3 ms·

Reminds me of Facadism as part of the larger pattern of cargo culting trends in development to try to gain the benefits of the "new way" without deeper changes

Reminds me of Facadism as part of the larger pattern of cargo culting trends in development to try to gain the benefits of the "new way" without deeper changes resulting in nothing really different. On the parking issue and related housing shortages I wonder how viable an attempted rail primary based housing development project to a major city would be in the US for NIMBY dodging. Apparently that is fairly common in Japan along with new rail line loops receiving housing developments and subway/train station centered commercial districts. In theory existing neighborhoods would scale up and add public transit as density rises but in practice they complain like hell over any changes. Optimistically successful examples could give a kick in the pants to NIMBYs as their property value drops anyway due to the competition of a new area and they realize commutter trains aren't the devil or a waste of money but reduce road traffic.

CalRobert 7y ago
I think this is the idea behind culdesac (no private cars or parking in development, on light rail, carshare at periphery) but we'll see how that pans out.
- C1sc0cat 7y ago
  It wont work this is single young architects work that lead to high rise disasters in the 1970's and 60's
- msla 7y ago
  No private cars in the development? OK, that means the housebound can't live there, because people like home health nurses can't be asked to drag equipment and other supplies from the closest parking to wherever the person lives. With many First-World countries looking at aging populations, this is going to limit the appeal of such developments.
  - kaybe 7y ago
    Clearly some exemptions will be made as always, we just have to hash out which ones.
  - CalRobert 7y ago
    Aging populations are exactly a reason to move away from car dependence. Instead they're trapped in suburban homes with no drivers' licence, often alone.
    - msla 7y ago
      Old people should be in communities where driving is de-emphasized, I agree. However, home health services promote independence, too, and they depend on cars to practically transport meals, equipment, and people directly to the door, in ways which would be vastly impractical if cars were outright banned.
bluGill 7y ago
The can only work if there are already lots of trains - or will be. Which is to say it can only work if you can use the train to get other places you want to go. If you ensure the train goes to some sort of existing mall, a couple different modern grocery stores, a nice park, and a large job center: you have a chance. Grocery stores are very important to this. Everybody needs access to them. They are also a low margin business that seeks out locations with low rent - the railroad probably needs to have a special deal on commercial rent if you put in a grocery store to ensure this is met. A proper business plan should consider what other things get a special rent rates as a loss leader to get people on the train. Note that in no case is zero cars the goal! Everybody will get their stuff delivered on a truck, and the trash goes out the same way. Likewise there is always a need for plumbers, both as residents and day workers. Some couples will find the train doesn't work for one of the pair. So you make sure it is possible to drive - you just ensure the train is so convenient and cheap that most people don't.

CalRobert 7y ago

I think this is the idea behind culdesac (no private cars or parking in development, on light rail, carshare at periphery) but we'll see how that pans out.

C1sc0cat 7y ago
It wont work this is single young architects work that lead to high rise disasters in the 1970's and 60's
msla 7y ago
No private cars in the development? OK, that means the housebound can't live there, because people like home health nurses can't be asked to drag equipment and other supplies from the closest parking to wherever the person lives. With many First-World countries looking at aging populations, this is going to limit the appeal of such developments.
- kaybe 7y ago
  Clearly some exemptions will be made as always, we just have to hash out which ones.
- CalRobert 7y ago
  Aging populations are exactly a reason to move away from car dependence. Instead they're trapped in suburban homes with no drivers' licence, often alone.
  - msla 7y ago
    Old people should be in communities where driving is de-emphasized, I agree. However, home health services promote independence, too, and they depend on cars to practically transport meals, equipment, and people directly to the door, in ways which would be vastly impractical if cars were outright banned.

bluGill 7y ago

The can only work if there are already lots of trains - or will be. Which is to say it can only work if you can use the train to get other places you want to go. If you ensure the train goes to some sort of existing mall, a couple different modern grocery stores, a nice park, and a large job center: you have a chance. Grocery stores are very important to this. Everybody needs access to them. They are also a low margin business that seeks out locations with low rent - the railroad probably needs to have a special deal on commercial rent if you put in a grocery store to ensure this is met. A proper business plan should consider what other things get a special rent rates as a loss leader to get people on the train. Note that in no case is zero cars the goal! Everybody will get their stuff delivered on a truck, and the trash goes out the same way. Likewise there is always a need for plumbers, both as residents and day workers. Some couples will find the train doesn't work for one of the pair. So you make sure it is possible to drive - you just ensure the train is so convenient and cheap that most people don't.