Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

Sprawl-free vs. car-free

Notices
Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

Sprawl-free vs. car-free

Old 06-23-14, 09:03 PM
  #201  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,849

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3927 Post(s)
Liked 99 Times in 80 Posts
Originally Posted by gerv View Post
For myself, my greatest enjoyment in my workday is getting there
Me too, but not if I lived 50 km out. Eleven km (downhill in the morning) is about my limit.
cooker is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 07:28 AM
  #202  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by phoebeisis View Post

The rest you can look up.
...half your arguement can be dispelled with a $30 backpack.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 07:35 AM
  #203  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody View Post
Well, you might order the resources digitally, but they're going to be delivered by something with a machine. And the farther from the hub that machine has to go, the more energy it will use, and the more money it will cost. And the delivery vehicle will travel on roads that have been subsidized by some socialist government scheme.

I know you independent libertarian types don't want to subsidize or be subsidized by others, so you will refuse "free" delivery on government built roads. Right?
I never said anything about all resources arriving digitally. I was speaking of just the earning and receiving of money digitally. That can be done from a distance and then hard goods can be sourced locally.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I believe the government shouldn't be building and maintaining roads. It's actually one of the few programs that I think they should be involved in. I just wish they weren't neglecting them so much to dump billions in "alternative transportation" that went out of style decades ago.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 07:40 AM
  #204  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
I just wish they weren't neglecting them so much to dump billions in "alternative transportation" that went out of style decades ago.
Just curious, what is the "alternative transportation" you are referring to?
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 07:42 AM
  #205  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by daihard View Post
Just curious, what is the "alternative transportation" you are referring to?
Light rail.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 08:01 AM
  #206  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
Light rail.
Seattle has a relatively new light rail system and has been expanding the line. While buses are more flexible and cost less upfront, the light rail has its own advantage - not susceptible to traffic issues, train cars lasting much longer than buses, making commercial and residential development easier, etc. I believe the last point is important in the long run. Train stations are more permanent (and usually bigger) than bus terminals, and it makes it easier for the public and private planners to design development centred around the train stations.
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 08:14 AM
  #207  
Dave Cutter
Senior Member
 
Dave Cutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159

Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
It's much more expensive to distribute goods to people in a low density setting than in a high density setting.
It sure is! If... you're alive in 1935!!!! The burbs aren't constricted with single use property laws as are the "old" cities. It doesn't take much energy to transport potatoes less than a mile from where they are grown. In 2014.... high density city's require the most transportation and cost/energy use to support. NOT the burbs.
Dave Cutter is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 08:27 AM
  #208  
Dave Cutter
Senior Member
 
Dave Cutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159

Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by loky1179 View Post
..... I guess the underfunded state schools that I attended neglected to teach this.
I am sure they were WELL funded. But being a product of government schools does explain a lot. You do seem to believe that government (or should we say government paid employees) are the solution to most problems. Hummmm... who would teach someone that?!?!?!?

Personally I think you should count yourself lucky you can read and write (type). You're doing GOOD!

Here's a little tid-bit I would think every America would know about. (of course it doesn't have poop/death humor in it like you like).

Last edited by Dave Cutter; 06-24-14 at 08:37 AM.
Dave Cutter is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 08:32 AM
  #209  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by daihard View Post
Seattle has a relatively new light rail system and has been expanding the line. While buses are more flexible and cost less upfront, the light rail has its own advantage - not susceptible to traffic issues, train cars lasting much longer than buses, making commercial and residential development easier, etc. I believe the last point is important in the long run. Train stations are more permanent (and usually bigger) than bus terminals, and it makes it easier for the public and private planners to design development centred around the train stations.
That's the understatement of the year. They just finished an 11 mile $957,000,000 light rail line in Minneapolis. Seems a foolish investment when people are moving out of the city and into the suburbs. More flexible less expensive buses would be a much better option. This last winter the trains kept getting shut down due to snow falls which made the train stations keep a fleet of buses on hand in case of emergency as well. For the money they spent on this 11 mile route they could have added an entire lane to the 494/694 loop and improved traffic flow for cars and buses throughout the entire metro region instead of creating an 11 mile track that shuttles people from Minneapolis to St Paul and takes nearly an hour to do so.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:00 AM
  #210  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
That's the understatement of the year. They just finished an 11 mile $957,000,000 light rail line in Minneapolis. Seems a foolish investment when people are moving out of the city and into the suburbs. More flexible less expensive buses would be a much better option. This last winter the trains kept getting shut down due to snow falls which made the train stations keep a fleet of buses on hand in case of emergency as well. For the money they spent on this 11 mile route they could have added an entire lane to the 494/694 loop and improved traffic flow for cars and buses throughout the entire metro region instead of creating an 11 mile track that shuttles people from Minneapolis to St Paul and takes nearly an hour to do so.
I'm not familiar with the Minneapolis / St Paul area, but what is the area like between the two, where the train runs? Are they urban neighborhoods that are already developed, or more like suburbs? Assuming there are a few train stations between the two cities, I'd say the long-term development around those stations may actually bring more people into the area. That's what's been happening to the areas where the light rail runs (and will run) in Seattle.

As for adding lanes to the freeway, why not just designate one lane as transit-only instead? That would cost far, far less than building one full lane and still enable the bus services to run efficiently. IMO, adding a traffic lane for the cars will not solve the traffic problem in the long run - it would simply increase the traffic volume and cause the same traffic issue in a few years, if not sooner.
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:13 AM
  #211  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by daihard View Post
I'm not familiar with the Minneapolis / St Paul area, but what is the area like between the two, where the train runs? Are they urban neighborhoods that are already developed, or more like suburbs? Assuming there are a few train stations between the two cities, I'd say the long-term development around those stations may actually bring more people into the area. That's what's been happening to the areas where the light rail runs (and will run) in Seattle.

As for adding lanes to the freeway, why not just designate one lane as transit-only instead? That would cost far, far less than building one full lane and still enable the bus services to run efficiently. IMO, adding a traffic lane for the cars will not solve the traffic problem in the long run - it would simply increase the traffic volume and cause the same traffic issue in a few years, if not sooner.
Your solution to traffic congestion is to remove a lane? How do you come up with this stuff?
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:20 AM
  #212  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
Your solution to traffic congestion is to remove a lane? How do you come up with this stuff?
It discourages more people from driving. With more efficient bus services, more people will ride the bus. That will in turn decrease the vehicular traffic volume as well as enabling the authorities to increase the bus routes and frequencies of the transit services. That, again, will contribute to higher ridership. Virtuous cycle.

[ADD] And this would also partially address one of the disadvantages of buses vs trains. With a dedicated transit lane available, buses would be less prone to traffic congestion.
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:23 AM
  #213  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by daihard View Post
It discourages more people from driving. With more efficient bus services, more people will ride the bus. That will in turn decrease the vehicular traffic volume as well as enabling the authorities to increase the service routes and frequencies of the bus services. That, again, will contribute to higher ridership. Virtuous cycle.
So, you don't want to reduce congestion because you have a political agenda against cars. That is why your "solution" makes zero sense.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:33 AM
  #214  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
So, you don't want to reduce congestion because you have a political agenda against cars. That is why your "solution" makes zero sense.
I do believe that my solution would reduce congestion. The fewer cars, the less congestion. It's called reduced demand.

Am I against cars? Of course, I am. The fewer cars on the road, the easier for me to enjoy cycling. I try to limit the use of my own car as much as possible myself.

I wouldn't call my agenda "political," because it has nothing to do with politics but everything to do with my personal belief. If that matters to you, that is.
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:39 AM
  #215  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by daihard View Post
I do believe that my solution would reduce congestion. The fewer cars, the less congestion. It's called reduced demand.

Am I against cars? Of course, I am. The fewer cars on the road, the easier for me to enjoy cycling. I try to limit the use of my own car as much as possible myself.

I wouldn't call my agenda "political," because it has nothing to do with politics but everything to do with my personal belief. If that matters to you, that is.
I don't think your grasp on economics as applied to traffic is quite there. The demand already exceeds supply and reducing supply would not make the situation better.

I don't think you understand what political is either.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:39 AM
  #216  
phoebeisis
New Orleans
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 157 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
...half your arguement can be dispelled with a $30 backpack.
Do I really have to point out the difference between cool and FROZEN?


and try to bring a pack like that in a store where less than affluent folks shop-they make you feel like a thief

But the pack won't keep frozen food frozen-strictly a lightly insulated bag-even lots of cold packs would make it pretty iffy-and heavy-and low volume

I have actually done this sort of thing-that bag-won't work.
An actual "ice chest" would make more sense-smallish one-with ice of course(bulky heavy but with wheels-that is the route i would go)

Oh-I see some of the problem- MN- is cold much of the year.NOLA and much of coastal CA warmer and brighter sun
phoebeisis is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:48 AM
  #217  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by phoebeisis View Post
Do I really have to point out the difference between cool and FROZEN?


and try to bring a pack like that in a store where less than affluent folks shop-they make you feel like a thief

But the pack won't keep frozen food frozen-strictly a lightly insulated bag-even lots of cold packs would make it pretty iffy-and heavy-and low volume

I have actually done this sort of thing-that bag-won't work.
An actual "ice chest" would make more sense-smallish one-with ice of course(bulky heavy but with wheels-that is the route i would go)

Oh-I see some of the problem- MN- is cold much of the year.NOLA and much of coastal CA warmer and brighter sun
Well, I guess people are doomed to spend $9 for transportation to buy groceries. I hope that <$500 a year doesn't make someone starve to death.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:49 AM
  #218  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
I don't think your grasp on economics as applied to traffic is quite there. The demand already exceeds supply and reducing supply would not make the situation better.
From Wikipedia.

==========
Reduced demand has been demonstrated in a number of studies associated with bridge closings (to be repaired) or major roads rehabilitation projects. These studies have demonstrated that the total volume of traffic, considering the road or bridge closed and alternative roads which this traffic is diverted through, is lower than that in the previous situation. In fact, this is an argument to convert roads previously open to vehicle traffic into pedestrian areas, with a positive impact on the environment and congestion, as in the example of the central area of Florence, Italy.
==========

Seattle has done what's called "road diet" on a couple of arterial roads in order to slow down the traffic and create safer space for walkers and cyclists. They did so by turning the outside lane of two-lane roads into a bike lane and creating a centre turn lane. Their results agree with the studies I quoted.

I don't think you understand what political is either.
You mean political?
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 09:52 AM
  #219  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,849

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3927 Post(s)
Liked 99 Times in 80 Posts
Originally Posted by Dave Cutter View Post
It sure is! If... you're alive in 1935!!!! The burbs aren't constricted with single use property laws as are the "old" cities. It doesn't take much energy to transport potatoes less than a mile from where they are grown. In 2014.... high density city's require the most transportation and cost/energy use to support. NOT the burbs.
You know as well as I do that the vast majority of goods including vegetables are NOT produced a mile from where they are consumed. If a truck takes a load of potatoes or I-Pads to a store in town and purchasers walk, bike or drive a mile or two home, that takes a lot less energy than if the goods are delivered to a shopping centre in a semi-rural area and people drive 5 or 10 miles home with them.

If Fed Ex drops off a hundred packages in a city, they drive far less than if they drop off 100 packages in a rural area.

To connect wires to 100 city homes takes far less work than to connect wires to 100 semi-rural homes.

To pave or plow the street past 100 houses with 25ft. frontage, takes a lot less energy than to pave or plow past 100 homes with 100ft frontages.

Last edited by cooker; 06-24-14 at 09:58 AM.
cooker is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 10:02 AM
  #220  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by daihard View Post
From Wikipedia.

==========
Reduced demand has been demonstrated in a number of studies associated with bridge closings (to be repaired) or major roads rehabilitation projects. These studies have demonstrated that the total volume of traffic, considering the road or bridge closed and alternative roads which this traffic is diverted through, is lower than that in the previous situation. In fact, this is an argument to convert roads previously open to vehicle traffic into pedestrian areas, with a positive impact on the environment and congestion, as in the example of the central area of Florence, Italy.
==========

Seattle has done what's called "road diet" on a couple of arterial roads in order to slow down the traffic and create safer space for walkers and cyclists. They did so by turning the outside lane of two-lane roads into a bike lane and creating a centre turn lane. Their results agree with the studies I quoted.


You mean political?
Debunking the Induced-Demand Myth | Cato @ Liberty

Even UC Berkeley planning professor Robert Cervero believes that the induced demand argument is “wrong headed.” “Road investments by themselves do not increase volumes,” he writes. “Only by conferring a benefit, like faster speeds, will traffic increase.” Provided that benefit is greater than the cost–something that could be assured, Cervero says, through proper pricing of roads–then it is a good thing.
and

https://www.google.com/search?q=poli...sm=93&ie=UTF-8

motivated or caused by a person's beliefs or actions concerning politics.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 10:07 AM
  #221  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
I agree that it may make your argument for adding a lane more valid. It still won't make my argument for removing a lane any less valid, especially if reduced demand is combined with increased supply of public transit.

https://www.google.com/search?q=poli...sm=93&ie=UTF-8

motivated or caused by a person's beliefs or actions concerning politics.
And this is politics, right? It still doesn't look like my belief is political...
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 10:09 AM
  #222  
RPK79
Custom User Title
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Posts: 11,239

Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Quintana Roo Kilo

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2863 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by daihard View Post
I agree that it may make your argument for adding a lane more valid. It still won't make my argument for removing a lane any less valid, especially if reduced demand is combined with increased supply of public transit.


And this is politics, right? It still doesn't look like my belief is political...
I disagree on both counts, but I'm not going to argue it further.
RPK79 is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 10:20 AM
  #223  
daihard 
Just a person on bike
 
daihard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,944

Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Sport, Tern HSD S+

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by RPK79 View Post
I disagree on both counts, but I'm not going to argue it further.
Okay. You may not believe this, but I enjoyed the discussion with you. Have a good day.
__________________

The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
daihard is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 10:50 AM
  #224  
timmythology
Senior Member
 
timmythology's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Portland, Or
Posts: 395

Bikes: | Surly Disc-Trucker| unknown city bike |M80 Raleigh |09 Trek 1.2|

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Wow, it's hard to believe that there is going to a third viewpoint on this. I say keep the trains, allow the cars, but start reducing bus service around the train hubs. I, and my limited observations and experience, have noticed that when using the light rail in portland with alternative transportation that I have more time, and much better access to everything I need. As a student that decided to attend a CC 12 miles from my house, and 22 miles from my employer, but also lived between them. I was able to combine both very well with a bike, e-bike combination. Also observed others using bikes, skateboards, inline skates, scooters, and segways. The light rail systems also support individuals with mobility devices with more dignity than a bus does, imo.

While I view busses still as a necessity. I also think that through the reduction of bus service around light rail stops (not transit centers) with a radius of three miles would start to force more individuals to look at alternative transportation options, but only have a 1.5 mile distance to public service. While this may seem harsh, it is also a reality that starts to make individuals more aware of the alternatives. The reduction would also not affect the medically handicap since they would be eligible for accommodation with this type of system.

Cars will be dealt with through other means, and I am happy that in the urban area that I live in, is getting a diet. While I can also understand why others who do not live in my neighborhood may still need them. So in my opinion the light rail system is one of the best tools to defeat "sprawl" especially if used with a regional vision. Cars and busses will still continue to argue since it is a paradigm of individual want vs. group needs.

Yes this is my opinion, and while it may sound a little pie in the sky, I love pie.
timmythology is offline  
Old 06-24-14, 11:12 AM
  #225  
Dave Cutter
Senior Member
 
Dave Cutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,159

Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
You know as well as I do that the vast majority of goods including vegetables are NOT produced a mile from where they are consumed........ .
Actually you're TOTALLY incorrect! Farmers markets in big citys are often just a redistribution point (although not always) mostly its a ruse. Some organic big city farmers market on the left coast.... actually ship in produce from Asia (China). Of the "local farmers markets" in the 100K person Midwestern city I live in today.... only a couple venders actually market their own products. Everyone else is mostly selling a Farmers Market "experience".

However... rural growers routinely sell locally (the profits are to good to past up).... so yeah big city's equal great resource use.

Originally Posted by cooker View Post
If Fed Ex drops off a hundred packages in a city, they drive far less than if they drop off 100 packages in a rural area.

To connect wires to 100 city homes takes far less work than to connect wires to 100 semi-rural homes.

To pave or plow the street past 100 houses with 25ft. frontage, takes a lot less energy than to pave or plow past 100 homes with 100ft frontages.
There is no surcharge for delivery to rural areas.... BECAUSE... (wait for it)... rural areas require no more fuel per package. But I am sure you imagined things worked differently... didn't you.

Really? More wire to wire rural areas? Certainly.... you imagined that too didn't you. It would seem to make sense wouldn't it? Factually correct... no not really. The mass of wire used (called gauge) is determined also by the wattage carried.... NOT just by distance. I think you might find there is no difference "per person" in copper use in rural areas... vs city use.

Apparently... you don't get out much. Rural areas don't plow for snow as do their city cousins. Millions of rural Americans.... live on roads that aren't even paved.

The world you've imagined is so different from the real world..... that I think you would find it amazingly enjoyable to see and learn about. Maybe you could get your parents to take you to the county during summer break.

Your quoting 1920-30's history as if that was todays world. You read like you've learned history watching old movies. American city's no longer produce. They don't make cars in Detroit... rural car factories ship cars to Detroit. All Detroit makes in debt. City's like Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburg, MANY of the left coast city's will collapse. They will be disassembled and the land reclaimed.... just like old pit and strip mines.

City's no longer fulfil a real need. Come up with just ONE actual real-life reason for a dense population center.

Last edited by Dave Cutter; 06-24-14 at 11:28 AM.
Dave Cutter is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.