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.
Whoa, then I have fallen off the deep end. I am not against cars, let me point this out.
I own a car, I think cars are the most efficient way to do certain types of trips very often. I think in the future cars will likely run on an alternative fuel, solar, hydrogen etc, and therefore the current constraints of gas prices are not a long term issue.
I plan to always have atleast 1 car in my house hold. My bigger issue is when the prioritization becomes completely out of whack where the very people you are trying to help become the same that are most damages (see any waterfront highway project over the past 50 years). We need to see the forest for the trees is my mind set. Lets not just build things to help commuters, lets start systematically correcting the problems that got us here. Quick fixes are just that, quick fixes. A spot improvement here, a lane widening there, it just assures that more will be needed unless we look at ourselves and begin to retrospectively analyze how we got to the point where people get stuck on the way to work in a 2 hour traffic jam everytime one person makes a split second error in judgement.
The car will ALWAYS be a symbol of anywhere movement and freedom, and thanks to certain bailouts, americas future of building cars is brighter than it has been since the original revival of GM.
Things I am against, people with giant SUVs or trucks who dont even use the payload capacity. As fat as children are getting, I dont think that 500 horsepowers is needed to haul them around. If you actually work on farms/construction/manufacturing etc, they are absolutely necessary tools. People who live in farmlands but work in the cities, not them as an individual, but the system in place that incentivizes this habit through much cheaper housing out of county that doesnt have to pay for the infrastructure on the way to work.
Its not the car itself that is evil, but the way we use it sometimes, and the way we are addicted to it sometimes.
If you actually look at that chart, this decrease isn't unprecedented. Looks like in 1974 and 1979 through 1981-1982 also saw a decrease. Obviously when gas prices rise and more people are unemployed, people will drive less. Increased gas prices along with this being the great recession would explain why this lasts a little longer than the last decrease. 10 years from now if you continue seeing a decrease after the ecomony recovers and if gas prices decrease then there might be a trend. Right now there is just a blip.
If you actually look at that chart, this decrease isn't unprecedented. Looks like in 1974 and 1979 through 1981-1982 also saw a decrease. Obviously when gas prices rise and more people are unemployed, people will drive less. Increased gas prices along with this being the great recession would explain why this lasts a little longer than the last decrease. 10 years from now if you continue seeing a decrease after the ecomony recovers and if gas prices decrease then there might be a trend. Right now there is just a blip.
Those were much smaller. This is a 3 year long trend. I think while the recession clearly has altered it, the fact that the population has grown 3% in those 3 years should have all but erased it, and yet we are 4% less driving than what we were doing 3 years ago. The other blips all appear to be very short and mirror recessions and the oil crisis in the 70s.
Glad you said that. Part of my purpose was to give you a chance to clarify your position. The irony of all of this is that I believe that people that live in rural areas will agree with 'urbanists' if they understood the arguments.
I know for example that many people that live out in places like Round Hill, Purcellville or Middleburg do NOT want to see urban development and big city-style living come out there. The thing is...neither do the 'urbanists'. With more density, there could be less sprawl and places like Western Loudoun could be preserved as the idyllic places that they are. However, with the ever expanding roads and reckless approval of ever more housing developments, Western Loudoun will not be the same in a few years
So it works hand in hand. Not in opposition to one another.
Glad you said that. Part of my purpose was to give you a chance to clarify your position. The irony of all of this is that I believe that people that live in rural areas will agree with 'urbanists' if they understood the arguments.
I know for example that many people that live out in places like Round Hill, Purcellville or Middleburg do NOT want to see urban development and big city-style living come out there. The thing is...neither do the 'urbanists'. With more density, there could be less sprawl and places like Western Loudoun could be preserved as the idyllic places that they are. However, with the ever expanding roads and reckless approval of ever more housing developments, Western Loudoun will not be the same in a few years
So it works hand in hand. Not in opposition to one another.
Oh dude, totally agree, if you only knew how much I want to preserve those landscapes. I LOVE rural regions, real rural regions. I spend a lot of my time discussing urbanism with farmers and try to explain that part of the reason that farming has shifted to a machine industrial process, and the family farms have died is because land has become too expensive to keep certain areas as farms. This is low density creep which occurs with unplanned growth. Another reason is because the areas that are farms now, are 10 times further from distribution points than just a decade ago. Farmers must bring their goods through congested suburban sprawls so far that freight and transport is now one of their largest costs in operations. Like my status and teddy roosevelt said, the best way to preserve our natural lands is to build better cities.
This country is so big it seems like we can endlessly build, and we could, but the ripple effect is a deterioration in the efficiency of the smallest things from commutes to how much it costs to bring us food. It all evolves to an economy of size where only the monsantos of the world and large scale operations can prosper, and the little guys get pushed out.
We see this happening with small retail as well, where mainstreets used to provide a constant passive customer, now we must provide mega centers with mega parking because no body can even get to main street, all the houses are miles away.
I love rural areas, I want to make this century the return of the mom and pop, the return of the small manufacturer, the return of the farmer. I think the best way to do that is to make tweaks to how we view suburbia and cities in order to bring those functions closer in and economically make these types of operations profitable again. The car/truck, atleast its future self, will be integral in this as it remains the best way to transport short distances.
I am really sorry if I started painting urbanism in any other way because I think it would be a huge disservice to other people who are much better with words than myself if I didnt correct that. Sometimes I just get a little too rowdy, a little too anxious, and maybe I demand too much change too fast. To that point I think I may still be immature in terms of the process.
But the main goal of almost every urbanist I ever talk to is not to expand the city out, but to bring the farm back in.
What they're going at the Dunn Loring Metro is absolutely ludicrous. I saw a sign up for a Black Finn opening just today. That area is already congested as all get out. Jamming more restaurants and bars in there - What's the point? Why does every metro stop need to be a mini-me-city?
What they're going at the Dunn Loring Metro is absolutely ludicrous. I saw a sign up for a Black Finn opening just today. That area is already congested as all get out. Jamming more restaurants and bars in there - What's the point? Why does every metro stop need to be a mini-me-city?
Restaurants rarely are a draw at 4:30 to 5:30, it will have almost no impact on traffic seeing as commuters will be long gone before people return dinners/lunch.
All vehicle trips are not equal, length of the trip and time of the trip mean much more than how many trips a particular road gets.
Im not that educated on this particular development, but I do know that the Mosaic district will help shift and distribute 1500 people within walking distance to a metro, so those are people who will likely use that metro (otherwise they wouldn't buy/rent in that particular location)
As this topic was primarily generalized and not focused on the Northern Virginia region from which the thread was created, it has been moved to the Politics forum.
As with all stereotypes, obviously it doesn't fit all people. But would you not agree that MANY, I would say a majority, in your age group are so hardcore about their driving and cars that they couldnt imagine a house without 3 car garages and highways that are 20 lanes wide?
And while the 1950s were the creators of the highway (which I think was one of the greatest planning accomplishments in history because they created a safe way of transporting freight and military assets) it was your generation that took that infrastructure and turned it into a tool like a locust plague to sweep over farmlands, build cheap housing, but retain jobs in the city creating the unsustainable system we have today? Highways were envisioned as travel tools and transport tools NOT commute tools.
Uh; hold it right there, please.
The 1st Baby Boomers turned 18 in 1964 and the last in 1982; I'm a Gen Xer, 1965, but have many BB friends. "Urban Sprawl" started getting bad in the 1960's when the Greatest Generation wanted to move away from the cities. Word has it what forced the hand of many was the 1960's riots when the BB's were still mostly kids.
Driving has actually greatly declined among the younger generation of Americans (according to various news articles I've read this year).
The percentage of Americans in their 20's who don't bother to get drivers licenses at all, has risen significantly. And their miles driven has greatly decreased. And they aren't excited or particular about which models they drive.
The younger generation are more connected with their computers, facebook, and cellphones. They no longer have to physically visit their friends to stay connected. Many are able to do their jobs, or take college courses, on-line. Many are unemployed and don't care to lay out money to buy a car. Long-gone are the days of the 1960s when particular "muscle-car" models were envied and celebrated in popular songs.
I've read that too.
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.
