8 ms·

Some good commentary in this thread, however one topic thats never raised in the topic of affordable housing is fast cheap public transit. I could never imagin

Some good commentary in this thread, however one topic thats never raised in the topic of affordable housing is fast cheap public transit. I could never imagine being able to buy a house in London. but the train network makes it possible to live in a more affordable neighbourhood and commute as needed. In the US we seem to think that cities can continue to have affordable housing in the most desireable areas. this is a false hope. what we need to have is faster cheaper transit to satelittle communities. Seattle is the perfect example. If we have high speed rail between Bellingham and Seattle it would dramatically change the dynamics of the housing situation in Seattle.

Slava_Propanei 3y ago
[dead]
GenerocUsername 3y ago
Available transit needs to include safe transit. The current bus and light rail situation has turned off swaths of the working class to support the dredges of the drug-addict class by their lack of fare-enforcement and other low-end enabling schemes that sound great on paper, but lead to complicated downstream chilling effects on the entire region.
- cornercasechase 3y ago
  Public transit is much safer than driving in your car. Someone skipping fare does not compare to even a light fender bender.
  - dr_dshiv 3y ago
    Yeah, but it doesn’t feel like public transit is safe. That’s important. Public transit in other countries feels nice. In the US, you feel poor. Design, maybe, matters?
  - denimnerd42 3y ago
    I think people mean a more irrational feeling of safety, rather than hard statistics. They don't want to see or be near those antisocial behaviors when they're taking transportation. Old people seem to suffer from this irrational feeling more than younger.
    - gottorf 3y ago
      "Irrational" is a strange way to describe it. People don't go around memorizing statistics of how likely someone who is exhibiting one kind of antisocial behavior (being obviously high, defecating in public, etc.) would be to engage in another kind of antisocial behavior (committing physical violence upon another person). And especially when the cost of making the wrong judgment is high, it's entirely rational to want to avoid it entirely. > Old people seem to suffer from this irrational feeling more than younger. Old people generally have more to lose. Young people, especially young males, are well known to think of themselves as invincible.
      - dkarl 3y ago
        > People don't go around memorizing statistics of how likely someone who is exhibiting one kind of antisocial behavior (being obviously high, defecating in public, etc.) would be to engage in another kind of antisocial behavior (committing physical violence upon another person) So you're saying people don't do a rational analysis of the risks... but calling it "irrational" is strange? Lots of human behavior is irrational. It doesn't have to be unusual to call it irrational. Overestimating the risks of one choice and therefore not getting the benefits of it, and incurring the higher risks of alternatives instead (for the elderly, being socially isolated at home or driving with impaired abilities) is the kind of irrationality that people would benefit from correcting, through education and changing social assumptions.
        gottorf 3y ago
        > So you're saying people don't do a rational analysis of the risks... but calling it "irrational" is strange? GP's wording implied that rational people take public transit because they've done the risk-benefit analysis, and irrational people don't. I'm not sure if there's actual evidence behind such a risk-benefit analysis. > people would benefit from correcting, through education and changing social assumptions. If the goal is to attract more people to use public transit, it would be vastly more effective to police the occurrence of antisocial behavior on it, instead of telling people that it's actually OK, the chance of stepping on a puddle of piss or being shouted at incoherently or being pushed onto an oncoming train is much lower than they think, and is lower than the chance of being injured in a car crash while driving to work. Whether or not that is true (and I wouldn't mind seeing some cold, hard data on it), most people will prefer to roll the dice with their car. In other words: if you're a social architect keen on implementing your vision of a flourishing public transit system, it would be irrational not to account for people's loss aversion, whether or not that loss aversion itself is irrational.
  - blairbeckwith 3y ago
    I think when most people use "safe" in this context, they mean "comfortable" or "psychologically comfortable". Nobody enjoys sitting beside someone tweaking and shitting themselves, even if it's perfectly safe.
    - rg111 3y ago
      Exactly. I don't ever mind public transport. I have used public transport in multiple areas of the planet. There are two quips: 1. You have to be there in someone else's time. You can't have 5 or 10 or 30 minutes if something comes up. 2. What you say. I don't want to rub my body with people who are wearing dirty clothes, smell, and has god-knows-what liquid on their clothes who might choose to cough without using their hands. (This has happened to me) So, I avoid public transport where there is this kind of intermingling. Fine with me where there are upper classes or similar in transport and it is enforced strictly.
      - ta1243 3y ago
        Do you avoid elevators?
        hparadiz 3y ago
        Maybe not explicitly when traveling but when picking a place to live, sure.
        anshorei 3y ago
        Elevators tend to be restricted to a specific group of people (inhabitants, customers, employees, etc.) in a way that public transport is not. If an elevator smells like urine, has suspicious stains or trash, chances are I'd look for an alternative. But it just so happens that the elevators I come across tend to be clean, unlike the public transport. And I say this as someone who still takes public transport a lot, but it's increasingly less comfortable.
        HEmanZ 3y ago
        This isn’t a fair comparison, and you have to be arguing in bad faith to say this. I have never seen someone pull out a gun, tweak out and rip out the hair of the girl sitting in front of them, or shit themselves, on an elevator. I have seen all of these on public transport in Seattle. From another city, my younger brother was on the L in Chicago when a gun went off. Someone shot into the ceiling, no one got hurt, but holy hell idk if I could ride after that. I still like the light rail in Seattle and am a massive supporter of public transport, but I understand people who won’t take it because of the psychological threats.
  - hifromLA 3y ago
    Psychological safety matters just as much as physical safety. If you think that you won’t see some shit on public transit I welcome you to come to LA and take the red line for a day.
    - brandall10 3y ago
      Having spent 6 months in NYC over the past year, you see shit on the subway lines all of the time, but normal people use it all the time. I think the latter is the important thing. It's not normalized as a viable means of transport in the land of the automobile.
      - amrocha 3y ago
        Buddy if you want to convince people to use public transit, saying a little shit is normal is not the way to do it btw I live in Tokyo and moved here explicitly because of public transit.
        brandall10 3y ago
        That wasn’t the message - it’s the presence of having normal people. Public transport is just as popular in NYC as it is in Tokyo despite the shit. Just got back from 3.5 months in Europe (17 cities), and yes it’s vastly better there, far more clean and sane. Still, coming back to NYC I’m not not taking the subway despite spending nearly my whole life in SoCal. It’s easily the better option over owning a car if you’re in Manhattan/Brooklyn.
        amrocha 3y ago
        I see where you're coming from, but the "normal people" leave because of these incidents. If you want everyday people riding the train, you gotta make sure that the poorest people in society aren't so miserable that they're unpleasant to be around.
        brandall10 3y ago
  - nomel 3y ago
    > Someone skipping fare This, obviously, isn't what raises fear in people. "Safer" for some statistics, like a car crash, but also much less safe for things like getting stabbed, spit on, confronted. Sure, it's somewhat rare on public transport, but they're exactly zero in my car, at freeway speeds. edit: A quick google search shows two stabbings, one slit throat, and a page full of fights, in my area, over the last two years. While the statistics are low, in terms of per person*miles, this real difference, and the 2hr vs 30 minute times, is what keeps people and families in cars. Fundamental changes are needed.
    - lapetitejort 3y ago
      I may never get stabbed in my car, but I will get brake-checked, cut off, buzzed, rammed, and shot at [0]. Driving is stressful and I dread every getting on the highway. [0]: https://everytownresearch.org/reports-of-road-rage-shootings-are-on-the-rise/ https://everytownresearch.org/reports-of-road-rage-shootings...
      - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
        You can still get shot on a train.
      - Wojtkie 3y ago
        Everytown is definitely a biased source to use
    - rapind 3y ago
      What's funny is over-policing public transit would probably take only a fraction of the resources that private transportation does.
    - dkarl 3y ago
      > two stabbings, one slit throat, and a page full of fights, in my area, over the last two years That's basically nothing next to car accidents. Car accident injuries can be pretty gruesome. Maybe the fundamental change that is needed is awareness of the risks of driving and the yearly death/mutilation toll in each community. (And the awareness that bigger and bigger SUVs with higher and higher bumpers is a zero-sum game.)
  - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
    That’s a dishonest comparison. Skipping fare not same as a drug addled person hassling commuters.
    - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - stevenicr 3y ago
    I think it's important with discussions like these to include the city or area, and time period. I can say for sure that the subway in DC was better and safer than cars for the most part, when I was there many moons ago - However if you look at the people who are riding the bus in my current city, or at the times when I was in Vegas.. and I've heard the NY subway at night is nothing like the DC subway.. These discussions can have all people right and all people wrong when they are discussing how they view their apples to others oranges.
- frozenport 3y ago
  SF problems
  - mholm 3y ago
    This is not just SF problems. These problems are _everywhere_ in the US, with just a reduction in other major hubs where transit is effective for the middle class.
    - frozenport 3y ago
      There are threshold effects. Going down into the bart tunnels is a decent into human misery, but in Chicago feel much safer because don't see people loitering.
- cptskippy 3y ago
  That's a public health issue that no one wants to address. We're completely ok with de-funding public healthcare and social services while complaining about the results.
- diogenes4 3y ago
  > The current bus and light rail situation has turned off swaths of the working class to support the dredges of the drug-addict class Tell me you never use public transit without telling me you never use public transit. This is so out of touch it reads like a rant from the chronicle.
jimt1234 3y ago
I've been told since childhood that the main obstacle to inexpensive public transit in the the majority of US is racism - keep those people in their neighborhood. I've never done any sort of research or anything, and even though it's depressing, it sounds plausible.
- psd1 3y ago
  Sprinkle in a dash of car-industry lobbying and suburban sprawl
- bad_user 3y ago
  I'm not a US citizen, and racism may be the issue. OTOH, given US's geography and culture of wide streets, suburbs, and driving around, it's pretty obvious that public transit is pricier than it is in Europe, similarly to broadband connection. As a European, I could also complain about terrible traffic congestion due to narrow streets in constant need of repair, or lacking parking space, which makes every car ride a source of stress. Your Uber is also dirt cheap compared to where I live.
  - bobthepanda 3y ago
    The culture is manufactured though. It is hard or downright illegal to build traditional American towns or housing styles. (It also dates back only to the postwar era.)
- fnimick 3y ago
  It's very true. Look at the way "urban" is used as a dog whistle for certain groups of people. A bit of local history from where I live: Boston rapid transit was intended to extend to the northwest a considerable distance, putting more communities on the system and allowing easy, car-free commutes. It saw vociferous neighborhood opposition from groups who "didn't like the idea of increased traffic and certain urban elements entering their quiet suburban town." Sound familiar? https://boston.curbed.com/2014/2/13/10144086/the-red-line-stops-in-arlington-and-lexington https://boston.curbed.com/2014/2/13/10144086/the-red-line-st...
bad_user 3y ago
London is very expensive, driving Londoners out of the city. It's nice that they have public transport, but it's not helping much, unless you're saying that it could have been much worse. And despite being praised for public transport, the average commute time in London is bad. They're also not building much housing, affordable or otherwise, which means that it's only going to get worse.
lambdasquirrel 3y ago
I don’t know about that. There’s a whole lot of people in Bellingham who’ve been saying it’s unaffordable for them now.
- eep_social 3y ago
  Yep, I have family there and heard the same. The game changer is the stops that would inevitably be put up in places like Burlington, Mt Vernon, or Conway between Seattle and Bellingham. Smaller towns which are connected to the big city should be able to attract folks gp has in mind.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
UncleOxidant 3y ago
> Seattle is the perfect example. If we have high speed rail between Bellingham and Seattle it would dramatically change the dynamics of the housing situation in Seattle. It's not like Bellingham is affordable anymore. Median price is ~$650K. (People looking to escape effects of climate change in parts of the country that are becoming hotter are moving to places like Bellingham) Yes, high speed rail and other forms of public transit are needed, but we're still going to need to build a lot more housing units in those outlying areas.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  Bellingham isn't very affordable, but Marysville and Darington are still kind of affordable. And those two places aren't that far north of Everett.
  - UncleOxidant 3y ago
    Ok, but if high speed rail from Seattle to/from those towns was added they wouldn't stay affordable for very long. In order for that not to happen lots of housing units would need to be added to those areas.
    - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
      Those places already growing at a steady clip. They aren't very desirable though. In high school, I lived in South Snohomish county (it was still just Bothell even though it wasn't in King Co). Within striking distance of Seattle, so it grew quickly. I had friends from Marysville and Darington however, they didn't like living in those places very much.
sillyfluke 3y ago
The constant whinging about NHS notwithstanding, I think London is actually a great place to be if you're 65+ and lucky enough to a have a roof over your head. From what I have seen, senior citizens are very active and proactive -- someone living there a few months a year can end up connecting with a walking group, bird watching group etc, where people are inviting and polite by nature. There's lots of free events, access to large parks and nature is possible using the rail network etc. In the US, senior citizens can be individually active, but I haven't come across the same level of proactive organizational behavior and openness to noobs and outsiders that I have come across in London. The prerequisite for such a thing of course is proper public transport.
bobthepanda 3y ago
Seattle is actually quite sprawly already for how small it is, by European standards. Bellingham is 140km away, just not a commutable distance in general. Seattle has quite a lot of room to densify. Density could double, and it would still be less dense than Queens, NY, which still has plenty of homes with garages and yards.
rajman187 3y ago
While I agree the public transit in the US is abysmal at best, I'm not sure the UK is a good measure anymore. Rail strikes and engineering work are happening with such frequency that getting around seems to take longer and longer. A 1+ hour commute to just travel 10 miles is pretty absurd. Insane cost overages and years of delays aside, the Elizabeth line has suffered from nearly 10% of all services being canceled in August. At one point I was needing to take the Northern line from Clapham and would have to wait 3-4 trains before I could squeeze on. The max I waited was 10. Then I moved away. Add to that infrastructure issues like Hammersmith and Wandsworth bridge closures and commuting becomes a soul crushing prospect. I don't know what the solution is but with such a high tax rate in the country you'd expect much better. Other European countries seem to have it figured out. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-66754481 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-66754481
- sillyfluke 3y ago
  Perhaps experiences like yours is why I was downvoted for my London comment. But we are talking relative to the US here, and I do believe there is no comparison. I also found the bus network rather extensive and frequent in the suburban areas, and not unpleasant compared to other countries. Senior citizens are also more flexible with their travel times and often have the luxury of avoiding rush hour Many western economic powerhouses of old seem to be facing the same infrastructure problems, whereas autocratic countries that are building everything from scratch appear to have their shit together by comparison. It's not good PR unfortunately.
ericmay 3y ago
It cannot be overstated how important getting transit right is and what an abject failure transit policy in the US has been. Cities can not efficiently scale with car-only infrastructure, and the long-term costs are too high. This doesn't mean "we all go live in skyscrapers" either, and in fact you can keep your car. But we have to stop prioritizing car traffic (and its problems) over everything else.
RIMR 3y ago
Seattle really is the perfect example. I love living here, but I can only afford to own real estate in the suburbs. But, the moment I buy something in the suburbs, I'll either have to buy a car, or take 3+ busses to get anywhere I want to go in my off-time, which just drives the cost of my decision to move up, or it harms my quality of life. For now I rent and hope that the cost of living doesn't screw me. If I could just bike to the nearest train station, and zip around everywhere I needed to go, the radius in which I would want to live would be much wider. Hopefully some of the light rail expansions will make things nicer, but a high speed rail would be a complete game-changer.

Slava_Propanei 3y ago

[dead]

GenerocUsername 3y ago

Available transit needs to include safe transit. The current bus and light rail situation has turned off swaths of the working class to support the dredges of the drug-addict class by their lack of fare-enforcement and other low-end enabling schemes that sound great on paper, but lead to complicated downstream chilling effects on the entire region.

cornercasechase 3y ago
Public transit is much safer than driving in your car. Someone skipping fare does not compare to even a light fender bender.
- dr_dshiv 3y ago
  Yeah, but it doesn’t feel like public transit is safe. That’s important. Public transit in other countries feels nice. In the US, you feel poor. Design, maybe, matters?
- denimnerd42 3y ago
  I think people mean a more irrational feeling of safety, rather than hard statistics. They don't want to see or be near those antisocial behaviors when they're taking transportation. Old people seem to suffer from this irrational feeling more than younger.
  - gottorf 3y ago
    "Irrational" is a strange way to describe it. People don't go around memorizing statistics of how likely someone who is exhibiting one kind of antisocial behavior (being obviously high, defecating in public, etc.) would be to engage in another kind of antisocial behavior (committing physical violence upon another person). And especially when the cost of making the wrong judgment is high, it's entirely rational to want to avoid it entirely. > Old people seem to suffer from this irrational feeling more than younger. Old people generally have more to lose. Young people, especially young males, are well known to think of themselves as invincible.
    - dkarl 3y ago
      > People don't go around memorizing statistics of how likely someone who is exhibiting one kind of antisocial behavior (being obviously high, defecating in public, etc.) would be to engage in another kind of antisocial behavior (committing physical violence upon another person) So you're saying people don't do a rational analysis of the risks... but calling it "irrational" is strange? Lots of human behavior is irrational. It doesn't have to be unusual to call it irrational. Overestimating the risks of one choice and therefore not getting the benefits of it, and incurring the higher risks of alternatives instead (for the elderly, being socially isolated at home or driving with impaired abilities) is the kind of irrationality that people would benefit from correcting, through education and changing social assumptions.
      - gottorf 3y ago
        > So you're saying people don't do a rational analysis of the risks... but calling it "irrational" is strange? GP's wording implied that rational people take public transit because they've done the risk-benefit analysis, and irrational people don't. I'm not sure if there's actual evidence behind such a risk-benefit analysis. > people would benefit from correcting, through education and changing social assumptions. If the goal is to attract more people to use public transit, it would be vastly more effective to police the occurrence of antisocial behavior on it, instead of telling people that it's actually OK, the chance of stepping on a puddle of piss or being shouted at incoherently or being pushed onto an oncoming train is much lower than they think, and is lower than the chance of being injured in a car crash while driving to work. Whether or not that is true (and I wouldn't mind seeing some cold, hard data on it), most people will prefer to roll the dice with their car. In other words: if you're a social architect keen on implementing your vision of a flourishing public transit system, it would be irrational not to account for people's loss aversion, whether or not that loss aversion itself is irrational.
- blairbeckwith 3y ago
  I think when most people use "safe" in this context, they mean "comfortable" or "psychologically comfortable". Nobody enjoys sitting beside someone tweaking and shitting themselves, even if it's perfectly safe.
  - rg111 3y ago
    Exactly. I don't ever mind public transport. I have used public transport in multiple areas of the planet. There are two quips: 1. You have to be there in someone else's time. You can't have 5 or 10 or 30 minutes if something comes up. 2. What you say. I don't want to rub my body with people who are wearing dirty clothes, smell, and has god-knows-what liquid on their clothes who might choose to cough without using their hands. (This has happened to me) So, I avoid public transport where there is this kind of intermingling. Fine with me where there are upper classes or similar in transport and it is enforced strictly.
    - ta1243 3y ago
      Do you avoid elevators?
      - hparadiz 3y ago
        Maybe not explicitly when traveling but when picking a place to live, sure.
      - anshorei 3y ago
        Elevators tend to be restricted to a specific group of people (inhabitants, customers, employees, etc.) in a way that public transport is not. If an elevator smells like urine, has suspicious stains or trash, chances are I'd look for an alternative. But it just so happens that the elevators I come across tend to be clean, unlike the public transport. And I say this as someone who still takes public transport a lot, but it's increasingly less comfortable.
      - HEmanZ 3y ago
        This isn’t a fair comparison, and you have to be arguing in bad faith to say this. I have never seen someone pull out a gun, tweak out and rip out the hair of the girl sitting in front of them, or shit themselves, on an elevator. I have seen all of these on public transport in Seattle. From another city, my younger brother was on the L in Chicago when a gun went off. Someone shot into the ceiling, no one got hurt, but holy hell idk if I could ride after that. I still like the light rail in Seattle and am a massive supporter of public transport, but I understand people who won’t take it because of the psychological threats.
- hifromLA 3y ago
  Psychological safety matters just as much as physical safety. If you think that you won’t see some shit on public transit I welcome you to come to LA and take the red line for a day.
  - brandall10 3y ago
    Having spent 6 months in NYC over the past year, you see shit on the subway lines all of the time, but normal people use it all the time. I think the latter is the important thing. It's not normalized as a viable means of transport in the land of the automobile.
    - amrocha 3y ago
      Buddy if you want to convince people to use public transit, saying a little shit is normal is not the way to do it btw I live in Tokyo and moved here explicitly because of public transit.
      - brandall10 3y ago
        That wasn’t the message - it’s the presence of having normal people. Public transport is just as popular in NYC as it is in Tokyo despite the shit. Just got back from 3.5 months in Europe (17 cities), and yes it’s vastly better there, far more clean and sane. Still, coming back to NYC I’m not not taking the subway despite spending nearly my whole life in SoCal. It’s easily the better option over owning a car if you’re in Manhattan/Brooklyn.
        amrocha 3y ago
        I see where you're coming from, but the "normal people" leave because of these incidents. If you want everyday people riding the train, you gotta make sure that the poorest people in society aren't so miserable that they're unpleasant to be around.
        brandall10 3y ago
- nomel 3y ago
  > Someone skipping fare This, obviously, isn't what raises fear in people. "Safer" for some statistics, like a car crash, but also much less safe for things like getting stabbed, spit on, confronted. Sure, it's somewhat rare on public transport, but they're exactly zero in my car, at freeway speeds. edit: A quick google search shows two stabbings, one slit throat, and a page full of fights, in my area, over the last two years. While the statistics are low, in terms of per person*miles, this real difference, and the 2hr vs 30 minute times, is what keeps people and families in cars. Fundamental changes are needed.
  - lapetitejort 3y ago
    I may never get stabbed in my car, but I will get brake-checked, cut off, buzzed, rammed, and shot at [0]. Driving is stressful and I dread every getting on the highway. [0]: https://everytownresearch.org/reports-of-road-rage-shootings-are-on-the-rise/ https://everytownresearch.org/reports-of-road-rage-shootings...
    - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
      You can still get shot on a train.
    - Wojtkie 3y ago
      Everytown is definitely a biased source to use
  - rapind 3y ago
    What's funny is over-policing public transit would probably take only a fraction of the resources that private transportation does.
  - dkarl 3y ago
    > two stabbings, one slit throat, and a page full of fights, in my area, over the last two years That's basically nothing next to car accidents. Car accident injuries can be pretty gruesome. Maybe the fundamental change that is needed is awareness of the risks of driving and the yearly death/mutilation toll in each community. (And the awareness that bigger and bigger SUVs with higher and higher bumpers is a zero-sum game.)
- cscurmudgeon 3y ago
  That’s a dishonest comparison. Skipping fare not same as a drug addled person hassling commuters.
  - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
    [flagged]
- stevenicr 3y ago
  I think it's important with discussions like these to include the city or area, and time period. I can say for sure that the subway in DC was better and safer than cars for the most part, when I was there many moons ago - However if you look at the people who are riding the bus in my current city, or at the times when I was in Vegas.. and I've heard the NY subway at night is nothing like the DC subway.. These discussions can have all people right and all people wrong when they are discussing how they view their apples to others oranges.
frozenport 3y ago
SF problems
- mholm 3y ago
  This is not just SF problems. These problems are _everywhere_ in the US, with just a reduction in other major hubs where transit is effective for the middle class.
  - frozenport 3y ago
    There are threshold effects. Going down into the bart tunnels is a decent into human misery, but in Chicago feel much safer because don't see people loitering.
cptskippy 3y ago
That's a public health issue that no one wants to address. We're completely ok with de-funding public healthcare and social services while complaining about the results.
diogenes4 3y ago
> The current bus and light rail situation has turned off swaths of the working class to support the dredges of the drug-addict class Tell me you never use public transit without telling me you never use public transit. This is so out of touch it reads like a rant from the chronicle.

jimt1234 3y ago

I've been told since childhood that the main obstacle to inexpensive public transit in the the majority of US is racism - keep those people in their neighborhood. I've never done any sort of research or anything, and even though it's depressing, it sounds plausible.

psd1 3y ago
Sprinkle in a dash of car-industry lobbying and suburban sprawl
bad_user 3y ago
I'm not a US citizen, and racism may be the issue. OTOH, given US's geography and culture of wide streets, suburbs, and driving around, it's pretty obvious that public transit is pricier than it is in Europe, similarly to broadband connection. As a European, I could also complain about terrible traffic congestion due to narrow streets in constant need of repair, or lacking parking space, which makes every car ride a source of stress. Your Uber is also dirt cheap compared to where I live.
- bobthepanda 3y ago
  The culture is manufactured though. It is hard or downright illegal to build traditional American towns or housing styles. (It also dates back only to the postwar era.)
fnimick 3y ago
It's very true. Look at the way "urban" is used as a dog whistle for certain groups of people. A bit of local history from where I live: Boston rapid transit was intended to extend to the northwest a considerable distance, putting more communities on the system and allowing easy, car-free commutes. It saw vociferous neighborhood opposition from groups who "didn't like the idea of increased traffic and certain urban elements entering their quiet suburban town." Sound familiar? https://boston.curbed.com/2014/2/13/10144086/the-red-line-stops-in-arlington-and-lexington https://boston.curbed.com/2014/2/13/10144086/the-red-line-st...

bad_user 3y ago

London is very expensive, driving Londoners out of the city. It's nice that they have public transport, but it's not helping much, unless you're saying that it could have been much worse. And despite being praised for public transport, the average commute time in London is bad. They're also not building much housing, affordable or otherwise, which means that it's only going to get worse.

lambdasquirrel 3y ago

I don’t know about that. There’s a whole lot of people in Bellingham who’ve been saying it’s unaffordable for them now.

eep_social 3y ago
Yep, I have family there and heard the same. The game changer is the stops that would inevitably be put up in places like Burlington, Mt Vernon, or Conway between Seattle and Bellingham. Smaller towns which are connected to the big city should be able to attract folks gp has in mind.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

UncleOxidant 3y ago

> Seattle is the perfect example. If we have high speed rail between Bellingham and Seattle it would dramatically change the dynamics of the housing situation in Seattle. It's not like Bellingham is affordable anymore. Median price is ~$650K. (People looking to escape effects of climate change in parts of the country that are becoming hotter are moving to places like Bellingham) Yes, high speed rail and other forms of public transit are needed, but we're still going to need to build a lot more housing units in those outlying areas.

seanmcdirmid 3y ago
Bellingham isn't very affordable, but Marysville and Darington are still kind of affordable. And those two places aren't that far north of Everett.
- UncleOxidant 3y ago
  Ok, but if high speed rail from Seattle to/from those towns was added they wouldn't stay affordable for very long. In order for that not to happen lots of housing units would need to be added to those areas.
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    Those places already growing at a steady clip. They aren't very desirable though. In high school, I lived in South Snohomish county (it was still just Bothell even though it wasn't in King Co). Within striking distance of Seattle, so it grew quickly. I had friends from Marysville and Darington however, they didn't like living in those places very much.

sillyfluke 3y ago

The constant whinging about NHS notwithstanding, I think London is actually a great place to be if you're 65+ and lucky enough to a have a roof over your head. From what I have seen, senior citizens are very active and proactive -- someone living there a few months a year can end up connecting with a walking group, bird watching group etc, where people are inviting and polite by nature. There's lots of free events, access to large parks and nature is possible using the rail network etc. In the US, senior citizens can be individually active, but I haven't come across the same level of proactive organizational behavior and openness to noobs and outsiders that I have come across in London. The prerequisite for such a thing of course is proper public transport.

bobthepanda 3y ago

Seattle is actually quite sprawly already for how small it is, by European standards. Bellingham is 140km away, just not a commutable distance in general. Seattle has quite a lot of room to densify. Density could double, and it would still be less dense than Queens, NY, which still has plenty of homes with garages and yards.

rajman187 3y ago

While I agree the public transit in the US is abysmal at best, I'm not sure the UK is a good measure anymore. Rail strikes and engineering work are happening with such frequency that getting around seems to take longer and longer. A 1+ hour commute to just travel 10 miles is pretty absurd. Insane cost overages and years of delays aside, the Elizabeth line has suffered from nearly 10% of all services being canceled in August. At one point I was needing to take the Northern line from Clapham and would have to wait 3-4 trains before I could squeeze on. The max I waited was 10. Then I moved away. Add to that infrastructure issues like Hammersmith and Wandsworth bridge closures and commuting becomes a soul crushing prospect. I don't know what the solution is but with such a high tax rate in the country you'd expect much better. Other European countries seem to have it figured out. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-66754481 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-66754481

sillyfluke 3y ago
Perhaps experiences like yours is why I was downvoted for my London comment. But we are talking relative to the US here, and I do believe there is no comparison. I also found the bus network rather extensive and frequent in the suburban areas, and not unpleasant compared to other countries. Senior citizens are also more flexible with their travel times and often have the luxury of avoiding rush hour Many western economic powerhouses of old seem to be facing the same infrastructure problems, whereas autocratic countries that are building everything from scratch appear to have their shit together by comparison. It's not good PR unfortunately.

ericmay 3y ago

It cannot be overstated how important getting transit right is and what an abject failure transit policy in the US has been. Cities can not efficiently scale with car-only infrastructure, and the long-term costs are too high. This doesn't mean "we all go live in skyscrapers" either, and in fact you can keep your car. But we have to stop prioritizing car traffic (and its problems) over everything else.

RIMR 3y ago

Seattle really is the perfect example. I love living here, but I can only afford to own real estate in the suburbs. But, the moment I buy something in the suburbs, I'll either have to buy a car, or take 3+ busses to get anywhere I want to go in my off-time, which just drives the cost of my decision to move up, or it harms my quality of life. For now I rent and hope that the cost of living doesn't screw me. If I could just bike to the nearest train station, and zip around everywhere I needed to go, the radius in which I would want to live would be much wider. Hopefully some of the light rail expansions will make things nicer, but a high speed rail would be a complete game-changer.