3 ms·

This seems to me like one of those issues that has way too many variables to make a reasonable guess at how things will really compare in the counterfactual sit

This seems to me like one of those issues that has way too many variables to make a reasonable guess at how things will really compare in the counterfactual situation. If you've got a city that really is dense enough to be pedestrian-friendly, I think it's likely to be the case that the time situation is shifted considerably. Not only will it take less time to walk and bike places, but you probably find that the kinds of places you might want to walk or bike to end up being located closer to where you live and work. At the same time, driving becomes less convenient due to congestion. Whereas, in car-centric cities, it often ends up being the case that businesses float out to the periphery of town. My own pet theory, which seems to hold in every place I've lived or visited, but hasn't been backed up by any any rigorous data gathering, is that, no matter where you live, everything you might need to get to (e.g., the supermarket) ends up being 10-20 minutes away using the dominant mode of transportation in that city, regardless of what that mode is.

kasey_junk 8y ago
I’d love to see a study on this. Anecdata: there are 3 grocery stores within a 5 minute walk from me. But I live there because of that.
Franciscouzo 8y ago
Sounds similar to Smeed's prediction: > Smeed also predicted that the average speed of traffic in central London would always be nine miles per hour, because that is the minimum speed that people tolerate. He predicted that any intervention intended to speed traffic would only lead to more people driving at this "tolerable" speed unless there were any other disincentives against doing so.
supertrope 8y ago
Many people underestimate the total costs of commuting. They want a cheaper and/or bigger residence. They think they're a superior driver and/or they'll buy a bigger car for safety. They would never take a salary cut even if it came with a greatly shortened commute. Car operation cost deltas are not included when considering a job or residence.
- bunderbunder 8y ago
  Which just feels crazy to me. My commute is a 7 minute walk. I go home and eat lunch with my family several days a week. I would have a very hard time giving that up, and I couldn't even imagine going back to spending 10% of my waking hours stuck in traffic. Life is too short for that.

kasey_junk 8y ago

I’d love to see a study on this. Anecdata: there are 3 grocery stores within a 5 minute walk from me. But I live there because of that.

Franciscouzo 8y ago

Sounds similar to Smeed's prediction: > Smeed also predicted that the average speed of traffic in central London would always be nine miles per hour, because that is the minimum speed that people tolerate. He predicted that any intervention intended to speed traffic would only lead to more people driving at this "tolerable" speed unless there were any other disincentives against doing so.

supertrope 8y ago

Many people underestimate the total costs of commuting. They want a cheaper and/or bigger residence. They think they're a superior driver and/or they'll buy a bigger car for safety. They would never take a salary cut even if it came with a greatly shortened commute. Car operation cost deltas are not included when considering a job or residence.

bunderbunder 8y ago
Which just feels crazy to me. My commute is a 7 minute walk. I go home and eat lunch with my family several days a week. I would have a very hard time giving that up, and I couldn't even imagine going back to spending 10% of my waking hours stuck in traffic. Life is too short for that.