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.
You do realize there has never really been a very successful non core based PT system, fitting multiple cores is more costly and less efficient. Unless eveyone moves into these little urban centers and works and lives in the same one, wow then Houston would have 10 seperate MSAs (because on a larger scale that is why you say Philly doesnt include the other cores )
the most successful PT systems are multiple core based systems. No one said there won't be a core, there will be several cores.
The PT system in the NE, Toronto, London, Paris, Etc are all multiple core PT sustems.
the most successful PT systems are multiple core based systems. No one said there won't be a core, there will be several cores.
The PT system in the NE, Toronto, London, Paris, Etc are all multiple core PT sustems.
True, but weren't most of those systems laid down as the cities grew? With the rapid growth over such a large area, is it expected that Houston can keep up with PT implementations? How do you think this will affect taxes and the COL? I could see handling multiple cores, but I would imagine the demand to connect those cores and keep-up with the population will be quite a task (and yes, I realize it's already a work in progress, and that there is existing PT).
the most successful PT systems are multiple core based systems. No one said there won't be a core, there will be several cores.
The PT system in the NE, Toronto, London, Paris, Etc are all multiple core PT sustems.
no where near as spread, and with london (the largest system you had as an example), the fringe, comparable to your cores, is sporadic at best, the vast vast vast majority is closer to the core and serves the densest regions - the fringe areas are more like RR that facilitate movement to the core. Way more mile means way more infrastructure for a system (cost taxes etc.) - really it is just that simple
Btw travel times across the London systems to the perimters are rediculously long
And not to mention the cultural amenities and other such things in a disparate fashion are either more costly (requires more) or less accesable, both dampen attractiveness long term
Last edited by kidphilly; 08-19-2010 at 02:35 PM..
True, but weren't most of those systems laid down as the cities grew? With the rapid growth over such a large area, is it expected that Houston can keep up with PT implementations? How do you think this will affect taxes and the COL? I could see handling multiple cores, but I would imagine the demand to connect those cores and keep-up with the population will be quite a task (and yes, I realize it's already a work in progress, and that there is existing PT).
most of those areas are already connected by bus, rail will only make it more efficient. The cores don't need to be connected, only the areas around the cores need connecting to the cores for now.
no where near as spread, and with london (the largest system you had as an example), the fringe, comparable to your cores, is sporadic at best, the vast vast vast majority is closer to the core and serves the densest regions - the fringe areas are more like RR that facilitate movement to the core. Way more mile means way more infrastructure for a system (cost taxes etc.) - really it is just that simple
Btw travel times across the London systems to the perimters are rediculously long
And not to mention the cultural amenities and other such things in a disparate fashion are either more costly (requires more) or less accesable, both dampen attractiveness long term
you are arguing the same old drab that has been over argued on here. At least AJNEOLA is trying to understand stuff
The North east, Toronto and London are all as spread out as Houston buddy. They all connect efficeintly by train.
and I am surprised you would even whine about crap like density when comparing those areas. really, who are you trying to convince that London, The Northeast, etc are more dense than Houston? psssst everyone the earth is not flat. Everyone knows that these darn areas are denser. you don't need to keep on saying that.
AJ is asking our opinion on how the areas will look as it DENSIFIES
everything you are arguing is nonsense. London is older than Dirt. Houston is 150 years. let the city catch up.
Chicago is the only city you could probably make a strong argument for spanking us, because although the Chicago area was occupied before us, both cities were incorporated about the same time, and Chicago was booming while we were still trying to prevent the city from failing
most of those areas are already connected by bus, rail will only make it more efficient. The cores don't need to be connected, only the areas around the cores need connecting to the cores for now.
Disparate, Inefficient, Expensive, Non Cohesive
or build more highways, they actually cost more in the long run, that bill hasn't arrived
not to mention the influx of money also historically demands better education, that bill is also coming
I have said many times I like the Midtown area and areas around it, as well as others in and around the Atl. But no they do not give the same feel as Rittenhouse Sq, or Washington Square, or Bella Vista, or Society Hill or Old City, or Boston's North End, or NYCs Village etc. I am not generalizing at all, I actually being very specific, that was my point, nor have I found a comparable neighborhood in Houston (and again this is what I like, not everyone has to) though I would say areas in Atlanta feel closer when compared to houston but that may be the older parts co-mingled which makes sense, but still not the the same. There is really no area in Philly or Boston etc. exactly like Buckhead so to that point if that is preffered it is offered at a some level but would not match Buckhead. The type of neighborhood I am reffering is not availble in Houston (or Atlanta for that matter).
Urban neighborhood do exist in Atlanta point blank it is what is. Atlantic Station, Midtown, Glennwood, Inman park village you got what you wanted they’re urban. Atlanta is not going feel like a east coast city, it’s not a East coast city, Do Seattle feel like a East coast city? no, but dense urban neighborhood do exist point blank. So it not Urban development your talking about but rather east coast grit.
I never said they did not, but don't pretend the exist in a similar vein to larger more densly cohesive cities the point
and again, those larger more densly cohesive cities are twice as old. When ATL is as old as Philly it will be twice as populated and twice as nice. That is if Philly will still be around
and again, those larger more densly cohesive cities are twice as old. When ATL is as old as Philly it will be twice as populated and twice as nice. That is if Philly will still be around
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.
)
