3 ms·

You mean the roads downtown should be inaccessible to people living downtown so suburban people can commute in on 2 ton steel boxes that they then store for the

You mean the roads downtown should be inaccessible to people living downtown so suburban people can commute in on 2 ton steel boxes that they then store for the day in downtown? No, that is indeed not the most efficient use of the roads. The most efficient use of the roads would be to rip them out and use the space for vastly more efficient public transport. (Bus transport is also not slowed down by cyclists, or of all things, skateboarders.)

rayiner 8y ago
> The most efficient use of the roads would be to rip them out and use the space for vastly more efficient public transport. More efficient for who? The software developer who lives in a condo downtown, or the lady who cleans his office that drives in from the suburbs?
- stefan_ 8y ago
  For both? This isn't policy, this is what you already mentioned: space is becoming rapidly more expensive downtown, and that doesn't stop with such mundane things as roads or parking spaces. These are not magically guaranteed their place, forever. This article and things like congestion charge in NYC are the natural consequence. So the choice isn't some faux gentrification debate on optimizing roads for the strawman "cleaning lady from the suburbs" or the "downtown software developer", it's for the cleaning lady to be out of a job in 10 years because the only cars driving downtown will be worth a century of her yearly income - or taking the train...
- ocschwar 8y ago
  In Boston? The cleaning lady takes the T. No way she can afford parking downtown.
  - wtetzner 8y ago
    But how does she get to the T? It doesn't go very far.
    - ocschwar 8y ago
      It goes to East Somerville. It goes to Chelsea. It goes to Everett. If you want to knwo how the night shift janitors in your office get to work, just hang around the Sullivan Square station at 6PM.
- francisofascii 8y ago
  She would benefit most from more bus only lanes going into the city. Or perhaps rip out the parking garages and replace them with affordable housing downtown.
- atoav 8y ago
  I lived next to a main traffic route in a bigger city for a few years. You rarely see a commuter that is not completely ALONE in their car. Using a car in a city is not a human right, it is a luxury. That trunk and the four free seats are there "just in case" you might need it. There is no rational reason why it is that way. It is a whole culture that revolves around owning a car and I say that as somebody who was driving for a living once. Commuting to a city boils down to using the cities advantages (well paying jobs, infrastructure, etc) while avoiding the disadvantages (noise, pollution, higher rents and criminality) at the cost of those living there (you take jobs people living there could take, you are traffic, space and noise). Could they get a space in the city? Sure. Only it would be tiny and substandard and they don't want that.
- TulliusCicero 8y ago
  If you're committed to high quality public transport, it's more efficient for both. Do you think there's a lot of cleaning ladies driving in and parking downtown in expensive major cities?
  - lkbm 8y ago
    In Austin, a significant portion of the cleaning people work evenings/nights, and I believe frequently are given the option of parking in the garage of the office building(s) they're cleaning. It's not all, but it's a part. Of course, Austin's no NYC. I assume NYC doesn't have as many empty parking garages at night, and it definitely has better public transit.
    - TulliusCicero 8y ago
      People who are 'reverse commuting' are unlikely to be hurt by this, since there's not much traffic pressure going that way at that time.
- adrianN 8y ago
  A parking spot uses about as much space as a mid-sized apartment if you build four stories above it. Fewer cars mean more room for affordable housing.
- baron_harkonnen 8y ago
  lower income people in nearly all major cities tend not live in the suburbs since that require owning an maintaining a car (or two), usually they live in high density housing in areas adjacent to larger metro areas and accessible by public transportation. These people would benefit tremendously if urban areas where restructure to have better, more efficient public transportation.

rayiner 8y ago

> The most efficient use of the roads would be to rip them out and use the space for vastly more efficient public transport. More efficient for who? The software developer who lives in a condo downtown, or the lady who cleans his office that drives in from the suburbs?

stefan_ 8y ago
For both? This isn't policy, this is what you already mentioned: space is becoming rapidly more expensive downtown, and that doesn't stop with such mundane things as roads or parking spaces. These are not magically guaranteed their place, forever. This article and things like congestion charge in NYC are the natural consequence. So the choice isn't some faux gentrification debate on optimizing roads for the strawman "cleaning lady from the suburbs" or the "downtown software developer", it's for the cleaning lady to be out of a job in 10 years because the only cars driving downtown will be worth a century of her yearly income - or taking the train...
ocschwar 8y ago
In Boston? The cleaning lady takes the T. No way she can afford parking downtown.
- wtetzner 8y ago
  But how does she get to the T? It doesn't go very far.
  - ocschwar 8y ago
    It goes to East Somerville. It goes to Chelsea. It goes to Everett. If you want to knwo how the night shift janitors in your office get to work, just hang around the Sullivan Square station at 6PM.
francisofascii 8y ago
She would benefit most from more bus only lanes going into the city. Or perhaps rip out the parking garages and replace them with affordable housing downtown.
atoav 8y ago
I lived next to a main traffic route in a bigger city for a few years. You rarely see a commuter that is not completely ALONE in their car. Using a car in a city is not a human right, it is a luxury. That trunk and the four free seats are there "just in case" you might need it. There is no rational reason why it is that way. It is a whole culture that revolves around owning a car and I say that as somebody who was driving for a living once. Commuting to a city boils down to using the cities advantages (well paying jobs, infrastructure, etc) while avoiding the disadvantages (noise, pollution, higher rents and criminality) at the cost of those living there (you take jobs people living there could take, you are traffic, space and noise). Could they get a space in the city? Sure. Only it would be tiny and substandard and they don't want that.
TulliusCicero 8y ago
If you're committed to high quality public transport, it's more efficient for both. Do you think there's a lot of cleaning ladies driving in and parking downtown in expensive major cities?
- lkbm 8y ago
  In Austin, a significant portion of the cleaning people work evenings/nights, and I believe frequently are given the option of parking in the garage of the office building(s) they're cleaning. It's not all, but it's a part. Of course, Austin's no NYC. I assume NYC doesn't have as many empty parking garages at night, and it definitely has better public transit.
  - TulliusCicero 8y ago
    People who are 'reverse commuting' are unlikely to be hurt by this, since there's not much traffic pressure going that way at that time.
adrianN 8y ago
A parking spot uses about as much space as a mid-sized apartment if you build four stories above it. Fewer cars mean more room for affordable housing.
baron_harkonnen 8y ago
lower income people in nearly all major cities tend not live in the suburbs since that require owning an maintaining a car (or two), usually they live in high density housing in areas adjacent to larger metro areas and accessible by public transportation. These people would benefit tremendously if urban areas where restructure to have better, more efficient public transportation.