Are there any Big Cities with a slow-paced lifestyle?

[jessemh431]

Originally Posted by metroplex2003

Is the SD a traffic issue b/c there are not enough lanes across?
Or is it a quantity issue of not enough freeways for the population for SD?

Cities can have bad traffic issues simply b/c older cities may not have enough lanes or enough freeways (possibly due to poor city planning or due to geographical or topographcial limitations). FOr example, traffic is considered bad in Honolulu b/c there is absolutely no room to build freeways given the mountains that are literally just behind the city...it's a narrow strip of land.

IN Texas, where space is wide open, DFW and Houston probably boast the one of the highest concentrations of freeways in the country...however, both cities still rank very highly in terms of bad traffic...perhaps it's b/c even with all this they still need more lanes and HOV lanes....but to add to it, they need to expand their light rails. DFW is doubling the size of its light rail over the next 5 years from it's current 45 miles to 90 miles of track. IT also has the TRE line. But they're also building more freeways as well. HOuston , like Dallas, is working on its 3rd loop.

look at trafficpulse.com
i just did and this is what i found. BTW, it's only 3:30 here...not rush hour yet:
LOS ANGELES=22/33 listings of freeways are jammed (3 are 8.0+ of 10)
SAN DIEGO=2/11 listing of freeways are jammed (highest is an 8.0)
DALLAS=2/10...and isnt it rush hour there now (highest is 6.5
NYC=26/30 are jammed
CHICAGO=14/20 (two have ratings 10/10)
VEGAS=4/9 (one is a 10)

[metroplex2003]

Originally Posted by jessemh431

look at trafficpulse.com
i just did and this is what i found. BTW, it's only 3:30 here...not rush hour yet:
LOS ANGELES=22/33 listings of freeways are jammed (3 are 8.0+ of 10)
SAN DIEGO=2/11 listing of freeways are jammed (highest is an 8.0)
DALLAS=2/10...and isnt it rush hour there now (highest is 6.5
NYC=26/30 are jammed
CHICAGO=14/20 (two have ratings 10/10)
VEGAS=4/9 (one is a 10)

DO you have any research cited as to why SD has problems with traffic? Is it a lane issue, or a topographical/geographic issue, or is it simply, there's not enough freeways to serve the population issue?

[jessemh431]

Originally Posted by metroplex2003

DO you have any research cited as to why SD has problems with traffic? Is it a lane issue, or a topographical/geographic issue, or is it simply, there's not enough freeways to serve the population issue?

i have not research whatsoever as to why, but my guess would be that when SD was developing, no one expected it to be such a large city. that is what happened with LA-great freeway system but then a massive population boom occured and the once iconic freeway system is now horrible.

also, if u have ever been on I-5 from SD to LA or LA to SD, you will notice that the part of the freeway with the military base to the west and the hills to the east really has no room to grow. that is a very crowded section sometimes. the I-5 is their busiest freeway but b/c of its locations, it can't grow much (throuhg tight valley passes, next to bases, next to the ocean)

i read somewhere, earlier, that part of the 5 has been narrowed down due to construction of making it wider so right now parts of it are very bad. i dont where the construction is or if it is still going on tho

[metroplex2003]

San Antonio is a fairly large city with a slow paced lifestyle.
Although it has 1.9 million in the metro with 1.1 million in the city outright, it has the slow paced feel to it...so if you're looking for large population with slow paced feel, San Antonio might be for you.

[Spade]

Yeah, San Antonio is slow paced IMO for a big city. Even Austin is a bit faster pace than San Antonio to me.