3 ms·

You've sort of given it away with the "smaller cities" thing. People who live in NYC don't want to live in a smaller American-style city with suburban sprawl.

You've sort of given it away with the "smaller cities" thing. People who live in NYC don't want to live in a smaller American-style city with suburban sprawl. (You've also glossed over the more painful statistic: for every lifetime-equivalent lost on mass transit inefficiencies, there are hundreds lost to gridlock in NYC. That number, already terrible, would be far worse without the city's mass transit -- you simply cannot support the kind of density NYC endeavors for with car-oriented development.)

cyberax 1y ago
I mean, I don't hide my despair at large cities. They're destroying the fabric of the Western civilization by acting as black holes for population. > You've also glossed over the more painful statistic: for every lifetime-equivalent lost on mass transit inefficiencies, there are hundreds lost to gridlock in NYC. Here's the thing. A well-designed human-oriented city like Houston has FASTER commutes than ANY similar-sized city in Europe. The fix for cities like NYC is to stop building them and start de-densifying them.
- masklinn 1y ago
  > well-designed human-oriented city like Houston Said no urban planner in the history of urban planning. Or NJB (https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54 https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54) > FASTER commutes than ANY similar-sized city in Europe. Houston ranks 7th worst traffic in the US. The internet tells me you’re boasting of 30mn for an “average 6 miles commute”. That’s bicycle distance and speed that you need to drive due to a broken city.
  - cyberax 1y ago
    > Said no urban planner in the history of urban planning. Or NJB (https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54 https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54) Wrong. Houston is a great example for planners who care about housing availability and the quality of life for the people. And not bike lanes and road diets. > Houston ranks 7th worst traffic in the US. Yes. And the 7th worst traffic in the US is STILL BETTER than any large European city's oh-so-great transit. Tells you volumes, doesn't it?
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- Earw0rm 1y ago
  You do know that cities are for things besides going from your suburban family home unit to your workplace and back again?
  - cyberax 1y ago
    Which "things"? Pretty much the only thing is the availability of bars and night clubs. And people past the age of 20-25 are typically not that interested in them. Anything else: museums, operas, theaters, etc. Take up an insignificant amount of time in the real life. For example, most NYC citizens go to museums exactly 0 times a year.
    - Earw0rm 1y ago
      Then why are they paying $3M for a condo? Because it's not 20-25 year olds doing that.
- Mawr 1y ago
  > Here's the thing. A well-designed human-oriented city like Houston has FASTER commutes than ANY similar-sized city in Europe. Didn't I debunk your nonsense "data" last time? Why are you repeating incorrect data when you've been corrected? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42648738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42648738
  - cyberax 1y ago
    No, you didn't. You googled the first numbers you could find and threw them over the wall. The official commute time (one direction) for Houston is in the Census. It was 27.6 minutes in the 2023 ACS: https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S0801?q=commuting&g=160XX00US4835000 https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S0801?q=commuting&... (data series: "Workers 16 years and over who did not work from home", "Mean travel time to work (minutes)", restriction by "Census place" = "Houston city, TX"). Make sure you're not looking at "Houston county", which is a small rural area with a population of 20000 people. And I was talking about the commute time in _large_ cities in Europe, comparable with Houston's population of 7 million. The best is Berlin, with 31 minutes. So I suppose you're going to apologize for providing the incorrect data?
- woodruffw 1y ago
  This framing that commute time matters more than anything else about a city seems facially incorrect. And once again, it glosses over the actual reality here: people living in dense cities want the benefits of dense living, and there’s no tractable way to maintain that while designing a city primarily for car traffic.
  - cyberax 1y ago
    > people living in dense cities want the benefits of dense living No, they don't. The majority of people in the US (more than 80-85%) want to live in individual homes in suburbs. Yet people _have_ to live in dense cities because that's where the jobs are.

cyberax 1y ago

I mean, I don't hide my despair at large cities. They're destroying the fabric of the Western civilization by acting as black holes for population. > You've also glossed over the more painful statistic: for every lifetime-equivalent lost on mass transit inefficiencies, there are hundreds lost to gridlock in NYC. Here's the thing. A well-designed human-oriented city like Houston has FASTER commutes than ANY similar-sized city in Europe. The fix for cities like NYC is to stop building them and start de-densifying them.

masklinn 1y ago
> well-designed human-oriented city like Houston Said no urban planner in the history of urban planning. Or NJB (https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54 https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54) > FASTER commutes than ANY similar-sized city in Europe. Houston ranks 7th worst traffic in the US. The internet tells me you’re boasting of 30mn for an “average 6 miles commute”. That’s bicycle distance and speed that you need to drive due to a broken city.
- cyberax 1y ago
  > Said no urban planner in the history of urban planning. Or NJB (https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54 https://youtu.be/uxykI30fS54) Wrong. Houston is a great example for planners who care about housing availability and the quality of life for the people. And not bike lanes and road diets. > Houston ranks 7th worst traffic in the US. Yes. And the 7th worst traffic in the US is STILL BETTER than any large European city's oh-so-great transit. Tells you volumes, doesn't it?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
Earw0rm 1y ago
You do know that cities are for things besides going from your suburban family home unit to your workplace and back again?
- cyberax 1y ago
  Which "things"? Pretty much the only thing is the availability of bars and night clubs. And people past the age of 20-25 are typically not that interested in them. Anything else: museums, operas, theaters, etc. Take up an insignificant amount of time in the real life. For example, most NYC citizens go to museums exactly 0 times a year.
  - Earw0rm 1y ago
    Then why are they paying $3M for a condo? Because it's not 20-25 year olds doing that.
Mawr 1y ago
> Here's the thing. A well-designed human-oriented city like Houston has FASTER commutes than ANY similar-sized city in Europe. Didn't I debunk your nonsense "data" last time? Why are you repeating incorrect data when you've been corrected? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42648738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42648738
- cyberax 1y ago
  No, you didn't. You googled the first numbers you could find and threw them over the wall. The official commute time (one direction) for Houston is in the Census. It was 27.6 minutes in the 2023 ACS: https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S0801?q=commuting&g=160XX00US4835000 https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S0801?q=commuting&... (data series: "Workers 16 years and over who did not work from home", "Mean travel time to work (minutes)", restriction by "Census place" = "Houston city, TX"). Make sure you're not looking at "Houston county", which is a small rural area with a population of 20000 people. And I was talking about the commute time in _large_ cities in Europe, comparable with Houston's population of 7 million. The best is Berlin, with 31 minutes. So I suppose you're going to apologize for providing the incorrect data?
woodruffw 1y ago
This framing that commute time matters more than anything else about a city seems facially incorrect. And once again, it glosses over the actual reality here: people living in dense cities want the benefits of dense living, and there’s no tractable way to maintain that while designing a city primarily for car traffic.
- cyberax 1y ago
  > people living in dense cities want the benefits of dense living No, they don't. The majority of people in the US (more than 80-85%) want to live in individual homes in suburbs. Yet people _have_ to live in dense cities because that's where the jobs are.