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 10-06-2014, 08:43 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,000 posts, read 102,581,357 times
Reputation: 33059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
Exactly! Those who need a parking space within a few feet of every business they visit, will generally complain about walkable business districts, while that same lack of surface parking is what makes them walkable.
You can't please all the people all the time!
And God forbid we take any concern for people with little kids, the elderly, the infirm, etc. I can remember the days when all sorts of fancy concrete "steps: and the like were popular on city streets, including in Louisville. They were "hip" and "creative". They also were out of compliance with the ADA. I haven't heard anyone complain about walkable business districts, per se. People do complain about lack of parking. Compromise is in order, but will never happen with attitudes such as the above expressed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2014, 09:47 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 3,349,928 times
Reputation: 3030
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Then maybe you can tell us why car dependent communities were created? Either way, it is a great way to require everyone to need a car thus means more people need to buy a car.
You mean transit-independent subdivisions?

There are lots of reasons
1. Bad housing choices in cities
2. Crime in cities
3. Noise/pollution in cities
4. Regulatory environment in cities
5. Lot size in city
6. City taxes
7. Human congestion in cities
8. Bad schools/bad family environment in cities
9. Lack of parking/access in city
10. City prices
11. More freedom
...

The list can go on and on but any one of the above is likely sufficient for just about anyone living in a non-city transit-independent environment.

By the way, it's not as if cities suddenly existed out of thin air. What are you - a believer in some creationist theory of cities? Portland was a "suburb" of Oregon City at one point. They form, grow, and ebb at different rates - problem is some people can't deal with that and believe things should continue on forever. Everything has a life cycle including artificial entities like cities.

Last edited by IC_deLight; 10-06-2014 at 10:02 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 10:12 AM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,858,676 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Then maybe you can tell us why car dependent communities were created? Either way, it is a great way to require everyone to need a car thus means more people need to buy a car.
Car free works best when where you need to go is say an CBD(in Chicago's case the loop), during rush. Need to go elsewhere at rush or at other times and public transit is often the slowest option. The short is that people in urban environment need cars too. Sometimes to quickly access jobs in the burbs, sometimes to quickly access jobs outside of the CBD. For most people public transit is of limited use when you have an car therefore things like big lawns and larger houses become more important. In addition the reason why there are so many small "walkable" business districts in an city was because before the automobile people actually had to walk to an store to buy things and therefore the stores needed to be nearby. With the automobile people could more easily choose the distant store that had lower prices and better selection and both of these are facilitated by larger buildings that could hold three different brands and sizes of an product or could hold an large quantity of product(and again with lower prices).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 10:27 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,419 posts, read 11,923,391 times
Reputation: 10536
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Car free works best when where you need to go is say an CBD(in Chicago's case the loop), during rush. Need to go elsewhere at rush or at other times and public transit is often the slowest option. The short is that people in urban environment need cars too. Sometimes to quickly access jobs in the burbs, sometimes to quickly access jobs outside of the CBD. For most people public transit is of limited use when you have an car therefore things like big lawns and larger houses become more important. In addition the reason why there are so many small "walkable" business districts in an city was because before the automobile people actually had to walk to an store to buy things and therefore the stores needed to be nearby. With the automobile people could more easily choose the distant store that had lower prices and better selection and both of these are facilitated by larger buildings that could hold three different brands and sizes of an product or could hold an large quantity of product(and again with lower prices).
I'd say it varies dramatically depending upon the city. My brother lived in San Francisco for two years when he worked at Berkeley. He didn't keep his car, because he found it too much of a hassle to drive/park in the city, and found a Zipcar membership really covered those random few trips a month he absolutely needed a car. And when I lived in DC while I did need a car for work (I worked in Suburban Maryland) I literally never used by car except for work and road trips. I could socialize and shop entirely through a mixture of using my bike and the metro (I barely ever even got off the Red Line). If I had gotten a longer-stint job in DC within the city limits, I would have almost assuredly would have ditched my car.

That said, DC and San Francisco are the #2 and #3 cities for transit in the country (following NYC of course), so it's no surprise it's a bit easier there than someplace like Chicago. But even in cities with lower transit utilization, it makes a big difference in terms of your life if you can live in a city where being a one-car family is possible. We have two cars now, but one is very unreliable and seldom used, and once it breaks we'll be back down to one car again, which we did for several years before.

The one thing I would disagree with you strongly on is that public transit isn't an amenity everyone wants. My understanding is that the majority of studies have shown there is always at least a modest price premium for being located close to transit. While this doesn't mean that "most people" (as you put it) care about public transit, it does mean there are more people who want a home with good transit access then are able to afford it (e.g., that demand outstrips supply).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 10:58 AM
 
2,493 posts, read 2,194,181 times
Reputation: 3351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
As many city streets are designated "state highways". Don't be so disingenuous. Arapahoe has a speed limit of 30 mph in that area, I believe, and Foothills' is 45, I think. No, cities didn't build interstates at all, the feds did. There is no interstate within about 15 miles or so of Boulder.

I thought you were the one who wanted to talk about "walkability" not parking. Now you're talking about driving.

I mentioned that one of the reasons the hospital moved to east Boulder was better emergency access being on two highways.
Are you disputing that the East Arapahoe location has better access?

Last edited by nei; 10-06-2014 at 03:41 PM.. Reason: rude
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 11:07 AM
 
2,493 posts, read 2,194,181 times
Reputation: 3351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
And God forbid we take any concern for people with little kids, the elderly, the infirm, etc. I can remember the days when all sorts of fancy concrete "steps: and the like were popular on city streets, including in Louisville. They were "hip" and "creative". They also were out of compliance with the ADA. I haven't heard anyone complain about walkable business districts, per se. People do complain about lack of parking. Compromise is in order, but will never happen with attitudes such as the above expressed.

I live and walk in a very walkable neighborhood/downtown and I see plenty of little kids and elderly out walking. I understand that there are those that can not walk (spent 6 weeks in a wheelchair myself) but that does not mean we can not discuss walkable places. Some people can not ski or mountain climb but it is ok to discuss skiing and climbing. It has been said a hundred times, but for those that missed it: walkable areas do not exclude cars, they just give the option of walking or biking.

There will always be car centric shopping options with parking right at the front door available. We are just proposing more areas should be pedestrian centric. Restaurants will always provide for those that choose not to walk, I just read that there are now drive thru funeral parlors.

Last edited by nei; 10-06-2014 at 03:41 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,519,126 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight View Post
You mean transit-independent subdivisions?

There are lots of reasons
1. Bad housing choices in cities
2. Crime in cities
3. Noise/pollution in cities
4. Regulatory environment in cities
5. Lot size in city
6. City taxes
7. Human congestion in cities
8. Bad schools/bad family environment in cities
9. Lack of parking/access in city
10. City prices
11. More freedom
...

The list can go on and on but any one of the above is likely sufficient for just about anyone living in a non-city transit-independent environment.

By the way, it's not as if cities suddenly existed out of thin air. What are you - a believer in some creationist theory of cities? Portland was a "suburb" of Oregon City at one point. They form, grow, and ebb at different rates - problem is some people can't deal with that and believe things should continue on forever. Everything has a life cycle including artificial entities like cities.
False, Portland was never a suburb of Oregon City, it was a city in its own right between Fort Vancouver and Oregon City.

The rest of your post basically states, we have cars now so all built areas should be car dependent only rather than provide options. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but that is what I read.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 02:16 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,519,126 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Car free works best when where you need to go is say an CBD(in Chicago's case the loop), during rush. Need to go elsewhere at rush or at other times and public transit is often the slowest option. The short is that people in urban environment need cars too. Sometimes to quickly access jobs in the burbs, sometimes to quickly access jobs outside of the CBD. For most people public transit is of limited use when you have an car therefore things like big lawns and larger houses become more important. In addition the reason why there are so many small "walkable" business districts in an city was because before the automobile people actually had to walk to an store to buy things and therefore the stores needed to be nearby. With the automobile people could more easily choose the distant store that had lower prices and better selection and both of these are facilitated by larger buildings that could hold three different brands and sizes of an product or could hold an large quantity of product(and again with lower prices).
There are lots of neighborhoods where one could live car free in Chicago and not be just going to the Loop.

I am not saying anything about communities being car free, I am saying there needs to be options and only walkable neighborhoods provide those options. If you want to drive everywhere in a walkable community you can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 03:46 PM
 
2,366 posts, read 2,127,934 times
Reputation: 1752
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
There are lots of neighborhoods where one could live car free in Chicago and not be just going to the Loop.

I am not saying anything about communities being car free, I am saying there needs to be options and only walkable neighborhoods provide those options. If you want to drive everywhere in a walkable community you can.
Options and alternatives ends up being limited. People can drive in a "walkable" community but it has been designed to make it difficult for them to do so i.e. reducing a travel lane for buses only or for bicyclist who think they're invisible. You want more options but it's always done at the expense of one that already exist. You can not design to change the behavior of people, especially when you have no idea what their preferences are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 04:09 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,519,126 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyxius View Post
Options and alternatives ends up being limited. People can drive in a "walkable" community but it has been designed to make it difficult for them to do so i.e. reducing a travel lane for buses only or for bicyclist who think they're invisible. You want more options but it's always done at the expense of one that already exist. You can not design to change the behavior of people, especially when you have no idea what their preferences are.
Sure, it is about putting the pedestrian first. So you aren't going to find all the same things that you would find in a car dependent community. With that in mind, you can still drive and park in a walkable community, there is nothing preventing you from doing that.

It doesn't matter what someone's preference is, you can design for the general need and want. By providing options we are actually providing a variety of options instead of just one option that you find in car dependent communities.
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