4 ms·
Transit and cycling would be awesome. I'd also like to see cities build more houses where the jobs are. And conversely, don't allow cities to build office spac
by ulkram 10y ago
Transit and cycling would be awesome. I'd also like to see cities build more houses where the jobs are. And conversely, don't allow cities to build office space if there is not enough residential zoning to support those jobs.
It seems the root cause of traffic is a mismatch between jobs and housing, leading to sprawl and traffic.
- jjnoakes 10y ago> It seems the root cause of traffic is a mismatch between jobs and housing Which I suspect is quite natural, because it is driven by a mismatch between where people want to be when they are working (commercial districts) and where people want to be when they aren't (anything except commercial districts). When you have errands to run, or want a day out exploring, you want all of that in the same place. When you get home at night, you don't want to be next to the noise, parking lots, crowds of people, airports, ...
- Tiktaalik 10y ago> I'd also like to see cities build more houses where the jobs are. This is what Vancouver did. The amount of cars entering and exiting the downtown core is the same since the 1960s, but the amount of downtown jobs is dramatically higher. This is possible because they substantially added residential housing into the downtown core so that many could walk and bike to work, and by adding rapid transit. Expansion of road capacity wasn't needed. Additionally instead of a hub and spokes model where everyone would live elsewhere and commute into downtown, Vancouver is organized like a loose federation of towns, each with residential and employment options. In suburbs of Vancouver such as Langley, more people work there or in adjacent suburbs than commute into City of Vancouver proper.