On 6/29/2018 10:11 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-06-28 08:47, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/27/2018 7:56 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-06-27 14:55, Frank Krygowski wrote:


I think there are different cultural or social expectations in
Europe,
most of which are influenced by history. Europe seems to generally
have
much more restrictive land use policies, and those policies seem to
promote "infill" development.

Example: In Britain, in Austria, etc. when we bicycle toured, I was
struck by the practicality of city limits. There seemed to be a
boundary
around most towns, with apartments, houses, shops etc. on one side
and
little but fields and forests on the other side. We saw almost no
rural
convenience stores or gas stations, for example. People have been
living
close for hundreds of years, and they're used to such a system.


Except that such difference are not truly there. Think back to when
your relatives came from Europe. Probably not very wealthy, they
likely settled in an east coast town very similar to a European one.

Joerg, I'm talking about present day geography, not that of over 100
years ago.


So why did you ask about the age then? Makes no sense. I said it doesn't
matter and now you seem to say the same.

scratching head

I'm sorry you're confused again. I'll try to explain more thoroughly.

European cities were typically founded in medieval times, often when
they were enclosed by walls and back when almost everyone walked to get
around. As a consequence, city blocks were and still are small. Most
streets were and still are narrow by U.S. standards. And to a much
higher degree than the U.S., that original high density remains.
Buildings fill the cities to a much higher degree than the U.S., leaving
little room for parking lots, again resulting in higher density. And
it's still considered quite normal to have a residence within the city,
which makes destinations one might want to access every day a relatively
short distance away. Public policy was able to prioritize mass transit,
which was and still is heavily used because of the density. That reduced
the need for private cars compared to the U.S. and contributed to
retaining higher densities.

Even before 1900, most U.S. cities were not quite as dense as those in
Europe. They were not walled in at their founding, so there was simply
more room. But starting in the early 1900s, the automobile took over
here far sooner and far more thoroughly than it did in Europe.
Construction from that point on was even less dense. Most mass transit
systems like streetcars crashed early on. The car became the only way to
get around beyond a few blocks, and economics of scale plus cheap land
caused things like grocery stores to grow in size and grow huge parking
lots that further reduced density. And Americans soon decided that the
suburbs were the place to be, reachable only by the car that everyone
needed anyway. The metro areas came to be dominated by the suburbs, so
even when the density of the inner city was relatively high, the density
of the metro area was low - low enough that one could not practically
walk to where one needed to go.

Here's a list of 125 large cities ranked by density. Note how seldom USA
is mentioned, and how low on the list those U.S. cities tend to sit:
http://www.citymayors.com/statistics...nsity-125.html

You (even you) can look up the population density of the U.S. vs.
northern European countries. You can look up the population density of
metropolitan areas both here and there, or typical home sizes, etc.
There can be no question that the U.S. sprawls more in every way.


As is evident in the examples I brought from Ireland and you brought
from the US, sprawl is almost identical.

A) It's not. An unbiased person looking at the city you chose would say
it's far different from most American cities.

Except in the US many people
have (had) larger lots.

So the U.S. is just as dense, except that it has larger lots that make
it less dense?
Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* ... And the suburbs, where almost all new
development happens, are all car-oriented. It's not only that business
owners expect that everyone will arrive by car; it's also that their
preferences and local regulations usually demand huge parking lots.
Those big parking lots force tremendous reductions in density.


That is indeed a major difference between America and most of the world.
Sprawl isn't different though, it's just that in US people used to want
larger properties. That is changing and now it looks more and more like
Europe, sometimes the density is even higher like he

https://goo.gl/maps/sJn6YgExy1K2

The car orientation is often still there but that has to do with
laziness. "Well, for starters a bicycle doesn't have an A/C button and
it's hot out!"

Yes, climate is another factor. We'll have heat indexes near or above
100 Fahrenheit for the next week. How often does Netherlands get that?

But back to the original point: Data shows people in Amsterdam average
about 2 miles of bicycling per day. If you restricted your mileage to
that figure, how many of your transportation needs could you satisfy by
bike?

--
- Frank Krygowski