Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: What about the weather?

Expand Messages
  • Erik Sandblom
    ... Are you sure? This site asserts that 40% of US urban trips are shorter than two miles (3,2km). That takes 10-15 minutes to ride.
    Message 1 of 30 , Feb 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "manfrommars_43" <jabailo@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Contrast that with America will is among the less dense...where we
      > typically live 30, 50, or more miles from our workplaces.


      Are you sure? This site asserts that 40% of US urban trips are
      shorter than two miles (3,2km). That takes 10-15 minutes to ride.

      http://www.2milechallenge.com/

      Assume you can ride up to 10km or 30 minutes, and ad in a Brompton
      folding bike or similar, and very many commutes can be quite
      painlessly shifted away from cars using a combination of bikes and/or
      public transport. That's today, with the public transit and bike
      paths available now. Assume some investment in more public transit,
      bike paths and traffic calming, and you can do even more.

      For those who thusly don't need the car for commuting, you can sell
      it and get by on rentals and carpooling. That means you potentially
      save a lot of money and can move to a better location with shorter
      commutes and a better lifestyle.

      Erik Sandblom
    • Richard Risemberg
      ... Indeed, and there are much cheaper folders than Bromptons--Dahon has vastly expanded its line, and you see them all over LA, which is among the least
      Message 2 of 30 , Feb 3, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        On Feb 2, 2008, at 8:59 PM, Erik Sandblom wrote:

        > > Contrast that with America will is among the less dense...where we
        > > typically live 30, 50, or more miles from our workplaces.
        >
        > Are you sure? This site asserts that 40% of US urban trips are
        > shorter than two miles (3,2km). That takes 10-15 minutes to ride.
        >
        > http://www.2milechallenge.com/
        >
        > Assume you can ride up to 10km or 30 minutes, and ad in a Brompton
        > folding bike or similar, and very many commutes can be quite
        > painlessly shifted away from cars using a combination of bikes and/or
        > public transport. That's today, with the public transit and bike
        > paths available now. Assume some investment in more public transit,
        > bike paths and traffic calming, and you can do even more.

        Indeed, and there are much cheaper folders than Bromptons--Dahon has
        vastly expanded its line, and you see them all over LA, which is
        among the least bike-friendly city in the US. In fact, you see bikes
        of all sorts in increasing numbers, and--what I find most
        encouraging--a great number of them being ridden by pudgy middle-aged
        and older folks, with rear bags carrying purchases, even in cold and
        often enough even in rain.

        Parts of LA, such as Pico-Union, have higher population densities
        than NYC.

        It's the far suburbs that are untenable--but the suburban paradigm is
        a travesty of habitation, unsustainable, unsociable, and a drain on
        civic treasuries. Carfree.com proposes new ways of shaping cities so
        that we are not compelled to be wasteful.

        However, all major cities can reduce car usage within their present
        infrastructures by very simple means. Here are some articles of mien
        on the issue:

        http://bicyclefixation.com/switch.htm
        http://bicyclefixation.com/convenience.htm
        http://bicyclefixation.com/suburbs.htm
        http://www.bicyclefixation.com/mainstreet.htm

        Rick
        --
        Richard Risemberg
        http://www.bicyclefixation.com
        http://www.newcolonist.com
        http://www.rickrise.com







        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Laura
        I think why the whater isn t a problem.In Brasil, for example, a tropical continet, bikes are used for esport, in the weekends . I say this because I live in
        Message 3 of 30 , Feb 3, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          I think why the whater isn't a problem.In Brasil, for example, a tropical
          continet, bikes are used for esport, in the weekends . I say this because I
          live in Porto Alegre. The city is relative plane. But we doesn't have the
          culture to use bike whit a modal transport.
          Further more: we doesn't have streets designed for bikes, or bikepark.
          Other reason is the insecurity on the traffic. The mortality of the
          motorcyclist growing 83% in for years , in the same time the deaths of
          pedestrian decreased 9%.
          Estatistics of the bikers are inaccurate, hardly existed.
          <http://noticias.terra.com.br/brasil/interna/0,,OI2287425-EI306,00.htm>

          Look ours "ciclovia" at this picture

          Laura


          2008/2/3, Richard Risemberg <rickrise@...>:
          >
          > On Feb 2, 2008, at 8:59 PM, Erik Sandblom wrote:
          >
          > > > Contrast that with America will is among the less dense...where we
          > > > typically live 30, 50, or more miles from our workplaces.
          > >
          > > Are you sure? This site asserts that 40% of US urban trips are
          > > shorter than two miles (3,2km). That takes 10-15 minutes to ride.
          > >
          > > http://www.2milechallenge.com/
          > >
          > > Assume you can ride up to 10km or 30 minutes, and ad in a Brompton
          > > folding bike or similar, and very many commutes can be quite
          > > painlessly shifted away from cars using a combination of bikes and/or
          > > public transport. That's today, with the public transit and bike
          > > paths available now. Assume some investment in more public transit,
          > > bike paths and traffic calming, and you can do even more.
          >
          > Indeed, and there are much cheaper folders than Bromptons--Dahon has
          > vastly expanded its line, and you see them all over LA, which is
          > among the least bike-friendly city in the US. In fact, you see bikes
          > of all sorts in increasing numbers, and--what I find most
          > encouraging--a great number of them being ridden by pudgy middle-aged
          > and older folks, with rear bags carrying purchases, even in cold and
          > often enough even in rain.
          >
          > Parts of LA, such as Pico-Union, have higher population densities
          > than NYC.
          >
          > It's the far suburbs that are untenable--but the suburban paradigm is
          > a travesty of habitation, unsustainable, unsociable, and a drain on
          > civic treasuries. Carfree.com proposes new ways of shaping cities so
          > that we are not compelled to be wasteful.
          >
          > However, all major cities can reduce car usage within their present
          > infrastructures by very simple means. Here are some articles of mien
          > on the issue:
          >
          > http://bicyclefixation.com/switch.htm
          > http://bicyclefixation.com/convenience.htm
          > http://bicyclefixation.com/suburbs.htm
          > http://www.bicyclefixation.com/mainstreet.htm
          >
          > Rick
          > --
          > Richard Risemberg
          > http://www.bicyclefixation.com
          > http://www.newcolonist.com
          > http://www.rickrise.com
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Don
          ... Well, I want to reiterate my initial question, with clarification, I guess. I understand that bicycling *is* possible in harsh weather, and that there are
          Message 4 of 30 , Feb 6, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Richard Risemberg
            <rickrise@...> wrote:
            >
            > Ain't nothin' better than merino wool for hot or cold weather. And
            > ti's made of grass! (With the mediation of sheep, of course.)
            >
            > I've used the wool gabardine bicycling knickers I designed for
            > weather up to 100F, and my customers have worn them bicycling down to
            > 22F (lower with liners). Same garment. No synthetic, nor any
            > cotton, can match that. Lets you wear fewer clothes in any weather,
            > for any type of exertion, and as Erik pointed out it takes it forever
            > to get smelly. No itch either.
            >
            > And wool keeps you warm when it gets wet, unlike any other fabric.
            >
            > It's almost a necessity in a human-powered transit mode. And back
            > when everyone walked everywhere, it was the universal fabric--though
            > cotton was available and cheaper.
            >
            > Rick
            >
            > On Feb 2, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Erik Sandblom wrote:
            >
            > > Merino wool is a good base layer because it doesn't absorb water and
            > > sweat as much as cotton, and when wet or sweaty it doesn't lose its
            > > insulation as much as cotton does. It also gets less smelly compared
            > > to synthetic base layers, while being almost as soft and comfortable
            > > as dry cotton
            >
            > --
            > Richard Risemberg
            > http://www.bicyclefixation.com
            > http://www.newcolonist.com
            > http://www.rickrise.com
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >

            Well, I want to reiterate my initial question, with clarification, I
            guess. I understand that bicycling *is* possible in harsh weather,
            and that there are all kinds of clothing and equipment options, but my
            question/prompt is not about the people who do or will ride a bike.
            While there definitely can be more people riding than currently do,
            there is a percentage of the population who *can't* ride, or won't,
            for one reason or another. This is the part of the population I am
            thinking about.

            Understand that this is not intended as an argument against biking or
            walking; instead it is a request for comment and discussion about what
            can be designed to fully accommodate as many people as possible in all
            types of weather in some reasonable way. i.e. Filling in the gaps so
            we can provide support for the largest possible percentage of the
            population in a carfree environment, thereby making the idea more
            appealing to more people.

            Ideas already in the mix
            - bike paths, racks, change areas, showers, etc.
            - walking paths, parks, with short walks to transit
            - transit lines that are efficient and accommodating and safe

            Weather/temperature/nighttime ?
            - covered walk ways?
            - over/underground pathways; subway without the train?
            - other people moving systems?

            What do you know, what do you think?

            Don
          • Tuomo Valkonen
            ... Skis. I would love to move relatively short (and not too hilly... but there s already a well-tested solution to that) distances by skis in the winter[*].
            Message 5 of 30 , Feb 7, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              On 2008-02-07, Don <fsstudio@...> wrote:
              > Weather/temperature/nighttime ?
              > - covered walk ways?
              > - over/underground pathways; subway without the train?
              > - other people moving systems?

              Skis.

              I would love to move relatively short (and not too hilly... but
              there's already a well-tested solution to that) distances by skis
              in the winter[*]. Skiing is faster than walking, but not as chilly
              as bicycling, demanding more warming motion (unfortunately meaning
              it's also more sweaty business). Another nice thing about skis is
              that it's easy to carry them in (the hypothetical) public transport,
              unlike bicycles. They also don't demand so much "parking" space,
              if any.

              But presently skiing has been reduced from an utility sport into mere
              entertainment and fitness even more so than bicycling: you can't well
              ski anywhere in cities (around here anyway), because all the paths are
              gritted, and intersect the dry asphalt where the metal cages live.

              Given a wide bicycle bouleward as in the Reference Design, I think
              even half (one lane) of it should be reserved for skiing in the
              winter (skating style space in the middle, plus classic tracks to
              each direction on both sides of it), assuming there's going to be
              any winters anymore. On other streets there could also be at least
              a single classic skiing track, but skating style demands too much
              space in most places.

              ---

              [*] I define winter as "when there's snow". These past two years
              there hasn't been much of a winter. Even now it's about +1C and
              something wet is falling from the skies, wheras typically the
              temperatures at this time of the year can reach -30C or so. One
              really annoying effect of snowless non-winter is that the metal
              cages still have studded tyres under them, and without snow and
              ice for the studs to bite into, and snow to act as a dampener,
              the noise levels are simply infernal.

              At those -30C tempatures, and over relatively short distances (of
              less than 5km or so), I've actually found the major challenges to
              bicycling to be not the so much the cold as such, but a) failing
              equipment, such a crankarms cracking, b) having to leave the bicycle
              outside for the day, so that the gears, breaks, and the chain
              freeze over, c) trying to avoid losing the breath, because
              breathing gets difficult in the cold air.

              In fact, the worst time for bicycling is when the snow starts
              melting, which hasn't recently been restricted to the spring.
              Then you're practically swimming in the slush, because road
              maintenance takes precedence if there's any multi-use path
              maintenance at all -- no proper bicycle paths here -- and the
              slush from the road just gets pushed on these paths. Also
              during the winter the snow from the road is piled on the
              sides of the multi-use path, making it even narrower, and
              adding to the slush.

              --
              Tuomo
            • Doug Salzmann
              Folks, we need to get back to the real world, here. In the real world, some 30% to 40% of the population (depending upon what studies you accept) is at least
              Message 6 of 30 , Feb 7, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Folks, we need to get back to the real world, here.

                In the real world, some 30% to 40% of the population (depending upon
                what studies you accept) is at least partially disabled
                (mobility-impaired) for some period of time during an average year.

                As the saying goes, it happens; and it doesn't take much.

                How far will you ski with a raging headache? Cycle with a sprained
                ankle, or on a creaky day when you're 83 years old? Roller skate in a
                buffalo herd?

                The answer is, "Not very far," and should probably taken as about the
                same as the "design distance" between home or work and the nearest
                transit halt.

                Cycling, skiing, small-wheeled transport -- all are fine for those who
                desire to, and are able to, use them (provided they don't threaten or
                intrude upon pedestrian movement), but they cannot be relied upon by an
                entire population.

                The answers to the carfree mobility problem are in the design of the
                built environment and the design and operation of the transit system.
                Both are covered rather comprehensively in Joel's book.


                -Doug


                Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
                >
                >
                > On 2008-02-07, Don <fsstudio@...
                > <mailto:fsstudio%40suscom-maine.net>> wrote:
                > > Weather/temperature/nighttime ?
                > > - covered walk ways?
                > > - over/underground pathways; subway without the train?
                > > - other people moving systems?
                >
                > Skis.
                >
                > I would love to move relatively short (and not too hilly... but
                > there's already a well-tested solution to that) distances by skis
                > in the winter[*]. Skiing is faster than walking, but not as chilly
                > as bicycling, demanding more warming motion (unfortunately meaning
                > it's also more sweaty business). Another nice thing about skis is
                > that it's easy to carry them in (the hypothetical) public transport,
                > unlike bicycles. They also don't demand so much "parking" space,
                > if any.



                --
                ==========================
                Doug Salzmann
                Post Office Box 378
                Tiburon, California 94920
                USA

                <doug@...>
              • Richard Risemberg
                ... Agreed. However, I think the original poster was referring to a human-powered city, which would indicate no mass transit either. Not practical, except for
                Message 7 of 30 , Feb 7, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Feb 7, 2008, at 9:28 AM, Doug Salzmann wrote:

                  > The answers to the carfree mobility problem are in the design of the
                  > built environment and the design and operation of the transit system.
                  > Both are covered rather comprehensively in Joel's book.


                  Agreed. However, I think the original poster was referring to a
                  human-powered city, which would indicate no mass transit either. Not
                  practical, except for fairly small villages.

                  Also (and this is something I have gone over on the Urban Ecology
                  list at length), we have to consider that survival and cultural
                  continuation require that we live in harmony with the weather. This
                  means traveling less in winter, not requiring accommodation so that
                  we can travel when we are sick or injured, not having cheap tomatoes
                  in January in the northern hemisphere, etc. Maybe not living in some
                  places that just require to much energy comfortably to accommodate
                  humans.

                  On the other hand, a largely human-powered city, which means in real
                  life mostly walking and bicycling, has been shown statistically to
                  reduce disability throughout life. In Japan and northern Europe,
                  people bicycle quite unheroically through the winter at advanced
                  ages, as well as very young ages.

                  And even now, even in the US, cyclists live longer and are disabled
                  less frequently than the general population, despite the perception
                  of inconvenience and danger. If I recall the Fed's stats on
                  accidents correctly, the death rate per million miles traveled is
                  very slightly less for cyclists than for motorists.

                  In Copenhagen, where well over 30% of all utility trips are done on
                  bicycles, and no one wears helmets, there were only six deaths from
                  cycling accidents in 2006. Copenhageners cycle over 1,000,000 kms
                  daily on average. This despite snow, rain, cold, and cars. Only 17%
                  of Copenhageners cycle for "exercise or recreation"; the rest is
                  utility riding.

                  Here's a link to the (PDF) report from Copenhagen's city government:
                  http://www.sfbike.org/download/copenhagen/bicycle_account_2006.pdf

                  There is a tram system there; does anyone on this list know whether
                  they have a metro?

                  Rick
                  --
                  Richard Risemberg
                  http://www.bicyclefixation.com
                  http://www.newcolonist.com
                  http://www.rickrise.com







                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Erik Sandblom
                  ... on ... from ... 17% ... whether ... They have a lovely new driverless metro, and you can even take bikes on it! Full size, non-folding, perfectly normal
                  Message 8 of 30 , Feb 7, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Richard Risemberg
                    <rickrise@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > In Copenhagen, where well over 30% of all utility trips are done
                    on
                    > bicycles, and no one wears helmets, there were only six deaths
                    from
                    > cycling accidents in 2006. Copenhageners cycle over 1,000,000 kms
                    > daily on average. This despite snow, rain, cold, and cars. Only
                    17%
                    > of Copenhageners cycle for "exercise or recreation"; the rest is
                    > utility riding.
                    >
                    > Here's a link to the (PDF) report from Copenhagen's city government:
                    > http://www.sfbike.org/download/copenhagen/bicycle_account_2006.pdf
                    >
                    > There is a tram system there; does anyone on this list know
                    whether
                    > they have a metro?


                    They have a lovely new driverless metro, and you can even take bikes
                    on it! Full size, non-folding, perfectly normal bikes: Pictures:

                    http://eriksandblom.blogspot.com/2007/12/kbenhavn-2.html
                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro

                    Erik Sandblom
                  • Erik Sandblom
                    ... upon ... This is news to me. Where can I read more about it? Not having read the studies you refer to, I suspect this thinking is part of a mentality which
                    Message 9 of 30 , Feb 7, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Doug Salzmann <doug@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > Folks, we need to get back to the real world, here.
                      >
                      > In the real world, some 30% to 40% of the population (depending
                      upon
                      > what studies you accept) is at least partially disabled
                      > (mobility-impaired) for some period of time during an average year.



                      This is news to me. Where can I read more about it?

                      Not having read the studies you refer to, I suspect this thinking is
                      part of a mentality which says that self-locomotion like walking,
                      cycling or skiing is terribly strenuous and tiring. I find I can do
                      15-30 minutes of gentle walking or cycling per day, even if I have a
                      fever. It makes me more tired than when I'm not sick, but what
                      doesn't? If I can't even do that, I don't have the energy to leave
                      the apartment anyway.

                      Cycling along a bike path with little or no car traffic is hardly
                      more strenuous than riding a crowded, noisy subway train and having
                      to stand and hold on.

                      Another suspicion I have is that people might not connect/listen to
                      their bodies to determine how much effort they can afford while sick.
                      I can see lying down for five minutes at work if you cycled there
                      with a fever. That's a good way to check that you don't overextend
                      yourself. If you fall asleep deeply, you probably needed to sleep :-)

                      Skiing to work is not as far-fetched as it sounds. In Ottawa, Canada,
                      the canal freezes and people can skate to work.
                      http://www.ottawakiosk.com/skating.html
                      http://www.google.com/search?q=ottawa+skate+to+work


                      > Cycling, skiing, small-wheeled transport -- all are fine for those
                      who
                      > desire to, and are able to, use them (provided they don't threaten
                      or
                      > intrude upon pedestrian movement), but they cannot be relied upon
                      by an
                      > entire population.
                      >
                      > The answers to the carfree mobility problem are in the design of
                      the
                      > built environment and the design and operation of the transit
                      system.
                      > Both are covered rather comprehensively in Joel's book.


                      As I recall, the book doesn't mention people who are sick. Or does it
                      mention electric wheelchairs? It does mention the 760m diametre of
                      each district and that going anywhere will require 5-10 minutes of
                      walking plus up to 25 minutes of riding the subway. I believe this is
                      comparable to 10-20 minutes of walking, cycling or skiing. 20 minutes
                      of sedate cycling will get you about five km or three miles. 40% of
                      urban travel in the USA is shorter than two miles.
                      http://www.2milechallenge.com/home.html

                      So I believe cycling, walking and skiing has potential even when you
                      are sick with a fever.

                      Erik Sandblom
                    • Don
                      ... . I want to clarify that I didn t intend for this discussion to apply only to places without mass transit. Not at all. That is just one of the many
                      Message 10 of 30 , Feb 9, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >
                        > Agreed. However, I think the original poster was referring to a
                        > human-powered city, which would indicate no mass transit either. Not
                        > practical, except for fairly small villages.
                        .
                        I want to clarify that I didn't intend for this discussion to apply
                        only to places without mass transit. Not at all. That is just one of
                        the many destinations that must be reachable by walking/biking.


                        > Cycling, skiing, small-wheeled transport -- all are fine for those
                        > who desire to, and are able to, use them (provided they don't
                        > threaten or intrude upon pedestrian movement), but they cannot be
                        > relied upon by an entire population.

                        This is right to my point and the crux of my question. All that
                        everyone here has said about the ability to bike in weather, the
                        benefits to general health, the percentage of this or that in whatever
                        city, are all very true and very important. But Doug gets the
                        question. What about everyone else, no matter what percentage they
                        are? Everyone lives here (wherever we are), and, again, I wonder
                        about what accommodations have been considered for times when, by
                        choice or necessity, walking/biking is not the mode of choice.. I am
                        really fishing for alternatives for inescapable hinderances like
                        weather or disability or age. I wanted to pose the question and throw
                        my ideas out there to invite others' creative thoughts and
                        discoveries, not just rationale for ped/bike use, which needs no
                        justification.

                        > Here's a link to the (PDF) report from Copenhagen's city government:
                        > http://www.sfbike.org/download/copenhagen/bicycle_account_2006.pdf
                        .
                        .
                        > They have a lovely new driverless metro, and you can even take bikes
                        > on it! Full size, non-folding, perfectly normal bikes: Pictures:
                        >
                        > http://eriksandblom.blogspot.com/2007/12/kbenhavn-2.html
                        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro

                        Thanks for the links. The Copenhagen bike pdf is very interesting.
                        Great metro idea! (Copenhagen seems to really have its sh*t together
                        on this!) Light rail is a key element in the granularity of
                        transportation infrastructure. I have seen other references to 'people
                        movers', an even more fine grained mass transit solution, but possibly
                        too expensive in many cases.

                        Another weather interdiction strategy I saw recently, right out of
                        antiquity (duh), was to include arcades along pedestrian ways.

                        Don
                      • Richard Risemberg
                        ... That s what community and family are for, and social and government structures that value help given to the incapacitated--and values it not only in
                        Message 11 of 30 , Feb 10, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Feb 9, 2008, at 8:27 PM, Don wrote:

                          > But Doug gets the
                          > question. What about everyone else, no matter what percentage they
                          > are? Everyone lives here (wherever we are), and, again, I wonder
                          > about what accommodations have been considered for times when, by
                          > choice or necessity, walking/biking is not the mode of choice


                          That's what community and family are for, and social and government
                          structures that value help given to the incapacitated--and values it
                          not only in speeches but in hard cash, say, in payments to family
                          members who are helping an aged relative or disabled child, or to
                          caregivers who can push a wheelchair (perhaps a wheelchair that
                          doubles as a bicycle trailer), without the air of disparagement
                          towards such helpers, whether voluntary or paid, that the present
                          competitive society imposes.

                          Anyway, it's way easier to get a wheelchair onto any metro train here
                          in LA than it is to get it into a car. In fact, it's easier to get it
                          onto a bus equipped with the (required) lift than to jockey it into a
                          car, and then get your disabled self in to drive it.

                          And as a motorcyclist throughout my twenties, I've done crutch time too.

                          Rick
                          --
                          Richard Risemberg
                          http://www.bicyclefixation.com
                          http://www.newcolonist.com
                          http://www.rickrise.com







                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • kyle3054
                          ... I was recently told by a person that public transport will never be widely accepted because it can never be door-to-door. I said, it can never be
                          Message 12 of 30 , Feb 16, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            "Erik Sandblom" <eriksandblom@...> wrote:

                            > Not having read the studies you refer to, I suspect this thinking is
                            > part of a mentality which says that self-locomotion like walking,
                            > cycling or skiing is terribly strenuous and tiring.

                            I was recently told by a person that public transport will never be
                            widely accepted because "it can never be door-to-door." I said, "it
                            can never be door-to-door, but in most of a city it should be able to
                            get you within 1km of where you want to go, 15 minutes' walk is not
                            going to cause you great suffering."

                            Cheers,
                            Kyle
                            http://greenwithagun.blogspot.com/
                          • Christopher Miller
                            When you really think about door to door transport, it really turns out to be something of a canard. Sure, we endlessly hear from those who fervently believe
                            Message 13 of 30 , Feb 16, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              When you really think about "door to door" transport, it really turns
                              out to be something of a canard.

                              Sure, we endlessly hear from those who fervently believe in the
                              advantages of private automobiles that they are so much more
                              "convenient" and get you from door to door etc. Fact is, in most
                              cases, the only door you are more or less assured of getting to
                              directly with a car is either your suburban detached home or your in-
                              town duplex or triplex. If you live iin an apartment building you
                              have to travel between your door and either the parking garage or
                              where it is sitting out there in the parking lot or somewhere most
                              likely down the street. And when it comes to directions, whether you
                              are shopping at a mall, going to work or visiting someone, most of
                              the time you have to park it way away from the "door" in question and
                              walk for a minute or two between the car and said entrance, or if you
                              are in town, you have to park somewhere down the road, away on
                              another nearby street, or in a parking lot some way away and -- again
                              -- walk the distance to the door at the end of your itinerary. Which
                              is more enjoyable/taxing, I wonder, a three or four minute walk
                              between the bus/tram/metro stop and your house/shopping/work/school,
                              or a probably equivalent walk between your car and a similar
                              destination?

                              To look briefly at the flip side of the coin, public transit does not
                              necessarily entail long walks to or from the stop: in many cases, you
                              do end up pretty close to your destination door the way most bus
                              stops are spaced (at least in more built up areas). And of course, by
                              bicycle or other human powered transport modes, you have a way better
                              chance of starting from the origin door and ending up pretty close to
                              the destination door, and in where you can combine this with public
                              transit, the advantage gets even better for longer distances.

                              There certainly is a "by the door" advantage for drivers living in
                              relatively low density housing, but I would venture to say that the
                              "by the door" advantage is probably with public transit users once in
                              town...



                              Anyone seeing weaknesses in my viewpoint is of course welcome to
                              challenge them, but I think this contrary viewpoint is worth
                              following up: has anyone actually done studies of relative "door to
                              door" convenience of different transportation modes, taking into
                              account the nature of the home base and the destination?


                              On 16-Feb-08, at 6:29 AM, kyle3054 wrote:

                              > "Erik Sandblom" <eriksandblom@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > > Not having read the studies you refer to, I suspect this thinking is
                              > > part of a mentality which says that self-locomotion like walking,
                              > > cycling or skiing is terribly strenuous and tiring.
                              >
                              > I was recently told by a person that public transport will never be
                              > widely accepted because "it can never be door-to-door." I said, "it
                              > can never be door-to-door, but in most of a city it should be able to
                              > get you within 1km of where you want to go, 15 minutes' walk is not
                              > going to cause you great suffering."
                              >
                              > Cheers,
                              > Kyle
                              > http://greenwithagun.blogspot.com/
                              >


                              Christopher Miller
                              Montreal QC Canada



                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • manfrommars_43
                              ... Except when you are transporting things such as groceries, furniture, clothing and so on. The car is not just a people transport, it s a truck for bringing
                              Message 14 of 30 , Feb 16, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "kyle3054" <KyleSchuant@...> wrote:

                                > as recently told by a person that public transport will never be
                                > widely accepted because "it can never be door-to-door." I said, "it
                                > can never be door-to-door, but in most of a city it should be able to
                                > get you within 1km of where you want to go, 15 minutes' walk is not
                                > going to cause you great suffering."

                                Except when you are transporting things such as groceries, furniture,
                                clothing and so on.

                                The car is not just a people transport, it's a truck for bringing in
                                the goods to the home.

                                That's one of the big omissions in thinking in carfree design, they
                                are not accounting for the vast economic efficiencies of letting
                                individuals make the last mile transport of goods to the home. This
                                has lead to very efficient constructs such as the warehouse store.
                              • J.H. Crawford
                                ... A week spent in Manhattan would reveal that most people don t use cars to transport groceries and clothing. (Most people don t even have cars.) Small carts
                                Message 15 of 30 , Feb 16, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  A recent posting says, regarding public transport convenience:

                                  >Except when you are transporting things such as groceries, furniture,
                                  >clothing and so on.

                                  A week spent in Manhattan would reveal that most people
                                  don't use cars to transport groceries and clothing. (Most
                                  people don't even have cars.) Small carts are used for heavy
                                  loads of groceries, and furniture is delivered.

                                  >The car is not just a people transport, it's a truck for bringing in
                                  >the goods to the home.

                                  It's one way to do it, yes.

                                  >That's one of the big omissions in thinking in carfree design, they
                                  >are not accounting for the vast economic efficiencies of letting
                                  >individuals make the last mile transport of goods to the home. This
                                  >has lead to very efficient constructs such as the warehouse store.

                                  Actually, the big box stores are very INefficient, because they
                                  require people to drive vast distances to use them. (They cannot
                                  survive without huge catchment areas.) So, they offer very low
                                  prices, but at the cost of externalizing huge transport costs
                                  to the larger society. WalMart's "greening" is just window dressing.
                                  The only way to green WalMart is to close it.

                                  Best,

                                  Joel




                                  ----- ### -----
                                  J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                                  mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
                                • Richard Risemberg
                                  ... Last year we got a large armoire from my wife s sister. Between my wife, her sister, and the sister s boyfriend, they own I think 5 cars, two of which are
                                  Message 16 of 30 , Feb 16, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On Feb 16, 2008, at 2:00 PM, manfrommars_43 wrote:

                                    > Except when you are transporting things such as groceries, furniture,
                                    > clothing and so on.
                                    >
                                    > The car is not just a people transport, it's a truck for bringing in
                                    > the goods to the home.
                                    >
                                    > That's one of the big omissions in thinking in carfree design, they
                                    > are not accounting for the vast economic efficiencies of letting
                                    > individuals make the last mile transport of goods to the home. This
                                    > has lead to very efficient constructs such as the warehouse store.


                                    Last year we got a large armoire from my wife's sister. Between my
                                    wife, her sister, and the sister's boyfriend, they own I think 5
                                    cars, two of which are SUVs. None of them could carry the armoire,
                                    so we rented a van.

                                    I shopped for groceries for a family of three for years on a standard
                                    bicycles with dedicated grocery carryalls attached to the rack. An
                                    Xtracycle (cheap attachments to stretch a standard mountain bike)can
                                    carry six bags of groceries. A Dutch bakfiets ("box bike") can carry
                                    three kids and two adults, or a few bags of cement; a longjohn cargo
                                    bike can carry a washing machine.

                                    Bikes at Work in Iowa runs a year-round haulage service using their
                                    own design of bicycle cargo trailers to carry loads approaching 1,000
                                    pounds.

                                    Okay, you can't ride a bicycle at all--your religion prohibits it.
                                    Okay,ka s Joel has pointed out in his book, you have cheap electric
                                    pallet jack rentals at Metro stops for precisely that purpose. Bring
                                    'em back the next day, or pass the rental on to someone else, using
                                    the management systems developed for the Paris VeloLib bike rental
                                    system.

                                    Quit making excuses to drive. And don't forget that Metro-to-home
                                    carry distances will be far shorter in a Crawfordian carfree city
                                    than in a autocentric city where the need for wide roads and lots of
                                    parking forces everything to be spread out.

                                    Quote from an English fellow living in the Dutch town of Assen: "We
                                    recently employed an electrician to work on our house. Much to my
                                    surprise, he turned up on a bike. When he needed assistance, a second
                                    electrician turned up - also on his bike."

                                    Read the whole article here:
                                    http://www.citycycling.co.uk/issue31/issue31page33.html

                                    We can't let ourselves be trapped by old assumptions.

                                    Rick
                                    --
                                    Richard Risemberg
                                    http://www.bicyclefixation.com
                                    http://www.newcolonist.com
                                    http://www.rickrise.com
                                  • Erik Sandblom
                                    ... Not just to society, but to their very own customers as well. If your only real reason to own a car is to go to warehouses, than that s a very expensive
                                    Message 17 of 30 , Feb 17, 2008
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...>
                                      wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > >That's one of the big omissions in thinking in carfree design, they
                                      > >are not accounting for the vast economic efficiencies of letting
                                      > >individuals make the last mile transport of goods to the home. This
                                      > >has lead to very efficient constructs such as the warehouse store.
                                      >
                                      > Actually, the big box stores are very INefficient, because they
                                      > require people to drive vast distances to use them. (They cannot
                                      > survive without huge catchment areas.) So, they offer very low
                                      > prices, but at the cost of externalizing huge transport costs
                                      > to the larger society.


                                      Not just to society, but to their very own customers as well. If your
                                      only real reason to own a car is to go to warehouses, than that's a
                                      very expensive way to go to warehouses. And as others have pointed
                                      out, cars are too small and delicate to take things like furniture
                                      anyway, which is why warehouses offer delivery.

                                      Erik Sandblom
                                    • Don
                                      ... wrote:. ... Firstly I want to say I had no idea when I started this thread that such a fantastic discussion would follow. Glad I
                                      Message 18 of 30 , Feb 17, 2008
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "Erik Sandblom"
                                        <eriksandblom@...> wrote:.
                                        > >
                                        > > Actually, the big box stores are very INefficient, because they
                                        > > require people to drive vast distances to use them. (They cannot
                                        > > survive without huge catchment areas.) So, they offer very low
                                        > > prices, but at the cost of externalizing huge transport costs
                                        > > to the larger society.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Not just to society, but to their very own customers as well. If your
                                        > only real reason to own a car is to go to warehouses, than that's a
                                        > very expensive way to go to warehouses. And as others have pointed
                                        > out, cars are too small and delicate to take things like furniture
                                        > anyway, which is why warehouses offer delivery.
                                        >
                                        > Erik Sandblom
                                        >
                                        Firstly I want to say I had no idea when I started this thread that
                                        such a fantastic discussion would follow. Glad I brought it up!

                                        I've come to this site as a result of doing a research paper on
                                        sustainability as part of my architectural studies (Univesity of Maine
                                        at Augusta, pass it on..). J.H. Crawford's book was a great resource,
                                        and I have thought about much of it quite often recently, with this
                                        site spurring me on.

                                        Of the many obvious but invisible things JC pointed out was this very
                                        fact that we as individuals are providing a dispersed distribution
                                        network for the big box warehouses. That these stores are warehouses
                                        is the revelation. Duh. And that it is necessary to walk across acres
                                        of pavement after burning gas at $3/gal is just as telling. If only
                                        the mindset of the masses could be tweaked to see the obvious (as I was).

                                        As a student of architecture, still able to deal with the essence of
                                        design before having to deal with the complexities of real practice, I
                                        am able to see that it is the importance and loss of human scale that
                                        is one of the worst aspects of this. My research paper focused on the
                                        aspects of carfree v carfull neighborhoods on the
                                        individual/family/neighborhood psychologically and culturally. It is
                                        human contact at human scale, without intervening miles of pavement
                                        (that doesn't seem that big from within a car at 70mph) that is lost
                                        to us and our families and friends (or future friends we may never meet).
                                      • manfrommars_43
                                        ... Yes, but look at how much energy it takes to bring goods in and out of Manhattan. You can postulate that, oh yes, see how dense population is and how
                                        Message 19 of 30 , Feb 17, 2008
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...>
                                          wrote:

                                          > A week spent in Manhattan would reveal that most people
                                          > don't use cars to transport groceries and clothing.

                                          Yes, but look at how much energy it takes to bring goods in and out of
                                          Manhattan. You can postulate that, oh yes, see how dense population
                                          is and how people can walk down to the corner grocery and get their
                                          tomatoes and they all walk everywhere...but what did it take to get
                                          those tomatoes through the bridges and tunnels and streets so that a
                                          few apartment dwellers can walk to get that tomato.

                                          My point (which, yes, I know I have made before) is that I worry that
                                          these plans merely shift or reallocate one efficiency for another.

                                          The other thing that really worries me is that inefficient systems,
                                          however distasteful, also provide a measure of freedom, redundancy and
                                          remove dependence on single points of failure. For example, when the
                                          bus union goes on strike, do people then starve? Does the corner
                                          grocery, seeing that people can only walk there, mark up prices sky
                                          high, because he knows he has a captive audience?

                                          Another thing: cars are not just transportation...they are powerful
                                          tools. We talk about Americans having guns so they can never be
                                          subverted by the government, but a car is a two ton machine that each
                                          and every family can have that can transport goods, people. The car
                                          can shape the land by letting people choose where they want to go.

                                          The proclivity of planners to create a Habitrail environment, assuming
                                          that humans will want to take the same path now and forever, shopping
                                          at the same store...well...something's missing.
                                        • Richard Risemberg
                                          ... it s been computed, my lad, and it s far FAR more efficient to have a even trucks bring large quantities of tomatoes into a neighborhood for people to pick
                                          Message 20 of 30 , Feb 17, 2008
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            On Feb 17, 2008, at 2:52 PM, manfrommars_43 wrote:

                                            > Yes, but look at how much energy it takes to bring goods in and out of
                                            > Manhattan. You can postulate that, oh yes, see how dense population
                                            > is and how people can walk down to the corner grocery and get their
                                            > tomatoes and they all walk everywhere...but what did it take to get
                                            > those tomatoes through the bridges and tunnels and streets so that a
                                            > few apartment dwellers can walk to get that tomato.


                                            it's been computed, my lad, and it's far FAR more efficient to have a
                                            even trucks bring large quantities of tomatoes into a neighborhood
                                            for people to pick up on foot, than for those same trucks to stop a
                                            little short, at some land-grabbing bigbox, and require people to
                                            make hundreds or car trips to pick up said tomatoes.

                                            As far as the car as a tool, yes, it's become a tool for isolation,
                                            for mindless self-aggrandizement, for destruction of both culture and
                                            the earth itself. Cars are inimical to community, and lead to an
                                            atomized population that never knows its neighbors or where it stands
                                            on the earth.

                                            As for your "habitrail" bullshit, Paris, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, and
                                            many other delightful cities with a real culture and a light
                                            footprint on the earth are built around transit and walking,
                                            accommodating very few cars per capita. They are the places everyone
                                            loves to visit and would live in if they could. Paris has TWICE the
                                            population density of New York and was not a robotic hell last time I
                                            visited.

                                            Get real.

                                            Rick
                                            --
                                            Richard Risemberg
                                            http://www.bicyclefixation.com
                                            http://www.newcolonist.com
                                            http://www.rickrise.com







                                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.