From: kweisser@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Kurt I Weisser)
Subject: Re: Cars, Cities and Choices
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:14:28 GMT

In article <JMC.92Jul24100456@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>After discussing how public transit decays when cities spread out
>
>I don't see that it has to be done.  Would Paul Barter consider
>the following experiment?
>
>Let a new modern, what he calls European style city be built and let a
>modern spread out city be built at similar expense.  Let them be only
>100 miles apart.  See which people move to.


     The key tradeoff appears to be quality of urban life vs. economic
efficiency.  The "European" style city has a higher quality of life, 
the "American" style city tends to be more economically efficient.
     Most of the poorer people would wind up in the American-style city; that's
where more jobs would be.  The wealthier would move to the European-style city,
for its better quality of life.  

     Arguing about whether one is "better" than another is pointless; the two
city styles have different efficiencies and inefficiencies in different areas.
A "European" city is normally one of the great prides of the local population-
it has a long history in commerce, culture, government, etc.  The city is
compact because land is valuable, it has a high quality of life because it
must (since social interaction at street level is more important), the
transport links are integrated and convenient intentionally to be very
efficient.  The drawbacks of European cities is that their infrastructure
and building stock may need extensive, expensive upgrading to meet minimum
modern commercial standards.  American cities developed as commercial service
centers around railways and later superhighways--the infrastructure was built
from the start for large, heavy bulk commerce.  Abundant cheap land and 
government policies focused on economic goals for well over a hundred years
has bred an entirely different system.

     The typical western (west of Pittsburgh) US city has a prime focus on
economy--if Columbus doesn't  keep up, Cleveland or Cincinnati will eclipse
it, stealing market area and jobs.  The same is not true of Paris; Orleans
is not going to steal all the jobs away.  US history shows cities rising and
faling (and a few even rose again), while the trend among European cities
(each as a national center) remained relatively stable.

     Besides, personally, I'd move to the more fun place--where I didn't have
to drive my hunk of junk EVERYWHERE (even to just a movie, aack!).




>
>The experiment is unlikely to be performed in its pure form.  However,
>there are indications.  The population of New York declines, and the
>population of Los Angeles and Houston increase.  Maybe people don't
>have the same relative preferences as most intellectuals think they ought
>to.
>

     The experiment specified a "modern" city.  Most of New York was
built 1850-1940, with little regard for social or behavioral requirements
of high densities.  Corruption and incompetence did not help.  I suggest
a different example (even though I LIKE NY).



>Well, maybe everything is in order.  New York is still a powerful magnet
>for intellectuals, and other people move to Los Angeles and other
>spread out cities.  Perhaps we're better off with not just one kind
>of city.


     By some measures of geographic hierarchical structure, New York is
increasing its dominance, not letting it ebb.  In some ways, LA has 
become a satellite subcenter, instead of a competing dominant center.

     You bet, diversity among cities is the way to go.  Any single solution
for all possible urban needs (either urban structure, transit mode, whatever)
implies great amounts of inefficiency just waiting to happen.
-- 
   Geography Spud                         --Kurt Ian Weisser
The Ohio State University           kweisser@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
   Columbus, Ohio           Send flames by e-mail only, I will post a summary.
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10065 sci.physics:11707 sci.energy:3700