Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

View Poll Results: Whose urban planning ideals more closely match your own?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • Robert Moses

    0 0%
  • Jane Jacobs

    22 84.62%
  • Not sure

    4 15.38%
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 77
  1. #1
    -=Barry=- The Human Car's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
    Posts
    4,077
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Urban planning and pro motoring or not

    While Forester has not identified what urban planning camp he is affiliated with here in Baltimore we are dealing with one of Robert Moses mistakes and the ideals of Robert Moses remind me a great deal of Forester’s claims of “ideal” urban planning.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_moses

    Robert Moses ideals stand in stark contrast to Jane Jacobs who opposed Robert Moses and questioned who are we accommodating, cars or people.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs

    Here is an interesting background to a future project area (Note: possible solutions should not be considered professional.)
    http://www.plainview3d.com/Baltimore..._Mulberry.html
    Cycling Advocate
    http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
    . . . o
    . . /L
    =()>()

  2. #2
    Part-time epistemologist invisiblehand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    My Bikes
    Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer
    Posts
    5,145
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hmmmm, seems like they both came with a lot of baggage.

  3. #3
    -=Barry=- The Human Car's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
    Posts
    4,077
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by invisiblehand View Post
    Hmmmm, seems like they both came with a lot of baggage.
    The essence of “great” minds????
    Cycling Advocate
    http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
    . . . o
    . . /L
    =()>()

  4. #4
    Sophomoric Member Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dancing in Lansing
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This is an interesting case study. Unfortunately, the 5 solutions proposed for the Baltimore tract are all Robert Moses-inspired solutions. They continue, or even worsen, the splitting of the city where the highway to nowhere currently lies. Business and commerce suffer greatly when people can't even travel directly across the city. Bikes, buses and walking become impractical because the barriers to travel greatly increase the distances people must travel to do their daily business.

    I think Jane Jacobs would propose rebuilding the city streets to knit the city back together again. She would probably zone the reunited streets for high density mixed use development, along with a few small but very accessible parks. She would encourage people to move into these areas and use them in their daily lives. Reuniting the streets would foster normal flow of traffic and commerce across the city, whether by car, bike or walking.

    I think the people who made these proposals have a very limited understanding of planning for people. All 5 solutions propose facilities that are too large and forbidding to encourage use by the people of the city. This is all too typical of the state of city planning all over the country today. I vote no to all 5 proposals.


    "Think Outside the Cage"

  5. #5
    Part-time epistemologist invisiblehand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    My Bikes
    Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer
    Posts
    5,145
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
    The essence of “great” minds????


    Yes ... quite so Barry.

    It is a little late -- so I really can't elaborate at the moment -- but I understand that urban areas involve a lot of externalities that would be difficult for markets to capture. Consequently, some regulation and urban planning is necessary for a well functioning society of even moderate density. But the short bios -- to my quick read -- are examples of how difficult of a problem urban development is and how good intentions can lead to poor results.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Bicure's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    91
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As a New Yorker, I can tell you Moses is still despised for his megalomaniacal efforts to completely destroy the city.

    Luckily, people like Jacobs ultimately prevented this, but Moses' vision of car-topia & the legacy thereof continue to cripple the city.
    "What about the 55,000 Americans who'll die on the highways this year? That's nearly 6 or 7 times the number that'll get killed in Vietnam. Why aren't you up in arms about that? Or is dying in a car somehow moral?" - Jack Webb as Sgt. Joe Friday lecturing some no-good dirty hippie-punks on Dragnet 1968

  7. #7
    -=Barry=- The Human Car's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
    Posts
    4,077
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Roody View Post
    I think the people who made these proposals have a very limited understanding of planning for people.
    That is correct. The proposed solutions on the link I provided are not any where near the top contenders for the area so please don’t panic in that respect. I shared the link as I thought the background provided was interesting and informative.
    Cycling Advocate
    http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
    . . . o
    . . /L
    =()>()

  8. #8
    Sophomoric Member Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dancing in Lansing
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by invisiblehand View Post


    Yes ... quite so Barry.

    It is a little late -- so I really can't elaborate at the moment -- but I understand that urban areas involve a lot of externalities that would be difficult for markets to capture. Consequently, some regulation and urban planning is necessary for a well functioning society of even moderate density. But the short bios -- to my quick read -- are examples of how difficult of a problem urban development is and how good intentions can lead to poor results
    .
    Jacobs said that cities, and only cities, can create diversity, wealth and markets. This is a function of people freely mingling and cooperating (as well as competing) in the urban environment--much as nature has created webs of diversity, cooperation and competition in the wild environment. She wasn't really very big on "planning cities," as she believed they would develop and expand nicely on their own--if allowed to. She opposed the big central plans of Moses because she thought they interfered with the natural economies of cities, which require a complex web of interdependence among people as they move and associate freely. Ultimately, the city that's disunited by big inaccessible "projects" will wither and die. I think that's nicely illustrated in the Google satellite shots linked by The Human Car. That highway is a rend in the fabric of the city, and the 5 "solutions" would tear the fabric even more.


    "Think Outside the Cage"

  9. #9
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,012
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    roody! replacing a sub one mile stretch of superhighway with a greenspace or park cannot be described as 'further ripping apart the fabric of a community' by any reasonable person, much less urban planners.

    come on, I think the auto culture of southern michigan is getting to you and addling your sensibilities!
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  10. #10
    Sophomoric Member Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dancing in Lansing
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    roody! replacing a sub one mile stretch of superhighway with a greenspace or park cannot be described as 'further ripping apart the fabric of a community' by any reasonable person, much less urban planners.

    come on, I think the auto culture of southern michigan is getting to you and addling your sensibilities
    !
    Sorry you're wrong. Look at the blight in the neighborhoods to either side of the highway. This is typical of areas near entrenched highways, whether in Maryland, Michigan or Washington. It's especially evident when a part of the city is severely isolated from the rest. Notice on the map that there are other nearly identical highways further disrupting the traffic flow in this part of the city. Now notice that the proposed solutions block traffic flow even more than the highway does. They are prettier than the highway they would replace, but these green spaces, fountains or canals would have the same deleterious effect on the region that the highway has had. It's one of Jacobs' fundamental principles: an isolated urban community cannot survive, any more than a few isolated acres of old growth forest could support a diverse ecology of wolves, spotted owls and other plants and animals.


    "Think Outside the Cage"

  11. #11
    -=Barry=- The Human Car's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
    Posts
    4,077
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Most cities have arterials every mile and stuff in between does not necessarily “isolate.” What about Central Park in NYC, does that isolate or is it a community resource? I’m not sure if I would agree that something a lot smaller would have deleterious effect.

    I am a big supporter of mixed use. So whatever does go in there I would like to see some green as that is really lacking in that area. But too small of a green area and you get these sterile little parks and they do not function as a community resource.

    FWIW I found it interesting that the original dig destroyed a lot of business, namely breweries.
    Cycling Advocate
    http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
    . . . o
    . . /L
    =()>()

  12. #12
    genec genec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    san diego
    My Bikes
    custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
    Posts
    22,521
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Roody View Post
    This is an interesting case study. Unfortunately, the 5 solutions proposed for the Baltimore tract are all Robert Moses-inspired solutions. They continue, or even worsen, the splitting of the city where the highway to nowhere currently lies. Business and commerce suffer greatly when people can't even travel directly across the city. Bikes, buses and walking become impractical because the barriers to travel greatly increase the distances people must travel to do their daily business.

    I think Jane Jacobs would propose rebuilding the city streets to knit the city back together again. She would probably zone the reunited streets for high density mixed use development, along with a few small but very accessible parks. She would encourage people to move into these areas and use them in their daily lives. Reuniting the streets would foster normal flow of traffic and commerce across the city, whether by car, bike or walking.

    I think the people who made these proposals have a very limited understanding of planning for people. All 5 solutions propose facilities that are too large and forbidding to encourage use by the people of the city. This is all too typical of the state of city planning all over the country today. I vote no to all 5 proposals.
    I tend to agree. I also agree with invisiblehand, these folks did come with a lot of baggage.

    I suppose I think a bit more like Jane Jacobs, but I also see the need for well designed high speed transit for economic reasons; I just happen to think that such transit can be designed to better merge with a city, and more importantly the people within that city.

  13. #13
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,012
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
    Most cities have arterials every mile and stuff in between does not necessarily “isolate.” What about Central Park in NYC, does that isolate or is it a community resource? I’m not sure if I would agree that something a lot smaller would have deleterious effect.

    I am a big supporter of mixed use. So whatever does go in there I would like to see some green as that is really lacking in that area. But too small of a green area and you get these sterile little parks and they do not function as a community resource.
    .....

    I don't see how a mile long park could be misconstrued as a 'sterile little park' but agree that the Olmsteadean approach to public green space -connectivity - is more beneficial to communities than disconnected collection of parks.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  14. #14
    -=Barry=- The Human Car's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
    Posts
    4,077
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I didn’t mean to imply that the mile long park would be sterile (but it could be) just that cutting up green space into little small chunks doesn’t always seem to work too well. A lot of buildings have landscaping and landscaped plazas, most of these are sterile, and void of people but green. Space for people should be used by people or it has failed.
    Cycling Advocate
    http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
    . . . o
    . . /L
    =()>()

  15. #15
    Sophomoric Member Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dancing in Lansing
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    I don't see how a mile long park could be misconstrued as a 'sterile little park' but agree that the Olmsteadean approach to public green space -connectivity - is more beneficial to communities than disconnected collection of parks.
    I think a park like this is likely to be sterile in the sense that few people would use it. It has the feeling of a barricade, and that will definitely turn people away. There's a beautiful park right behind my house that's like this. It blocks the flow of traffic through the city, so nobody goes through it. I discovered a single track path that I can ride through to the other side of town, and I now use the park all the time.

    Olmstead's great parks are very different from the parks proposed for Baltimore. Remember that Central Park, when it was first built, was located in the country, just outside the inhabited areas of Manhattan, as Manhattan was settled from it's south tip northward. The traffic patterns of NYC, both subways and boulevards are duplicated on the East Side and the West Side. East and West have distinctive feels, almost like different cities, but there is good circulation of the Manhattan traffic around the park, almost like a river current going around an island. Similarly, large parks in Paris and London, and even Balboa Park in San Diego, were all founded on the edges of the city, and the city later grew naturally around their sides.

    Another Olmstead park you might be familiar with is Belle Isle in Detroit. Since it's on an island, it doesn't sever transportation in Detroit. The large lakefront parks in Chicago are similar in that they don't get in the way of the flow of transportation. I believe that Baltimore also has a lot of parks on its waterfront, where they don't disrupt the flow of the city.


    "Think Outside the Cage"

  16. #16
    Sophomoric Member Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dancing in Lansing
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
    Most cities have arterials every mile and stuff in between does not necessarily “isolate.” What about Central Park in NYC, does that isolate or is it a community resource? I’m not sure if I would agree that something a lot smaller would have deleterious effect.

    I am a big supporter of mixed use. So whatever does go in there I would like to see some green as that is really lacking in that area. But too small of a green area and you get these sterile little parks and they do not function as a community resource.

    FWIW I found it interesting that the original dig destroyed a lot of business, namely breweries.
    Entrenched highways do tend to isolate parts of the city because they typically don't have enough bridges to carry all the surface streets across them. And even when they do have bridges, building is still discontinued for the approaches and the highway right of way. There are usually 100 or even 200 yard long blank streets along every bridge. This blankness is daunting to pedestrians, and it destroys people's sense of identification and connectedness with their city.

    I can envision very wide bridges across highways, with shops and offices built right on the bridges. If you've ever seen pictures of the medieval London Bridge, you know what I mean. This is the only development I know of that would remove the severing and disuniting effects of entrenched highways tearing apart a city.


    "Think Outside the Cage"

  17. #17
    Part-time epistemologist invisiblehand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    My Bikes
    Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer
    Posts
    5,145
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Roody View Post
    Jacobs said that cities, and only cities, can create diversity, wealth and markets. This is a function of people freely mingling and cooperating (as well as competing) in the urban environment--much as nature has created webs of diversity, cooperation and competition in the wild environment. She wasn't really very big on "planning cities," as she believed they would develop and expand nicely on their own--if allowed to. She opposed the big central plans of Moses because she thought they interfered with the natural economies of cities, which require a complex web of interdependence among people as they move and associate freely. Ultimately, the city that's disunited by big inaccessible "projects" will wither and die. I think that's nicely illustrated in the Google satellite shots linked by The Human Car. That highway is a rend in the fabric of the city, and the 5 "solutions" would tear the fabric even more.
    Clearly, I know little about Jacobs. My experience with Moses is from growing up in NYC.

    Virtual worlds might replace the function of cities at some point. Although my understanding from a few general articles is that companies find that most functions still require face-to-face interaction on a regular basis.

    I expect that big projects to require some sort of urban planner and government intervention due to the amount of capital and the risks involved. Moreover, I suppose that a lot of the benefits from say a "public" transportation system might be difficult for the owner to capture. There are a lot of reasons to think that the Coase Theorem would fail in these situations.

  18. #18
    ---- buzzman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    4,530
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fascinating thread and interesting contrasts on the part of urban planners. I fall more in the Jacobs camp but cities are an ever evolving entity so one person will never be able to embody all the practical realities that urban environments require. Often times the city has transformed into another kind of being by the time changes that were necessary only ten years before are incorporated. Horses, coaches, bicycles, trains, streetcars, automobiles have come through cities like waves. As has electricity, gas, coal, oil.

    But the fundamental aspects have remained constant since the earliest times of human civilization.

    The book "A Pattern Language" encompasses principals that are applicable through time and from the microcosm of our smallest living environments to our most extended- the planet itself.

    I've lived on North Calvert Street in Baltimore, quite near the the Mulberry Highway. I only lived in Baltimore long enough to sense it's vast potential as a great American city but could see how it was carved by highways and poor urban planning so that certain neighborhoods were shut off from the rest of the city and collapsed in on themselves in some of the worst urban blight in the nation.

    The best example of it can be seen in the film "Being There" as Chauncy Gardener exits a once glorious Baltimore home and walks along the highway that has isolated it.

  19. #19
    Sophomoric Member Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dancing in Lansing
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
    Fascinating thread and interesting contrasts on the part of urban planners. I fall more in the Jacobs camp but cities are an ever evolving entity so one person will never be able to embody all the practical realities that urban environments require. Often times the city has transformed into another kind of being by the time changes that were necessary only ten years before are incorporated. Horses, coaches, bicycles, trains, streetcars, automobiles have come through cities like waves. As has electricity, gas, coal, oil.

    But the fundamental aspects have remained constant since the earliest times of human civilization.

    The book "A Pattern Language" encompasses principals that are applicable through time and from the microcosm of our smallest living environments to our most extended- the planet itself.

    I've lived on North Calvert Street in Baltimore, quite near the the Mulberry Highway. I only lived in Baltimore long enough to sense it's vast potential as a great American city but could see how it was carved by highways and poor urban planning so that certain neighborhoods were shut off from the rest of the city and collapsed in on themselves in some of the worst urban blight in the nation.

    The best example of it can be seen in the film "Being There" as Chauncy Gardener exits a once glorious Baltimore home and walks along the highway that has isolated it
    .
    I grew up in Detroit (Highland Park, a few blocks from Ford's first assembly line) and I saw first hand the effect of cars and highways on a great American city. The irony that the car both created and destroyed Detroit was always evident. The superhuman scale of the Moses inspired highways and housing developments didn't help either. I've always been fascinated by the patterns of human habitation, and the Patterns book looks fantastic. I placed a hold on the one copy at my library. Evidently it's still popular even though it was published 30 years ago.

    Thanks for the suggestion, buzzman,


    "Think Outside the Cage"

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,946
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    both approaches have things to recommend them, and i think what a lot of people forget about Moses is that, in among all the poor decisions and myopia, he was an enormous advocate of and did much to make possible popular, working class access to recreation. Jones Beach, the rescue of Central Park, his parkways leading to state parks where people from the cities could swim and camp, the pools and parks he built in the five boroughs...all of these have benefits the city continues to enjoy. It's fortunate there were checks on some of his more lunatic schemes, and believe me, having grown up at the ass end of Brooklyn and having spent more time on the Gowanus than any one person ought to, there's plenty wrong with what he did. But I think it's simplistic to pat oneself on the back for having read Robert Caro's book and let the examination of his legacy end there. And I'd argue, Bicure, that the city has been harmed more by the paralysis in public works since his fall and by the tacit acceptance of the will of private developers like Bruce Ratner and his slimy ilk as a substitute for public works than it ever was by Moses. I'll see your Gowanus Expressway and raise you one Atlantic Yards.

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,946
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ^^^^
    one excellent example of this is the High Line, btw. There's no coherent public works philosophy to make it happen, and so private developers are exploiting that resource.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,069
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
    While Forester has not identified what urban planning camp he is affiliated with here in Baltimore we are dealing with one of Robert Moses mistakes and the ideals of Robert Moses remind me a great deal of Forester’s claims of “ideal” urban planning.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_moses

    Robert Moses ideals stand in stark contrast to Jane Jacobs who opposed Robert Moses and questioned who are we accommodating, cars or people.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs

    snipped
    I have also read the longer and more thoughtful responses that have appeared in this discussion up to today. I find that, at least, there's some thought and some knowledge being presented. I find it interesting that my name appears right at the beginning, although with a very mistaken suggested description of my views. Also, I think, the suggested opposition between Moses and Jacobs is not as great as is commonly assumed. They were both advocates for cities, but they differed as to how to go about making cities better. Both saw cities as centers of economic energy; they differed as to how to encourage that energy.

    In a way, Moses saw New York as comprising two classes of person, those with enough money to own cars and those with insufficient money. For those with cars, Moses developed parkways so that they could drive out of the city for a breath of fresh air (so to speak). For those without cars, and living in poor housing, Moses built what at the time were considered the best housing for the working classes, good apartments in high-rise buildings surrounded by some open space. Acts have consequences, and Moses's plan, if that is what it was, failed. The housing became the worst type of housing for the working poor, as we know. The parkways also became the route into town for suburban residents who worked in NYC. Did Moses not recognize this? I think that he must have, and there is evidence that he acted to enable the greater economic development of NYC. In short, the other side of his plan was to enable greater economic activity in NYC by daily importing more skilled labor from the suburbs. After all, the idea of allowing NYC Manhattan residents free access by automobile to the outside world failed because it became practically impossible to afford to keep a car in Manhattan.

    Jacobs, on the other hand, opposed planning because she had noted that planners too often did the wrong things. She did not oppose motoring as such, but remarked that our troubles with urban motoring simply showed that planners had not worked out how to properly account for motoring in urban life. It also seems that she differed from Moses about the proper scale of urban economic activity. Moses appears to have valued most the kind of economic activity that occurs in midtown office towers, while Jacobs appears to have valued most the kinds of economic and cultural activity that occur when smaller groups of residents of urban centers become mixed together in one location. (Jacobs's view of urban economic activity also included the idea of import replacement, which might include large-scale industry. However, it is a failed hypothesis, because it is contradicted by many actual occurrences of innovation. Henry Ford was not replacing imported motor cars; neither were the silicon entrepreneurs replacing the importation of computer chips; nor, really, was Matthew Baldwin replacing imported steam locomotives. And, I think, one would not really consider any of these innovations the creation of the kind of downtown activity that Jacobs advocated.) I think that one would say that Jacobs opposed planning for two reasons, or for just one and its corollary. She opposed planning because she saw that, done in the style of Moses and many others, it did harm to existing urban residents. She supported existing small scale urban economic and cultural (maybe based on a larger population) activity because she felt that this was the essence of urban living.

    I am of neither school. I note that sometimes events occur in the manner that I attribute to Moses; NYC Manhattan and the SF Financial District are such cases. However, I also note that, in both cities, the cultural events largely depend on tourism, and not all, by any means, are created locally, as Jacobs would assume. I note that cultural and economic activities have now spread to the suburbs, contrary to the views of both Moses and Jacobs. I note that, to a great extent, the residents of the high-rise workers' housing planned by Moses (and, of course, by many others in many places) have chosen to move out to the suburbs, tract homes though these are, while the new lowest class, the immigrants, have largely gone to the areas of older, pre-planned housing.

    I recognize that because the availability of private motor transportation has enabled many people to do more of what they prefer, they will do it. As far as cycling and cyclists are concerned, it is up to us to best manage our policies so that we can best operate within the general suburban culture that the automobile has created.

  23. #23
    Part-time epistemologist invisiblehand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    My Bikes
    Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer
    Posts
    5,145
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
    ...

    I recognize that because the availability of private motor transportation has enabled many people to do more of what they prefer, they will do it. As far as cycling and cyclists are concerned, it is up to us to best manage our policies so that we can best operate within the general suburban culture that the automobile has created.
    While I clipped John's post, this is a more general response than a direct response to John.

    With the caveat that I am no master of urban development -- other than what people have told me or what I read in popular articles, I am unable to say much about Jacobs or Moses -- it appears to me that from a long historical perspective, you are correct that the auto has reduced transportation costs to the individual subsequently providing a vast array of benefits. But this does not address whether the level of auto use is optimal. By its very nature, driving has an externality. My choice to drive is the result of some personal optimization of time, pecuniary cost, necessity, convenience, and so on. However, my choice to drive increases the amount of time it takes for others to complete their travel but does not factor in my decision-making process resulting in too much driving overall.

    While I agree that we -- the U.S. and many developed countries -- appeared to have done well given the decisions made, it is not clear to me that from a transportation perspective that we performed optimally (or close to it for that matter). The suburban culture seems to have been created by individuals basing their decisions conditioned upon the choices of a small set of urban planners or the choices of others in society who only faced a subset of the true cost of their actions. These choices may or may not have been based on accurate assertions regarding how society best works or how to make people happy or with full information regarding a wide assortment of issues.

    With regards to cycling advocacy, I agree that the best strategy would be to work within the present conditions of one's area and focus on some obtainable goals that improve the cycling environment. This doesn't mean that one can't advocate a "smart growth" strategy. Just that it is not necessarily cycling advocacy.

  24. #24
    littlecircles bmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    3,321
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester View Post

    I recognize that because the availability of private motor transportation has enabled many people to do more of what they prefer, they will do it. As far as cycling and cyclists are concerned, it is up to us to best manage our policies so that we can best operate within the general suburban culture that the automobile has created.

    I do not understand "I recognize that because the availability of private motor transportation has enabled many people to do more of what they prefer, they will do it."

    ... ? What? This isn't picking an argument with JF - but I don't see the logic here...

    Is this a chicken / egg scenario? If the development and patterns developed by the auto never happened, would I somehow 'prefer' them?

    How did I come to prefer long rides in the country vs. long drives? Or maybe that idyllic home in Cul-de-Sac Acres, next to 'Fawn Haven' and up the road from the elite 'The Timbers'? Or an SUV over taking the bus (assuming one exists?) How did people come to prefer strip mall shopping vs. downtown shopping? Or walking to driving? (or cycling?) Or even the first 'suburban' homes?

    Putting the automobile-centric development patterns in this context somehow naturalizes this - as if it is some form of evolution that we cannot escape - and leaves out the industrial / government complex that created both the environment and the market for these things to happen - it leaves out the greed, the $$$, the disregard and the abandoning of our cities, the catering to the oil and auto lobbies, etc. etc.

    Or maybe it is the innocent belief that the car enables people to 'escape', giving them personal 'freedom' (so long as payments are made, laws are followed, insurance is bought, licenses tested for, etc. etc.) to drive to the store or the woods or the trail...

    Or perhaps the current environment we are living in is truely derived from innocence - there was some good in mechanized personal mobility, there were intentions to make people richer, smarter, healthier, and allow them to live wherever they chose etc. etc. and it has just gotten a bit out of control... Or perhaps our current environment is too closely linked to the 'market' - and if the car sells, we need to support it - in our planning, and paving, and products, and homes, and development patterns, and etc... and perhaps this all starts to feed on itself and grows into a cancer that cannot be cured without killing part of the patient - maybe the profit, or the homes in the country, or the private auto, or the business model that supports unlimited growth on a finite planet...




    And I thoroughly disagree with the last part of the statement - call me semantic - but the automobile has not created anything. People with motives have... whether they are governments, corporations, or planners.

    These motives may be innocent - bringing mobility or a 'better life' to the masses - or maybe they started innocently enough - and through all the forces acting on the systems they have turned into the world we have today - technology and ideas and planning so entrenched that it is painful to separate "what we prefer" from what we are told to prefer, and what we even know we can prefer.

    I've found this Disney video a good watch... notice a problem with the future? There seems to be no congestion, no other cars fighting out for the same space... everyone zipping about blissfully in automobilic nirvanna. Innocent? Too bad it didn't depict bikes and walking and going to a lively market... no - just a sterile life moving from one conditioned space to the next - is this government inflicted on the masses? the free market? how does this get built?.

    All Hail Machinekind! (as long as you are white, in this video)

    The segment about our changing cities is scary - almost true in some cases. Have a car, or don't have a life - and it is amazing in this view of the future that everyone appears so fit and trim - but they never even walk around! even when mom and kids go to the mall while dad goes to work... or go on vacation in the mountains!



    As to the poll - I wish we started thinking about people instead of things. And if we need 'things' due to our current situation - I'd prefer that solutions be designed to find ways to human size the 'things' we need to live, move, and communicate...

    Cities and communities should put people first -
    ...because without people, there would be no one to drive all the cars around.
    Last edited by bmike; 01-10-08 at 08:30 PM.

  25. #25
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bmike View Post
    I do not understand "I recognize that because the availability of private motor transportation has enabled many people to do more of what they prefer, they will do it."

    ... ? What? This isn't picking an argument with JF - but I don't see the logic here...
    1. The availability of private motor transportation has enabled many people to do more of what they prefer.
    2. Because of this, people use cars to do more of what they prefer to do.



    Everyone has preferences in terms of activities, or things to do that they prefer. Those preferences may be based on need or desire, and may include working, shopping, gardening, laundry, reading, camping, watching TV, dining out, going to the movies, getting ice cream, playing tennis, bike riding, etc., etc. Each person has his own list of things they prefer to do.

    All John is saying is because they can do more of what they prefer to do if they drive their cars, they will drive their cars. Using private motor transportation enables people to do more things on their list. They can go to the gym before work, go to work, shop for clothes at lunch, and shop for dinner on the way home, for example. If they didn't use their car, but walked, used a bus, or rode their bike to go to work, they wouldn't be able to get as much on their list done. Indeed, on days when I need to get more done, I drive instead of ride my bike to work. Almost everyone I know at work uses his or her car this way. Half the parking lot empties at lunch, for example.

    Did you not understand that this is what he meant, or do you disagree? It seems totally logical to me, practically tautological in fact.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •