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.
When developers were allowed to do whatever they wished, but cars and roads weren't commonplace, they built their own transit line to run between the suburb and downtown.
If developers were allowed to do whatever they wish, they'd provide no parking and the streets would be congested with the resident's cars.
Perhaps, though off street parking is sometimes a selling point for a home. The streets congested with resident's cars (most my street is used up resident's cars) the residents manage to park their cars. I mentioned BajanYankee's situation earlier.
Quote:
If you live in Portland, or even NYC, that may be true. Those of us who live where there are real winters would beg to differ.
No idea if my location qualifies as a real winter by your rules*, but I find a driveway sufficient. Plenty of people don't have garages here, most in this part of town.
*I assume real winter = lots of snow. In my opinion, NYC gets plenty of winter. Btw, NYC has the opposite snow parking rules as Minneapolis, instead of many street parkers having to move their car for snowstorms, any street cleaning / move your car rules are waived. The reason why seems immediately obvious to me.
Nei and Jade408, you have both been so courteous to me, and I do appreciate it. You know, I think a lot of my basic attitude toward car ownership is a generational thing. I am 70. When I was growing up we males just could not wait to get our driver's licenses; it was the most important rite of passage there was - the key to manhood and independence. And the driving itself was (and remains) such a pure joy. Most of us worked on the cars with our fathers, so we developed an appreciation of what made them tick. Today, as cars are run to a great extent with little computers, they have become too complex and sophisticated for most home maintenance, so that bonding of father and son over the car has become a thing of the past.
I think there is some generational difference, cars aren't viewed as much as fun icons, nor is the car culture there as much. Still, most want easy, practical transportation. For most of the country, owning a car is the best option for that sometimes really the only option. I don't think me nor jade408 are typical of our generation, most people don't attach a lot of emotion in being able to get around without a car, nor are the teenagers you describe (dream of a car for a car's sake). They just want to get places easily.
I think it's at least as much of a regional thing. Southern California is known for its car culture, especially decades ago. Though how atypical it is I don't know, I'm sure it was played up in movies and TV. As for myself, I grew up in the suburbs of New York City. While in the suburbs themselves almost every adult had a car (though there are some one-car couples), that never was true of the city. Not owning a car wouldn't be unusual for my parent's generation perspective, there hasn't been much generational change except for maybe a greater interest in living in the city, where fewer people own cars. New York City is the most extreme in the US in this respect, but anyone with familiar with Boston, Philadelphia, DC, Chicago or San Francisco wouldn't consider owning a car as universal as a stove. Neither today nor decades ago. A friend of mine living in San Francisco doesn't own a car. His girlfriend does, and their main use of it together is to leave the city every other weekend or so to go rock climbing in Yosemite. Not sure if that counts, but it's not really for much local.
Apparently, Chicago has seen a recent change in behavior (according to the Chicago Tribune — don't think the NYTimes would have ever written that on NYC):
Just ten years ago, living in Chicago without an automobile was considered eccentric behavior.
and a blogger's comments:
Was it? Really? The one out of four people who didn’t own cars back then, they were eccentric? Is that what “eccentric” means? Things that 25% of the population does?
No. Really, as he explains over the next few paragraphs, what he means is that among a certain set of professional-class people (the newsroom of the Tribune, specifically), it was considered eccentric. Or, not to put too fine a point on it, it was considered something poor people do. But now it’s considered acceptable for middle-class people, so hurray!
A bit of a narrow perspective from the Tribune, and often our perspective is a bit warped by the types of people you deal with. Even Los Angeles has a substantial fraction of people without cars, and many more one-car couple. But the completely carless are almost all poor and probably not in your social circle.
Years ago, I used mass transit day-in and day-out. I wasn't one of those public transportation snobs by any means. It was just that public trans was a better choice over a car given my residence and place of work. Over the course of time though, I found mass transit to be a debilitating experience.
I think there is some generational difference, cars aren't viewed as much as fun icons, nor is the car culture there as much. Still, most want easy, practical transportation. For most of the country, owning a car is the best option for that sometimes really the only option. I don't think me nor jade408 are typical of our generation, most people don't attach a lot of emotion in being able to get around without a car, nor are the teenagers you describe (dream of a car for a car's sake). They just want to get places easily.
I think it's at least as much of a regional thing. Southern California is known for its car culture, especially decades ago. Though how atypical it is I don't know, I'm sure it was played up in movies and TV. As for myself, I grew up in the suburbs of New York City. While in the suburbs themselves almost every adult had a car (though there are some one-car couples), that never was true of the city. Not owning a car wouldn't be unusual for my parent's generation perspective, there hasn't been much generational change except for maybe a greater interest in living in the city, where fewer people own cars. New York City is the most extreme in the US in this respect, but anyone with familiar with Boston, Philadelphia, DC, Chicago or San Francisco wouldn't consider owning a car as universal as a stove. Neither today nor decades ago. A friend of mine living in San Francisco doesn't own a car. His girlfriend does, and their main use of it together is to leave the city every other weekend or so to go rock climbing in Yosemite. Not sure if that counts, but it's not really for much local.
Apparently, Chicago has seen a recent change in behavior (according to the Chicago Tribune — don't think the NYTimes would have ever written that on NYC):
Just ten years ago, living in Chicago without an automobile was considered eccentric behavior.
and a blogger's comments:
Was it? Really? The one out of four people who didn’t own cars back then, they were eccentric? Is that what “eccentric” means? Things that 25% of the population does?
No. Really, as he explains over the next few paragraphs, what he means is that among a certain set of professional-class people (the newsroom of the Tribune, specifically), it was considered eccentric. Or, not to put too fine a point on it, it was considered something poor people do. But now it’s considered acceptable for middle-class people, so hurray!
A bit of a narrow perspective from the Tribune, and often our perspective is a bit warped by the types of people you deal with. Even Los Angeles has a substantial fraction of people without cars, and many more one-car couple. But the completely carless are almost all poor and probably not in your social circle.
I have know people who lived without cars in Chicago. It wasn't an eccentric behavior. It was just an very limited existence being limited to where the CTA can go, when the CTA is wiling to take you and ONE pain in the neck when it comes to grocery shopping and very limited in terms of job prospects as the burbs and parts of the city with less direct public transit are off limits or difficult to get to not to mention very slow taking about twice the amount of time it would have taken to drive.
Perhaps, though off street parking is sometimes a selling point for a home. The streets congested with resident's cars (most my street is used up resident's cars) the residents manage to park their cars. I mentioned BajanYankee's situation earlier.
No idea if my location qualifies as a real winter by your rules*, but I find a driveway sufficient. Plenty of people don't have garages here, most in this part of town.
*I assume real winter = lots of snow. In my opinion, NYC gets plenty of winter. Btw, NYC has the opposite snow parking rules as Minneapolis, instead of many street parkers having to move their car for snowstorms, any street cleaning / move your car rules are waived. The reason why seems immediately obvious to me.
In Chicago driveways are rare. Off the street parking is an major selling point of an house. There are an few houses without garages but 99% have an detached 1-2 car garage and most are 2 car garages. Garages provide more than just parking. They provide extra storage space and extra space for stuff you don't want in your house. I personally hate clearing snow off my car and so an Garage is non-negotiable.
When developers were allowed to do whatever they wished, but cars and roads weren't commonplace, they built their own transit line to run between the suburb and downtown.
In Chicago driveways are rare. Off the street parking is an major selling point of an house. There are an few houses without garages but 99% have an detached 1-2 car garage and most are 2 car garages. Garages provide more than just parking. They provide extra storage space and extra space for stuff you don't want in your house. I personally hate clearing snow off my car and so an Garage is non-negotiable.
Spoken like a true Chicagoan. I hate it too, also the scraping ice which can add 10-15 min. to one's morning prep.
Right. We didn't have any roads before 1950, at the earliest.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with wburg's post, but wburg didn't say that. He said they weren't commonplace.
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.
