When I lived in Germany for a while, my wife and I took a train across the country one winter to Munich for the Christmas markets. We stayed in a hostel and walked the streets, enjoying the various stalls. I'd never heard of Glüwein before (hot, mulled, spiced red wine), but it was fantastic! It was an amazing experience and we didn't have to worry about parking lots or figuring out public transportation. Everything was within walking distance and we ended up touring all of Munich on foot.
I wish the US would get off its ass and get some high speed trains set up. We just need to keep oil and auto dealers out of the discussion because they keep shutting it down. Like Musk's "Hyperloop" project, which he proposed to stop legislation from approving high speed trains, but then intentionally did nothing with, so we just don't develop trains to replace his Tesla cars.
High speed trains should actually not be the primary focus of the US when it commes to public transport, city/suburban systems are more important.
Don't get me wrong, the US absolutely needs high speed rail, but without a well functioning local public transport system at both ends you end up with something that conceptually is more like an airport than a european train station.
Without local public transport, travelers still need to go by car to and from the endpoints, just like a lot of airports, this means that stations will require a lot of expensive parking, that is essentially wasted space.
Now, the US will probably allways be car dependant to a higher degree than Europe, this is due to how cities have been built, unchecked urban sprawl with little mixed use zones with few central spots makes it hard to build good metro and bus lines, where do you put the stations, where will people connect?
I won't pretend to have the answers, I absolutely don't, but I know that regardless of how public transport is established in new and existing neighbourhoods there will be angry people, but lets just make sure that the happy people outnumber them
100% without local city restructuring with mixed zoning and suburban redevelopment for proper land use, high speed rail developments will result on those stupid “middle of nowhere” train stations that are just railways from giant parking lot to giant parking lot. Completely undermining the whole point of rail that is being able to drop you off right in the middle of dense cities, which airports can't due to the logistics of flight.
Sometimes to get to work I drive one mile, park (expensively) and then take the train 8 miles, then walk a mile, carrying all the shit I need for work, including my dinner, laptop, change of clothes and 3 40z water bottles. Usually I just drive.
Right - public transit needs to be usable in the place you're traveling to if you're going to take a train. This is why a lot of people would rather drive from, say San Francisco to Los Angeles. Suppose you were to take a train instead. Then... great?! what would you do next? You wouldn't have anywhere to go, so you'll need a car anyway. You'd either have to rent one or just skip the train and do the drive instead.
Probably a lot easier and feasible in my opinion to build the local public transit first, and then focus on the regional/national transit system.
I see what you're saying, but the advantage of intercity rail, not necessarily high-speed, but rail that goes from one city to another at commuter speeds, that is definitely worth having where I live. I'm in Terre Haute, IN. There isn't a ton of work here. A lot of people here make the 80-90 minute drive to either Indianapolis or Bloomington to their jobs. There is already a bus line here if people need that and, yes, it could go to more places, but Indiana used to have a robust rail network that linked the entire state and doing something like that today would have a lot of advantages. Not just the job issue, but both Indianapolis and Bloomington are desirable destinations for things like restaurants and shows and people from all over the state drive to them (and a few other small cities) very regularly because of that.
The way I see it, a lot more CO2 emissions would be reduced with intercity rail in this state and the public bus transportation in various Indiana cities is already decent.
Dude I’m traveling to Texas in a few months and I didn’t realize how close Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, and Austin are. It’s like a triangle, 2.5 to 3.5 hours between either city. Waco and San Antonio sit on the line between Austin and DFW.
These cities are linked by a rather nice highway system from what I remember last time I was in TX, but to the best of my knowledge, there’s no high-speed rail, only rail that’s slower than driving most the time.
Why? Texas should be embarrassed. Especially with Houston being so close to Galveston, which is a pretty damn good port.
Palanquins were used only by noble families, if even. Less than 1% of the population and even less than that of the amount of people who would assist to the coliseum were carried there. Almost everyone just walked.
SF is easily as well-served by public transit as Chicago. It's the 2nd densest city in the US, behind NYC. Between Muni, the streetcars and busses and BART, there's always an easy way to get anywhere in The City. You can even jump on a cable car if that's your thing.
They probably assumed this is like a theme park or something and not an actual city that people actually live in year round. Cities having nice, people friendly places away from cars? Who's ever heard of that?
At the same time, those towns are hella compact, such that 90+% of residents can walk to pretty much any retailer or store or other resource within 15-20 minutes. Yes, some people (farmers) live outside of town and there are some American-style housing in clumps outside of the town, but everyone mostly lives in tight clusters.
And even the tiny towns well away from other larger towns have busses that move people between towns on a fairly regular If infrequent basis (15-20 minutes apart). Only the larger population centres can afford to have public transport that comes every 5 minutes or so.
You also have to understand that in North America, a “significant separation between towns” is something like 100+km. In Germany, that term qualifies with as little as a 10km distance. It’s rare to find any population centre that is more than 20km away from its nearest neighbour.
fairly regular If infrequent basis (15-20 minutes apart)
lol that’s the frequency that the busses and trains near me operate during peak commute times. I finally broke down and bought a car. I’m American if you couldn’t tell…
At the same time, those towns are hella compact, such that 90+% of residents can walk to pretty much any retailer or store or other resource within 15-20 minutes.
Pandemics are a thing
Families wanting nature and places in their backyard that kids can play
I think 15 minute cities are great if you have everything to back it up. All of the grocery stores and mini-box stores left downtown Seattle because a lot are work from home now. If people can work and live anywhere they want, they want nature. You need to have transit for that.
Edit: I'm trying to understand the downvotes, is this not being taught in urban planning? Is it just developers wanting to rent their spaces because their leases are closing out? Or is it naive people wanting to force their ideas without realizing humans are going to make decisions in the process as well? Super interesting thread.
I live in France, about 30 minutes from a major city. There is transit, but it's not good, and has very few stops near where I live. Grocery shopping has to be done by car or bike as there aren't any shops in the village. European cities are extremely well served by transit, but outside the metropolitan areas, cars are still king.
It's a really interesting thread. Cities are great, suburb & rural can be great and transit is great. 15 minute cities are great goals, but it's not a one size fits all situation. I can't figure out how they think these utopian 15 minute cities would work if they don't have a working transit built in. It's so weird, do they think handicapped people can bike and walk everywhere or don't exist? Do they think parents love sending their kids down the block to play by themselves instead of the backyard? Their choices aren't going to make sense for a ton of people. They're either right out of school or trolling, I can't tell which.
Impossible. This thread has shown me that literally all of Europe has year round Christmas markets with form of mechanical transportation. An entire continent reduce to pre-horse travel. Enough with facts feelings are all that is real.
Well this guy’s apparently never been to Germany, they do in fact have a lot of parking garages and street parking in cities. Is straight up lying how you’re going to convince people to build public transit?
Of course there is some parking, but there is no need for a dedicated car park for this market. Many of these people will have come on foot or by public transport, that isn't a lie at all. Public transport in Germany isn't exactly a model to follow imo (I was surprised, I expected it to be down to an art tbh), but like most of Europe the cities are walkable and at least have some form of public transport system.
We have a bunch of Christmas markets in the US. They get pretty packed. There are parking garages near them since their downtown in major cities (DC, Baltimore, Philly).
Yes. Not my thing but other people seem to enjoy shopping inefficiently. Think it is like when I give my guinea pigs a box to "explore" or jiggle keys infront of a baby.
Let me know if you have any further questions about flea markets.
Even in a lot of big us cities, most people don't live in the city. I live in a metro area with 2 million but only 300k in the city. That's 1.7 million with no public transit. Also all of the people farther out that aren't vin the metro area, no public transit. A very small percentage of people in the US have non-car options, and even where it exists it is generally terrible.
People in the US have to travel 500km on their car every day just to go shopping, sadly nobody has figured out a way to build shops closer to the population or any sort of sharable transport.
Now if only there was a long range form of transportation that could move a lot of people (or goods) from one city to another. 🤔 Maybe something that was set up over 150 years ago, lets say May 10, 1869.
Lmao. No the US like to kill all competition and forcing you to take your car 30 minutes to go to walmart. It's often illegal in a lot of places to have a shop on the ground floor of a residential building. This is by design.
The problem is not that the US is sparse, is that cities are. You are probably misunderstanding the problem, and if not, you are not explaining correctly. Check out The Dumbest Excuse for Bad Cities from Not Just Bikes for a breakdown of the issue.
No one is blaming you individually, or even the US citizens individually. The problems are multiple for sure, but you won't start to fix it unless you understand the issue properly. Maybe it's not your case, but many US citizens are surely not seeing the point at all.