3 ms·

I also strongly agree (with the original statement, and your own items). It is incredible how many urban planers and/or transport engineers subscribe to that fa

I also strongly agree (with the original statement, and your own items). It is incredible how many urban planers and/or transport engineers subscribe to that fallacy, and consequently how the tides of consensus in planing forums/reddits/... are turning towards sub-optimal solutions. One thing that irks me on those forums is the resurgence of the idea of focusing on buses (as opposed to rail) in urban mass transport. No one seems to understand that buses are much more uncomfortable, and doesn't allow you to zone out because: - All kinds of strong accelerations (stopping on intersections, turning right angles, jumping around on hills or potholes), impossible to read anything without getting motion-sickness, and in extreme cases sometimes you have to use gym-equipment-like strength to just keep yourself from falling. - The time spent waiting for a bus at the stop or connection doesn't allow zoning out, you have to keep constantly on the lookout for the right bus among other buses and other traffic (while in a metro station you can completely forget about the world and still you won't miss a giant train arriving and opening its doors).

tuatoru 5y ago
The best transport is no transport. The rules for residential zones need to change to require sidewalks, playgrounds, and parks, and to encourage low-traffic service businesses such as co-working spaces, professional services (e.g. accountants, lawyers, real estate offices, ...), convenience stores and small cafes (up to 10 seat). And then there are lot size, lot coverage, and off-street parking rules to be abolished... Hand in hand with that we'll need new bank regulations to force them to finance suburbs that work for people and communities.
- agumonkey 5y ago
  Beware, what you described sounds a lot like what France and other places did with projects in the 70s. Every thing was in reach, but for some obscure reason it collapsed in less than 20 years. Not saying it's a bad idea, but it's sociologically subtle.
  - jltsiren 5y ago
    When you build a new residential area, people move in with kids. After 15-20 years, kids move out, population collapses, and local services die. The best way to avoid this is building within / next to existing areas instead of building completely new areas.
  - mint2 5y ago
    Because then one is forced to go to what we dentist is there, whatever handful of restaurant are there, the grocery store that is there. No one wants zero or relative few choices like that, so trying to build mini self contained ecosystems isn’t going to work well
    - agumonkey 5y ago
      Nobody was forced but somehow something was missing, i tried to find reasons why these failed, it's a complex blend of mild poverty, mass social dynamics (same problems as in other neighborhood except it's not in higher concentrations and become unmanageable quick, broken window + reputation + tribalism). It devolved too fast to be handled. Even though on paper, they had best in class standards of living for average citizen (at that time my aunt lived in flat in Paris without toilets, it was the way for old building in her paris area; a year later she had electric kitchen appliance and her own toilet/bathroom).
ebiester 5y ago
Are they talking about dedicated roads like Istanbul? I would take their metrobus system (bridge-excepted) over an equivalent light rail that shares the road with cars like the green line in Boston. The key, to me, is dedicating space for public transit rather than a shared system.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  Worth noting for non-locals that a large part (maybe the majority of rail-miles but surely the majority of people-miles) of the green line is on dedicated rail not shared with cars.

tuatoru 5y ago

The best transport is no transport. The rules for residential zones need to change to require sidewalks, playgrounds, and parks, and to encourage low-traffic service businesses such as co-working spaces, professional services (e.g. accountants, lawyers, real estate offices, ...), convenience stores and small cafes (up to 10 seat). And then there are lot size, lot coverage, and off-street parking rules to be abolished... Hand in hand with that we'll need new bank regulations to force them to finance suburbs that work for people and communities.

agumonkey 5y ago
Beware, what you described sounds a lot like what France and other places did with projects in the 70s. Every thing was in reach, but for some obscure reason it collapsed in less than 20 years. Not saying it's a bad idea, but it's sociologically subtle.
- jltsiren 5y ago
  When you build a new residential area, people move in with kids. After 15-20 years, kids move out, population collapses, and local services die. The best way to avoid this is building within / next to existing areas instead of building completely new areas.
- mint2 5y ago
  Because then one is forced to go to what we dentist is there, whatever handful of restaurant are there, the grocery store that is there. No one wants zero or relative few choices like that, so trying to build mini self contained ecosystems isn’t going to work well
  - agumonkey 5y ago
    Nobody was forced but somehow something was missing, i tried to find reasons why these failed, it's a complex blend of mild poverty, mass social dynamics (same problems as in other neighborhood except it's not in higher concentrations and become unmanageable quick, broken window + reputation + tribalism). It devolved too fast to be handled. Even though on paper, they had best in class standards of living for average citizen (at that time my aunt lived in flat in Paris without toilets, it was the way for old building in her paris area; a year later she had electric kitchen appliance and her own toilet/bathroom).

ebiester 5y ago

Are they talking about dedicated roads like Istanbul? I would take their metrobus system (bridge-excepted) over an equivalent light rail that shares the road with cars like the green line in Boston. The key, to me, is dedicating space for public transit rather than a shared system.

sokoloff 5y ago
Worth noting for non-locals that a large part (maybe the majority of rail-miles but surely the majority of people-miles) of the green line is on dedicated rail not shared with cars.