4 ms·
No. Because increased density goes with less reliance on individual cars. The majority of people (by far) in NY or SF don't have a car already. Traffic is not b
by erispoe 10y ago
No. Because increased density goes with less reliance on individual cars. The majority of people (by far) in NY or SF don't have a car already. Traffic is not bad in the densest cities of the western world, because we have much more efficient ways of moving people around: public transit.
But you also need density to sustain public transit. So you have sour spot where there's not enough density to have good public transit, but enough to create bad traffic.
Edit: see below, it's actually the majority of new households that don't have a car in many large American cities, except for NYC, in majority car-free.
- ghaff 10y agoAbout 30% of households in San Francisco do not own cars.[1] That's not the majority "by far." NYC is the only city in the US where the majority of households do not own a car (~56%). But "by far" still only really applies to Manhattan. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_households_without_a_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_...
- cowsandmilk 10y agoIn the most dense part of NYC, Manhattan, 73% of people don't have access to a car[1], which supports the idea that with more density comes less car dependence/ownership. [1] https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/15_5YR/S0801/0600000US3606144919 https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/15_5YR/S...
- L_Rahman 10y agoBut this is true only if there's enough public infrastructure to support that kind of living. I'm in the East Village and I have these subways in a 10 min walk radius: 4|5|6|N|Q|R|B|D|F|M|L I can make a no transfer trip to anywhere in Manhattan and most parts of Brooklyn and Queens. If I lived in a part of Manhattan or NYC that didn't have these levels of access, I'd be very tempted to get a car.
- lloyd-christmas 10y agoI lived on a block just about the furthest from any subway in manhattan: 81st and York[0]. A car never crossed my mind. http://iquantny.tumblr.com/post/99544282749/found-the-manhattan-apartment-thats-the-farthest http://iquantny.tumblr.com/post/99544282749/found-the-manhat...
- Tiksi 10y agoTo be fair, of those in the outer boroughs of NY that do have a car, (anecdotally) they don't commute with it. From what I've seen, the car is for trips out of the city or occasionally getting something big home, or used as part of their job (Taxi, Contractor truck/van, etc).
- erispoe 10y agoYou're right. I mixed up my stats. Most of the new households come in these cities without owning a car. Sources: http://sf.streetsblog.org/2014/08/15/car-free-households-are-booming-in-san-francisco/ http://sf.streetsblog.org/2014/08/15/car-free-households-are... https://ggwash.org/view/35905/88-of-new-dc-households-are-car-free https://ggwash.org/view/35905/88-of-new-dc-households-are-ca... http://www.betterinstitutions.com/blog/2013/07/almost-all-of-los-angeles-growth-is-in http://www.betterinstitutions.com/blog/2013/07/almost-all-of...
- ghaff 10y agoThat doesn't surprise me much. A disproportionate percentage of new grads moving to Cambridge or Boston to live probably have a job there. Someone working out at 495 would maybe prefer to live in the city but they'd just as soon not have an hour commute each way every day. Furthermore, recent students are used to dealing with not having cars in many cases--even if it can be inconvenient at times. In addition, Zipcar and Uber/Lyft/etc. absolutely make a difference at the margins if you don't need a car on a day-to-day basis.
- imgabe 10y agoHaving a car and using a car two different things. I live in a city and own a car, but bike almost everywhere I go.
- loafa 10y agoBut the biggest cities in the world have problems with foot traffic and subway traffic. I'm not sure that they still employ "pushers" in Tokyo but they very well might. And that's with the benefit of Japanese culture where people are generally clean and polite. Japanese density plus American social problems sounds hellish.
- cylinder 10y agoYeah all this pro density hype comes off as coming from newbies to big dense cities. High density sucks for quality of life really quickly. Especially peak hours on the subway! I've learned I prefer medium density: walk to a shopping precinct for a commuter train to CBD and essential amenities. Weekends a small car to get about to social stuff, run errands, larger shopping trips, etc. You can have this even in suburban settings by planning well and keeping lot sizes smaller. Hardly exists in the US though.
- mahyarm 10y agoLong commutes and rush hour also sucks in low density suburban america too. I think a lot of the bad sides of high density living for people are unwanted solicitors, bad/old non-soundproofed housing and insecure shipping receiving.
- vonmoltke 10y ago> Long commutes and rush hour also sucks in low density suburban america too. Depends on where you want to live. I lived in Dallas for just over 14 years and never had a commute that was over 30 minutes each way. Half the time I was there it was 15 minutes door-to-desk. Now that I'm in the NYC area it's 1+ hour each way and I'm beholden to a bus or train schedule. I could cut it at the expense of increased rent and less space, but that is not a trade-off my wife and I are willing to make.
- mahyarm 10y agoI guess your wealthier in Dallas than you are in NYC in a way? A short commute usually costs more than a long one.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]