3 ms·
I expect that opposite will happen. Cities that are built for people (and not cars) will thrive. Nobody wants to drive everywhere. Cities that support multi-mod
by larrymyers 5y ago
I expect that opposite will happen. Cities that are built for people (and not cars) will thrive. Nobody wants to drive everywhere. Cities that support multi-modal transportation and have mixed residential / commercial centers will thrive.
Chicago does this well. From my front door I have the follow options:
* The El (train, local stops)
* Metra (train, commuter that gets out to the burbs)
* Bus
* Taxi
* Divvy (e-bike rentals)
* Personal bike
* Walking
... and finally, yes, I can drive. But driving sucks. It's slow, expensive, and you still have to find parking.
- incomingpain 5y agoKind of offtopic, but how about safety consideration? Chicago is represented as quite dangerous in the media. As a resident, is the danger true?
- larrymyers 5y agoNo, Chicago is not dangerous on a per-capita basis. The news is incentivized to get attention, and "OMG you'll get robbed and shot" is a very effective and crude way to get those clicks. Chicago is no different than any other large city in that being aware of your surroundings and not doing dumb things is expected.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoChicago is no St. Louis or New Orleans, but 1000 out of 100k is 1%. One of the reasons I never consider living in the midwest again (Toledo) is because my bike was stolen so many times as a kid. Crime doesn't make for nice living.
- granshaw 5y ago4+ year Chicago resident here. Chicago neighborhoods vary night and day to each other. Crime is very well contained to the dangerous ones, and the neighborhoods where are tech worker can afford and would want to stay in are very safe.