4 ms·

Culture doesn't just "change", forces shape it. Culture moves towards a suburban, car oriented culture when the local governments pay (at great taxpayer expense

Culture doesn't just "change", forces shape it. Culture moves towards a suburban, car oriented culture when the local governments pay (at great taxpayer expense) for an overbuilt highway system to quickly get people in and out of it.

Cloudy 11y ago
The attraction of suburban life vs dense urban downtown would be mostly the same if public transit routes were just as available. (Although I would imagine the availability of easier transportation would certainly increase restaurant & entertainment offerings from outside commuters who don't normally have car access) Some people prefer their peaceful cookie cut house and desire nothing much to do with the big cities. More often then not it's zoning, job availability, and affordability.
- BrainInAJar 11y ago
  I'd wager what people actually prefer would be wide open fields where everything you see in front of you is yours but they can't afford that, hence they settle on a suburban lawn. Economics drive suburbanization, not any sort of actual human desire. If the economics skew away from the heavy subsidies for suburbs, people stop expanding them.
  - hueving 11y ago
    That's not really true, at least with many people that desire suburbia that I talk to. They want a house in a nice neighborhood with decent restaurants and shopping within a reasonable driving distance. It's not that common to want wide open fields in front of you. On top of that, it's not that expensive to get a big chunk of land in the middle of nowhere.
hueving 11y ago
Consider what you just said. People clearly aren't that interested in being downtown if all it takes is a better Highway system to let them move out. What you are describing is a culture that already dislikes being downtown but is only there because the transit sucks. That's not a sign of a healthy downtown.
- BrainInAJar 11y ago
  All it takes is a taxpayer subsidized highway to move out. How much do people want to live in the suburbs? Enough to pay their own way to do so? Including the highways as well as the efficiency cost of eg, electricity and plumbing?
  - NoPiece 11y ago
    Highways are bidirectional, so they only pull people out of downtowns if they already wanted out, whether it be for financial or personal reasons.
- philwelch 11y ago
  Highways occupy startling amounts of space. For instance, the entire city of Florence takes up the same amount of space as a single cloverleaf interchange in Atlanta: http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/you-cant-set-shop-side-expressway.html http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/you-cant-set-shop-sid... The very presence of freeways drives people away because they are noisy eyesores and impediments to local travel. In Seattle, I-5 cuts across the street grid and separates downtown from Capital Hill and First Hill, while the Alaskan Way Viaduct cuts downtown off from the waterfront. If both of these were removed (I-5 could take a bypass route around the Seattle city center using what is now I-405), downtown Seattle would be much more livable and would have better traffic on account of being able to reconnect the street grid.
  - hueving 11y ago
    You don't put a cloverleaf interchange downtown so that comparison is dumb. An international airport takes up way more space and cities still seem to have them. See why that's stupid? The presence of freeways does not drive away people. If that were true there would be no freeways in any populated location. If you remove all freeways it would impede people's ability to visit and make the downtown less crowded. Perhaps that's your intention.
    - philwelch 11y ago

Cloudy 11y ago

The attraction of suburban life vs dense urban downtown would be mostly the same if public transit routes were just as available. (Although I would imagine the availability of easier transportation would certainly increase restaurant & entertainment offerings from outside commuters who don't normally have car access) Some people prefer their peaceful cookie cut house and desire nothing much to do with the big cities. More often then not it's zoning, job availability, and affordability.

BrainInAJar 11y ago
I'd wager what people actually prefer would be wide open fields where everything you see in front of you is yours but they can't afford that, hence they settle on a suburban lawn. Economics drive suburbanization, not any sort of actual human desire. If the economics skew away from the heavy subsidies for suburbs, people stop expanding them.
- hueving 11y ago
  That's not really true, at least with many people that desire suburbia that I talk to. They want a house in a nice neighborhood with decent restaurants and shopping within a reasonable driving distance. It's not that common to want wide open fields in front of you. On top of that, it's not that expensive to get a big chunk of land in the middle of nowhere.

hueving 11y ago

Consider what you just said. People clearly aren't that interested in being downtown if all it takes is a better Highway system to let them move out. What you are describing is a culture that already dislikes being downtown but is only there because the transit sucks. That's not a sign of a healthy downtown.

BrainInAJar 11y ago
All it takes is a taxpayer subsidized highway to move out. How much do people want to live in the suburbs? Enough to pay their own way to do so? Including the highways as well as the efficiency cost of eg, electricity and plumbing?
- NoPiece 11y ago
  Highways are bidirectional, so they only pull people out of downtowns if they already wanted out, whether it be for financial or personal reasons.
philwelch 11y ago
Highways occupy startling amounts of space. For instance, the entire city of Florence takes up the same amount of space as a single cloverleaf interchange in Atlanta: http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/you-cant-set-shop-side-expressway.html http://www.treehugger.com/urban-design/you-cant-set-shop-sid... The very presence of freeways drives people away because they are noisy eyesores and impediments to local travel. In Seattle, I-5 cuts across the street grid and separates downtown from Capital Hill and First Hill, while the Alaskan Way Viaduct cuts downtown off from the waterfront. If both of these were removed (I-5 could take a bypass route around the Seattle city center using what is now I-405), downtown Seattle would be much more livable and would have better traffic on account of being able to reconnect the street grid.
- hueving 11y ago
  You don't put a cloverleaf interchange downtown so that comparison is dumb. An international airport takes up way more space and cities still seem to have them. See why that's stupid? The presence of freeways does not drive away people. If that were true there would be no freeways in any populated location. If you remove all freeways it would impede people's ability to visit and make the downtown less crowded. Perhaps that's your intention.
  - philwelch 11y ago