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 10-27-2015, 12:36 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,004,178 times
Reputation: 1348

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Subways usually are subsidized more than highway.
We have to be honest here: that isn't wholly accurate, if for no other reason than there are varying definitions of what is included in each mode's "subsidy." Apropos of your post is an article in The Atlantic, The True Costs of Driving

Quote:
There are good reasons to believe that the methodology of “Who Pays for Roads?” if anything considerably understates the subsidies to private vehicle operation. It doesn’t examine the hidden subsidies associated with the free public provision of on-street parking, or the costs imposed by nearly universal off-street parking requirements, which drive up the price of commercial and residential development. It also ignores the indirect costs that come to auto and non-auto users alike from the increased travel times and travel distances that result from subsidized auto-oriented sprawl. And it also doesn’t look at how the subsidies for new capacity in some places undermine the viability of older communities.
While freeways don't have on-street parking, for the amount of users they carry, they do take up a lot of space that cannot be put to other uses, and they do support a spread-out built form that does have on-street parking and near-universal off-street parking requirements.

And even that doesn't include the amount of deferred maintenance that is due for our roadways and bridges, and the private cost of vehicle maintenance imposed on drivers by driving on pockmarked roadways.

Narrowly, your point might prove true. But, taken more broadly, once we start calculating the cost of follow-on effects, that $100m/mile of freeway construction is quickly swamped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-28-2015, 02:16 PM
 
Location: Seattle, WA
2,975 posts, read 4,078,755 times
Reputation: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
We have to be honest here: that isn't wholly accurate, if for no other reason than there are varying definitions of what is included in each mode's "subsidy." Apropos of your post is an article in The Atlantic, The True Costs of Driving



While freeways don't have on-street parking, for the amount of users they carry, they do take up a lot of space that cannot be put to other uses, and they do support a spread-out built form that does have on-street parking and near-universal off-street parking requirements.

And even that doesn't include the amount of deferred maintenance that is due for our roadways and bridges, and the private cost of vehicle maintenance imposed on drivers by driving on pockmarked roadways.

Narrowly, your point might prove true. But, taken more broadly, once we start calculating the cost of follow-on effects, that $100m/mile of freeway construction is quickly swamped.
Once we account for lives lost and injuries over time, which is just a function of the higher speeds, the costs to society as a whole easily exceed a subway. Not to mention noise pollution and visual unattractiveness that make most locations within a mile or so of the freeway undesirable places to live.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2015, 03:31 AM
 
85 posts, read 45,078 times
Reputation: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB1967 View Post
Because those countries DON'T have:
--Endless environmental impact reports
--NIMBYs who lobby to stop anything from disrupting their "historic" neighborhood
--Other choices, like moving somewhere else, at least nowhere near the extent that Americans do
We do not have the required density.

You would not understand it unless you have lived elsewhere. It is REALLY different...(North America and outside North America)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2015, 03:46 AM
 
85 posts, read 45,078 times
Reputation: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimrob1 View Post
With the exception of a few US cities. I don't think many are capable of building an efficient bus system, let alone a subway system. The competence level just isn't there. However the car dealers are all over the place. We are expected to own a car in this country, and politics and corporations keep us in cars intentionally. Building subways in the bigger US cities, should have been done years ago. I wish it had, and since it was not. I wish subways were being built right now, I just don't see it happening in this country. Not with the limited controlling mindsets in the US. Sorry I say it like it is.
Why would you willingly want to live a cloistered life with low control over your schedules and what time you can be a certain place (and having to relinquish that control to a state-managed body), herded like cattle, crammed into a tiny space with tons of other people, that entails a big loss of privacy and a high level of invasion of personal space daily?
People who have to live like this in Asia consider themselves cursed.

And what about the lifestyle of North America that is dependent on car ownership? Where will you put your skis? Carry music equipment?

If you don't like the space and lifestyle in North America, feel free to leave.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2015, 10:27 AM
 
1,998 posts, read 2,931,684 times
Reputation: 2150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander7 View Post
Why would you willingly want to live a cloistered life with low control over your schedules and what time you can be a certain place (and having to relinquish that control to a state-managed body), herded like cattle, crammed into a tiny space with tons of other people, that entails a big loss of privacy and a high level of invasion of personal space daily?
People who have to live like this in Asia consider themselves cursed.

And what about the lifestyle of North America that is dependent on car ownership? Where will you put your skis? Carry music equipment?

If you don't like the space and lifestyle in North America, feel free to leave.
That's funny, last time I checked NYC, DC, San Francisco, Boston and Chicago are all part of North America. There are all places where not only do many people not feel "cursed" to live somewhere where they don't need to own a car and can take subways, but they CHOOSE this lifestyle and the high-density areas with the best access to public transit and the least need for owning a car are usually the most expensive areas.
Why would they choose this? Because for some people, not having to deal with the hassles of owning a car and dealing with traffic and being able to walk to most daily tasks is a highly desirable lifestyle. I much prefer riding subways to driving because I can read and be more productive on the train than when I have to focus on the road. It's fine if you don't like it but don't pretend like those who do like it are somehow "cursed." If I felt I was cursed by my lifestyle, I could easily save some money and move out to the suburbs, which are cheaper than where I live. But it's not the lifestyle I want.

Also on the rare instances when we need to haul large items, it's much easier for us to rent cars or use a car-sharing service like Zipcar rather than actually own a car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 11:11 AM
 
893 posts, read 627,257 times
Reputation: 513
The federal government is the main reason why DC and Atlanta built their subways. Cities don't have enough money to build them. Suburbanites , middle class people, and white people fear that poor and black people will have easy access to their neighborhoods so they oppose them. There is a stigma towards subways and buses-- especially outside the northeast. Anti-tax hysteria means that people won't even agree to a 1% increase on a sales tax to build one. The only way cities will agree to them is if the federal government pass for most or all of it. I find the obsession with high speed rail when ever rail is discussed weird. Most people don't travel more than 300 miles. Therefore metro rail, suburban, and commuter rail is far more important.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
6,373 posts, read 5,996,908 times
Reputation: 3557
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
I think the main problem in the United States is that subway systems are viewed as a luxary for a city, while other countries view subway systems are a necessity for a city.

The American mentality nowadays for building mass transit is to look for the cheapest option possible, even though it may not be the best option as the cheapest option could possibly hurt them in the long term.
New York City, Chicago, and Washington DC are the only cities that have basically fulfilled their master plan when it comes to its subway system. Every other city has fallen quite short of that and is a testament to how mass transit isn't viewed as a high priority when it comes to cities with growing populations.

Many of you probably didn't know this but only 5 of the top 20 largest cities in the United States have subway systems(New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco).
Anyone that spends time regularly on City - Data should know that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 11:18 AM
 
893 posts, read 627,257 times
Reputation: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander7 View Post
Why would you willingly want to live a cloistered life with low control over your schedules and what time you can be a certain place (and having to relinquish that control to a state-managed body), herded like cattle, crammed into a tiny space with tons of other people, that entails a big loss of privacy and a high level of invasion of personal space daily?
People who have to live like this in Asia consider themselves cursed.

And what about the lifestyle of North America that is dependent on car ownership? Where will you put your skis? Carry music equipment?

If you don't like the space and lifestyle in North America, feel free to leave.
People in cars don't have complete control of their schedules. I live in the DC area, and buses run frequently. The cost is less than I would spend on a car, gasoline, parking, and maintenance. I take the subway often, and am mostly on time. I also walk more, as I have to walk down the escalator and stairs. Most US cities aren't crammed-- except maybe Manhattan. And even then it doesn't compare to the density found in Europe and Asia. Outside of rush hour I am rarely crammed on the subway.


In addition I don't understand why car fetishist seem to think building subways and light rail means people want to ban cars. That is not true. Subways actually will make car dependent people better off as fewer people are on the road.

Car dependence is hell for the disabled, under 16 year olds, the elderly, and the poor. Having to rely on friends/family for a ride restricts your life. I don't know why cars are perceived as "freedom."

As far as carrying heavy objects, many people who use subways/buses still have a car. They just use the subway to supplement their travel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 03:31 PM
 
9,520 posts, read 14,819,994 times
Reputation: 9769
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurricaneMan1992 View Post
Once we account for lives lost and injuries over time, which is just a function of the higher speeds, the costs to society as a whole easily exceed a subway. Not to mention noise pollution and visual unattractiveness that make most locations within a mile or so of the freeway undesirable places to live.
Within a mile? ROTFL. About half of Short Hills, NJ is within a mile of US 24 (a 4-lane limited access highway), as is much of Chatham, NJ and Madison, NJ. These are some of the most desirable places to live in northern NJ. Much of Gladwyne, PA (rich as hell) is within a mile of Interstate 76.

We get it, you hate cars. Don't just make stuff up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 06:10 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,857,480 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by moionfire View Post
People in cars don't have complete control of their schedules. I live in the DC area, and buses run frequently. The cost is less than I would spend on a car, gasoline, parking, and maintenance. I take the subway often, and am mostly on time. I also walk more, as I have to walk down the escalator and stairs. Most US cities aren't crammed-- except maybe Manhattan. And even then it doesn't compare to the density found in Europe and Asia. Outside of rush hour I am rarely crammed on the subway.
People in cars have greater control over their time. Buses run less frequently at night(if at all). Cars allow one to choose the time of departure(with in reason) as well as the route. They are more forgiving than public transit if you have to stay late for work or need to leave early for some reason.

Quote:
In addition I don't understand why car fetishist seem to think building subways and light rail means people want to ban cars. That is not true. Subways actually will make car dependent people better off as fewer people are on the road.
Subways are the most expensive way to create an right of way for an train. There are cheaper methods that are more appropriate for some locations. The main opposition for subways isn't car drivers it is tax payers in general. The subway does little for someone 10 miles away, an highway can be driven to, can carry cargo and can attract business to the area.

Quote:
Car dependence is hell for the disabled, under 16 year olds, the elderly, and the poor. Having to rely on friends/family for a ride restricts your life. I don't know why cars are perceived as "freedom."
Ride enough buses and you will understand the freedom cars give. I have and I can give you horror stories.

Quote:
As far as carrying heavy objects, many people who use subways/buses still have a car. They just use the subway to supplement their travel.
True, it isn't the presence of the subway people object to. It is things like say deciding all buildings within X distance of the subway are not required to have parking.
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