Driving Peeves: SUV's & Turn Signals

[BicycleTree]

Chroot, isn't the 4-lane single-occupancy-vehicle massive traffic jam going into Boston evidence enough?

 

[Evo]

I read an idea by someone, Richard, of Richard's Bicycle Book, wherein each city produces its own bicycles which are available for free public use. The city takes responsibility for fixing the bicycles in the form of repair stations, and each city has its own distinctive bicycle frame so that if anyone is seen riding that type of frame outside the city, they can be identified as thieves. The bikes are just left wherever someone finishes with them, and anyone who sees a city bike anywhere is free to use it within the city. This eliminates all trouble of ensuring your bike is in the right place at the right time. I think it's a pretty good idea.

The problem in a city is that most people are professionals and need to carry their laptop and files, presentations, samples, among other things, and can't be showing up for a meeting disheveled and sweaty.

I would never be able to use a bike because I have to visit clients and there is usually at least 26 miles between clients and very little time between appointments.

 

[Evo]

Chroot, isn't the 4-lane single-occupancy-vehicle massive traffic jam going into Boston evidence enough?

A bus in this case wouldn't work, people will still need a car to get around the Boston area, which is why so many people drive there and don't take the bus.

 

[chroot]

Chroot, isn't the 4-lane single-occupancy-vehicle massive traffic jam going into Boston evidence enough?

No. You've made the assertion -- several times, in fact -- that the majority of Americans live in the suburbs, but work inside city limits. I am challenging you to provide evidence of this assertion, because I do not believe it at all.

- Warren

 

[LeBrad]

Chroot, isn't the 4-lane single-occupancy-vehicle massive traffic jam going into Boston evidence enough?

You know Boston has a commuter rail and a subway system that many many people already use. Perhaps you should move to a smaller city if you don't like the idea of a large influx of people in the morning.

 

[Knavish]

Chroot, I wouldn't say that the majority of Americans live in the suburbs, but it is the growing trend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburbanization

 

[chroot]

The problem in a city is that most people are professionals and need to carry their laptop and files, presentations, samples, among other things, and can't be showing up for a meeting disheveled and sweaty.

This is certainly a problem.

I'd also like to discuss the myth of BicycleTree's work-on-the-bus proposal. My professional work involves hundreds of thousands of dollars of test and measurement equipment sprawled over several benches -- obviously I cannot do any real work on the bus. Many other people have the same problem: buses don't provide enough room per passenger to actually do any serious work. Some professionals could bring a laptop and work on a presentation, perhaps, but many people find the fifty sweating bodies crammed into your personal space to be a bit of a distraction. Needless to say, unless your "work" involves reading novels, most people aren't going to get a whole lot done on a bus.

- Warren

 

[BicycleTree]

No. You've made the assertion -- several times, in fact -- that the majority of Americans live in the suburbs, but work inside city limits. I am challenging you to provide evidence of this assertion, because I do not believe it at all.

I'm sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant that the majority of commuters to the city live in areas where there are other commuters.

 

[Huckleberry]

Rush hour traffic jams are a pain. I don't see bicycles replacing cars any time soon. Maybe if gas prices go over 5 dollars a gallon people will start taking bicycles seriously.

I think a large part of the problem is that some people take a car to go 1 block to the corner store and back. Last semester I walked to school about a mile away. Almost nobody there walked. They drove the same mile and parked in a 5 story parking garage and drove the one or two miles back to their houses. It took me about the same time to walk as it did for them to drive. If I were riding a bicycle I would have been home long before them.

Banning cars from the highway so only buses can use them is pretty ridiculous. Some people need their cars. Their may be no bus route. People often do chores on their way home from work, or have to pick up their children from day care somewhere. Some people are not able to ride a bicycle or walk very far to a bus stop. I think that if people would use public transportation and walk or bike when it was convenient then there would be much less traffic.

I once bicycled 50 miles in about 2.5 hours. I hope to bicycle across Australia someday.

 

[chroot]

Chroot, I wouldn't say that the majority of Americans live in the subarbs, but it is the growing trend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburbanization

I didn't ask this; the number of people living in the suburbs is not directly related to the number who actually commute to the central city each day. I am one such person -- I live in the suburbs of San Francisco, but I do not work there; I only go there for nightlife and culture. Almost everyone I know is in the same situation.

- Warren

 

[BicycleTree]

You know Boston has a commuter rail and a subway system that many many people already use. Perhaps you should move to a smaller city if you don't like the idea of a large influx of people in the morning.

I know that, and I also use that system. However, it doesn't reach out very far.

 

[Moonbear]

YThe problem is that most Americans don't work in major cities, and city-style public transportation is not a viable option for their locales.

The reality is that those who DO work in cities and CAN take public transportation already do that. I grew up in NJ suburbs where a large part of the population commutes to NYC for work. I don't know of anyone who had work hours compatible with taking buses or trains who didn't do so. The people who drove into the city are those who didn't have predictable hours compatible with bus routes (they might be in rush hour traffic in the morning, but then worked until 10 PM), or needed to carry a lot of files back and forth with them that were too heavy to lug around on buses. Yes, they were not the norm among commuters, but when you start adding them up, a few from this town a few from that town, that's where all those cars come from. Adding more buses isn't going to get them off the road, and in major cities, the buses themselves are creating congestion because there are so many of them.

 

[Moonbear]

I know that, and I also use that system. However, it doesn't reach out very far.

Whose homes would you like to tear down to expand it?

 

[chroot]

I'm sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant that the majority of commuters to the city live in areas where there are other commuters.

As I've said, the problem of moving many people from the suburbs to a small number of destinations in the city is already a solved problem. The metro, subway, BART, etc. already accomplish this. This is great, but only useful for a small percentage of the population.

- Warren

 

[Evo]

Chroot, I wouldn't say that the majority of Americans live in the subarbs, but it is the growing trend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburbanization

Two things - it says 45% of the population live in what is deemed suburbs, quite a large percent of the population live in small towns that are not considered suburbs, this means that the number of people living in the suburbs of a large city vastly outnumbers city dwellers (which supports chroot) and the statistics are 15 years old.

 

[BicycleTree]

If a bus has even two people on it, it's not causing congestion, it's reducing congestion. A bus with one person on it increases congestion by a small amount compared to a car in most traffic conditions (ten extra feet out of fifty, perhaps, counting the space needed between vehicles). But the average bus contains a great deal more than one person.

 

[BicycleTree]

Two things - it says 45% of the population live in what is deemed suburbs, quite a large percent of the population live in small towns that are not considered suburbs, this means that the number of people living in the suburbs of a large city vastly outnumbers city dwellers (which supports chroot)

How much attention are you paying to this discussion?? The people I am talking about are suburb dwellers who commute. People who live in the city are not people I am concerned with at the moment. These statistics support me in saying that there is a need for more buses from the suburbs and for more people who take buses from the suburbs.

and the statistics are 15 years old.

 

[chroot]

If a bus has even two people on it, it's not causing congestion, it's reducing congestion.

What??

Buses are slow. They accelerate poorly from stop lights. They have to turn slowly. They have low top speeds. They have to stop all the time. A bus probably has to continually carry a dozen people or more to make it a net "congestion savings!"

But the average bus contains a great deal more than one person.

Again, this is true in the city. It would not be true anywhere else -- and your proposed "sea of buses" was aimed not at cities, but at freeway traffic jams. As we've all already tried to explain, that won't work.

- Warren

 

[BicycleTree]

Chroot, you didn't even know that we were talking exclusively about highway traffic jams going into the city from the suburbs until a short time ago.

Consider this, which I have alluded to before in this discussion: before entrance ramps to the highway, there is a bus station and parking lot. You park your car and board a bus, and because people do this there is no jam.

Also, having to walk from a parking garage is as much inconvenience as having to walk from where the bus drops you off.

 

[BicycleTree]

Point taken about the acceleration of buses (although they can attain highway speeds). However, the fair number of people who ride any given bus make buses a space-saver.

 

[Moonbear]

This is certainly a problem.

I'd also like to discuss the myth of BicycleTree's work-on-the-bus proposal. My professional work involves hundreds of thousands of dollars of test and measurement equipment sprawled over several benches -- obviously I cannot do any real work on the bus. Many other people have the same problem: buses don't provide enough room per passenger to actually do any serious work. Some professionals could bring a laptop and work on a presentation, perhaps, but many people find the fifty sweating bodies crammed into your personal space to be a bit of a distraction. Needless to say, unless your "work" involves reading novels, most people aren't going to get a whole lot done on a bus.

- Warren

I've been on packed commuter buses. You're lucky if you get a seat, let alone space to sprawl out and do work. Those who do get a seat sometimes take a nap, which makes up for the extra half hour earlier they have to leave home to make sure they catch the bus (because if the first bus is full, you're waiting until the next one comes along).

 

[Evo]

How much attention are you paying to this discussion?? The people I am talking about are suburb dwellers who commute. People who live in the city are not people I am concerned with at the moment. These statistics support me in saying that there is a need for more buses from the suburbs and for more people who take buses from the suburbs.

Apparently I'm paying more attention than you, I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to knavish.

And the statistics do not support you, with the surburban sprawl, fewer and fewer jobs are in inner cities, they are in suburban areas, as chroot mentioned. Most of the jobs in this area are in a suburb of the "city".

 

[BicycleTree]

Moonbear, about bus scheduling: yes, not having hours consistent with the bus is a good reason not to take the bus. But if many people have this problem, it's only another good reason to have regular buses that come and go until 10 or 11 PM.

 

[Moonbear]

Chroot, you didn't even know that we were talking exclusively about highway traffic jams going into the city from the suburbs until a short time ago.

No, this is where we started this discussion, but you keep changing the topic. When one argument doesn't work, you circle around back to another.

 

[BicycleTree]

Many Americans no longer live where they work and instead live in the suburbs, commuting to work.

Does this mean "commuting to a different place in the same town"? I think it means "commuting to the city."

 

[chroot]

Chroot, you didn't even know that we were talking exclusively about highway traffic jams going into the city from the suburbs until a short time ago.

You didn't decide this yourself until a short time ago, kiddo. You were originally talking about buses on freeways, and I don't see many freeways inside cities.

Consider this, which I have alluded to before in this discussion: before entrance ramps to the highway, there is a bus station and parking lot. You park your car and board a bus, and because people do this there is no jam.

I'll say it again for perhaps the fourth time: I consider the problem of getting people from the suburbs into the downtown areas to be already solved. The majority of the cars making up a freeway traffic jam are not going to a city.

- Warren

 

[Moonbear]

Moonbear, about bus scheduling: yes, not having hours consistent with the bus is a good reason not to take the bus. But if many people have this problem, it's only another good reason to have regular buses that come and go until 10 or 11 PM.

No, it's not, and the reason is that you only have a handful of people at any given destination who need to get home at those hours. You'd also want to reduce the frequency of buses to account for reduced travelers (you wouldn't want to run a bus every 15 min when three out of 4 buses an hour will run empty and one of them will have two people on it; that ADDS to traffic). If it's 9 or 10 at night and I'm ready to leave the office and get to the bus stop at 10:05, I'm not going to want to wait another 55 minutes for a bus when I could drive and be home in that time, especially if I woke up at 5 AM. That is a very typical professional schedule in a big city.

 

[BicycleTree]

Also, Evo, whoever you were responding to, you were making statements which were not true relating to things I have said.

Moonbear, it is a fact that chroot was not aware of that until recently. If you read back you can establish this.

I am responding to every point made; if I have missed one by now (I think I've covered them) then please draw my attention to it.

 

[Moonbear]

Moonbear, it is a fact that chroot was not aware of that until recently. If you read back you can establish this.

Only chroot can establish what he was or was not aware of. I know what I was aware of and his arguments have been consistent with that.

 

[chroot]

Does this mean "commuting to a different place in the same town"? I think it means "commuting to the city."

What makes you feel so comfortable making assumptions like this with no supporting evidence? Almost everyone I know commutes from what is considered one suburb to another. I live in the San Francisco bay area, however, so there may be some bias here due to the weird geography. I will continue to believe that the majority of suburbanites actually do not work in their parent cities, however, unless you can prove otherwise.

- Warren