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

Re: [carfree_cities] Personal transport (was Homer)

Expand Messages
  • Mike Harrington
    Walking, too, will remain pretty cheap, for that matter. There is a problem with advocating bicycles as the primary means of getting around. How about if it
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Walking, too, will remain pretty cheap, for that matter.

      There is a problem with advocating bicycles as the primary means of getting
      around. How about if it is raining, or snowing, or in the blazing southern
      sun when it is 108­­° F? Those might be acceptable conditions for some, but
      for the aged, infirm, and very young those are not options. What if you
      need to travel twenty miles? How many people go on a twenty-mile radius
      with their bicycle? One solution is to build a much greater number of
      transit vehicles than exist today, both rail and bus, with increased space
      allocated for on-board bike storage, so you can use a bike for part of your
      trip.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Andrea Casalotti" <andrea@...>
      To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 9:17 AM
      Subject: [carfree_cities] Personal transport (was Homer)


      > Mike Harrington wrote:
      > > Personal transportation will be prohibitively expensive for all but the
      > > most wealthy,
      >
      > Notwithstanding the valid objection made by Turpin that energy will
      > unlikely be expensive in the future, the most appropriate means of
      personal
      > transport, the bicycle is likely to remain inexpensive.
      > --
      > Andrea Casalotti
      >
      > ZERO
      >
      > 7 Plympton St
      > London NW8 8AB
      >
      > 020 7723 2409
      > zero@...
      >
      > www.zeroisbest.com
      >
      >
      > -----------
      >
      >
      > Vive le velorution!
      > velorution.blogspot.com
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      carfree_cities-unsubscribe@...
      > Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
    • turpin <turpin@yahoo.com>
      ... Cheap, healthy, pleasant, and versatile. Cities should support walking as the primary mode of transportation. It s biology. It s how we evolved to move.
      Message 2 of 4 , Jan 3, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        "Mike Harrington" <mike@p...> wrote:
        > Walking, too, will remain pretty
        > cheap, for that matter.

        Cheap, healthy, pleasant, and versatile.
        Cities should support walking as the
        primary mode of transportation. It's
        biology. It's how we evolved to move.

        > What if you need to travel twenty
        > miles? How many people go on a twenty-
        > mile radius with their bicycle?

        With respect to cities, some would argue
        that if you ever have to travel twenty
        miles between two destinations, things
        are already broken. Cities sprawl to
        that extent only when the government
        builds a car infrastructure and
        implements development policies that
        encourage it.

        As an aside, and marking myself as a
        heretic here, I enjoy car travel BETWEEN
        cities. The big problem with highways is
        not their use to get from one city to
        another, but their use for transport
        WITHIN a city, and how that shapes the
        urban environment. Of course, one can
        get into all sorts of discussion about
        how the highway system warped cross-
        country transportation, and the various
        effects of that. For cities, I think the
        primary and most harmful effect came
        from building highways through cities,
        and allowing highway use for local
        transportation. Cities then grew along
        the highways. There are modest-sized
        towns in Arkansas that are ten miles
        long and three blocks wide. These cities
        are broken. It's hard to see how they
        will ever accomodate any mode of
        transportation that isn't centered on
        the highway that serves as their
        backbone.
      • Mike Harrington
        Actually, suburbs were built by rail, not automobiles. For several decades the only way to get to and from from any suburban town in the US was by interurban
        Message 3 of 4 , Jan 3, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Actually, suburbs were built by rail, not automobiles. For several decades
          the only way to get to and from from any suburban town in the US was by
          interurban trolley or railroad. Just about every suburban town around Los
          Angeles up to and including Riverside was originally developed by suburban
          trolley, years before there was any highway system there. You see that in
          suburban Dallas. Richardson and Plano, seen from the expressway, look like
          today's typical sprawling suburbs. But if you get a mile away from the
          freeway, you'll find that they still have viable little urban cores
          surrounded by single-family residences built mostly before the 1950's. Fast
          rail service has actually restored the importance of those old suburban town
          centers, inspiring both building restoration and new traditional,
          pedestrian-oriented construction in the vicinty of the rail stations. By
          traditional I mean appartments on city streets with walk-in businesses on
          the first floor.

          Carfree Cities is a concept that is naturally extensible to suburbs. Things
          aren't necessarily "broken" if you have to travel twenty miles. What if my
          daughter wants to go see her aunt in the suburbs? Nowadays, I'd have to
          drive her, but in the 1940's she could have ridden there herself by train or
          trolley. We're actually much, much worse off than then.

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: <turpin@...>
          To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 11:56 AM
          Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: Personal transport (was Homer)


          > "Mike Harrington" <mike@p...> wrote:
          > > Walking, too, will remain pretty
          > > cheap, for that matter.
          >
          > Cheap, healthy, pleasant, and versatile.
          > Cities should support walking as the
          > primary mode of transportation. It's
          > biology. It's how we evolved to move.
          >
          > > What if you need to travel twenty
          > > miles? How many people go on a twenty-
          > > mile radius with their bicycle?
          >
          > With respect to cities, some would argue
          > that if you ever have to travel twenty
          > miles between two destinations, things
          > are already broken. Cities sprawl to
          > that extent only when the government
          > builds a car infrastructure and
          > implements development policies that
          > encourage it.

          > As an aside, and marking myself as a
          > heretic here, I enjoy car travel BETWEEN
          > cities. The big problem with highways is
          > not their use to get from one city to
          > another, but their use for transport
          > WITHIN a city, and how that shapes the
          > urban environment. Of course, one can
          > get into all sorts of discussion about
          > how the highway system warped cross-
          > country transportation, and the various
          > effects of that. For cities, I think the
          > primary and most harmful effect came
          > from building highways through cities,
          > and allowing highway use for local
          > transportation. Cities then grew along
          > the highways. There are modest-sized
          > towns in Arkansas that are ten miles
          > long and three blocks wide. These cities
          > are broken. It's hard to see how they
          > will ever accomodate any mode of
          > transportation that isn't centered on
          > the highway that serves as their
          > backbone.
          >
          >
          >
          > To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
          > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
          carfree_cities-unsubscribe@...
          > Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.