia possible. Suburbanites really don't care if urbanists ride buses, eat at different restaurants every night, have access to museums, etc. I think the attitude is "good for them." But urbanists clearly have an issue with the way suburbanites live. I even recall one poster in this forum once saying that living in the suburbs was morally wrong.
So getting back to traffic, I don't see how traffic is something suburbanites complain about urbanists "doing" since it's not really urbanists causing traffic. The traffic is largely caused by people commuting from suburbs into cities.
It's not an ax. I just think it's important to put things in perspective. You can go on any forum for any number of things and people will swear up and down that that particular thing is "booming" and taking over America. And they'll offer data to back up their claims. According to posters in the soccer forum, the sport is just a few years away from overtaking American football in the U.S. (look at MLS attendance!). And if you talk to tennis fans, tennis is not too far away from overtaking basketball in popularity (Wimbledon 2008 was the most watched match in history!). Yes, it's good that cities are no longer losing population, but we're talking about a small population out of 315 million Americans that are moving into American cities and gentrifying them. Sorry, but I don't see that as "revolutionary."
I'll say one last thing about this and then I'll let it get back to why people don't use mass transit.
I think you're underestimating the significance of cities losing population for 60+ years, and then starting to gain population (some pretty aggressively, considering). It doesn't have to reach gains that rival suburban growth to be a big deal. If you compare the disinvestment from even 20 years ago to the investment in 2014, it's truly remarkable and is cause to acknowledge a major pattern of change; again, "major" not meaning that a majority of the country has changed, but more that there are more people entering the city than leaving (which also underscores the sheer number of people moving in in some cities).
Terminology like "boom" may draw rightful criticism, but to me, to say it's just semi-rich white people being shortsighted is overly-simplistic and borderline racist.
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.
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.
