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

The Dynamics of Short Transport

Expand Messages
  • Erik Rauch
    Some comments on the article in Carfree Times. The figures given for cars seem to be based on an auto-oriented city (which is appropriate if you are comparing
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Some comments on the article in Carfree Times. The figures given for
      cars seem to be based on an auto-oriented city (which is appropriate if
      you are comparing modes of urban development). But I think driving is
      much less practical in a dense city. For example, in Boston where I
      lived for seven years, 400 meters or more is a typical distance from a
      parking spot to one's home or destination, so the overhead time is much
      longer, and it is impractical for short distances.

      The spacing of metro stops makes a big difference, as was mentioned in
      the book.
      My commute was 6 km and took 45 minutes by metro (with one transfer),
      mainly because the stops are too far apart except in the downtown area,
      and secondarily because the average wait times are too long. 20 minutes
      of the was walking and 8 was waiting. This is why the bicycle cannot be
      beat for most trips in this city (in my case it took half the time).
    • J.H. Crawford
      Hi Erik, Thanks for the review. ... These assumptions are very optimistic and could only be realized if the driver were one of just a few using this mode;
      Message 2 of 2 , Jan 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Erik,

        Thanks for the review.

        >Some comments on the article in Carfree Times. The figures given for
        >cars seem to be based on an auto-oriented city (which is appropriate if
        >you are comparing modes of urban development). But I think driving is
        >much less practical in a dense city. For example, in Boston where I
        >lived for seven years, 400 meters or more is a typical distance from a
        >parking spot to one's home or destination, so the overhead time is much
        >longer, and it is impractical for short distances.

        "These assumptions are very optimistic and could only be realized if the driver were one of just a few using this mode; otherwise much more waiting at intersections would arise, along with more time to park."

        Doesn't that pretty well cover it?

        >The spacing of metro stops makes a big difference, as was mentioned in
        >the book.
        >My commute was 6 km and took 45 minutes by metro (with one transfer),
        >mainly because the stops are too far apart except in the downtown area,
        >and secondarily because the average wait times are too long. 20 minutes
        >of the was walking and 8 was waiting. This is why the bicycle cannot be
        >beat for most trips in this city (in my case it took half the time).

        In reality, in most places, if you dare to ride a bike,
        you get there first. Here in Lisbon, I wouldn't dare,
        and neither does anybody else (well, there are a few....)

        Fortunately, the metros seem to run on about 5-6 minute headways
        during the day, with trains coming amazingly often during rush
        hour, maybe 3 minutes. It's a good system, fortunately for me.

        Anything coming of your meeting with Rob?

        Best,

        Joel



        -- ### --

        J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
        mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.