HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: randolph@netcom.com (Randolph Fritz)
Subject: Re: Death and Life of Great American Cities
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:05:53 GMT

Jacobs isn't a city planner--she's an architectural critic.  Many US
city planners haven't read her.

On top of which, the motivations for the design of US cities are not
mostly Jacobs'.  For a summary of what we do and why, as opposed to
what we might like to do, take a look at Joel Garreau's *Edge City*.

__R
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: PAPAI@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Jonathan Papai)
Subject: Re: <none>
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 01:49:35 GMT



	Is this newsgroup active.  Ever?
-J.
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: dtasman@NMSU.edu (Dan Tasman)
Subject: Re: <none>
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 05:23:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.014935.22854@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>  
PAPAI@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Jonathan Papai) writes:
: 
: 
: 	Is this newsgroup active.  Ever?
: -J.

Yes.

--
   Dan Tasman                                       dtasman@dante.nmsu.edu
                                                     molson@rever.nmsu.edu
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   "I think that I shall never see a billboard lovely as a tree
    Indeed, unless the billboards fall, I'll never see a tree at all."
                                                                Ogden Nash
From: zebee@wattle.itd.adelaide.edu.au (Zebee Johnstone)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Re: Gasoline Tax and Cities
Date: 11 Jan 93 03:10:51 GMT
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: wattle.itd.adelaide.edu.au

pmitra@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Pritha Mitra-stiff) writes:


>This is true, gasoline is only a small portion of the cost of
>driving a car.  However, people perceive gasoline costs to be
>a relatively large part of the cost of driving.  This is
>because the other costs of driving -- purchase price of a car,
>maintenance costs, insurance -- are fixed costs.  So, when
>drivers decide how much to drive, they largely ignore these      
>costs, which they will have to pay no matter how many miles
>they drive.  Consequently, gasoline prices, and other 'out-of-
>pocket' costs -- tolls, parking fees -- can strongly influence
>driving habits.

>For proof of this look at the situation in Europe, where        
>gasoline prices are three times greater than in the U.S. (due
>to taxes).  In European countries, people drive much less than
>in the U.S. (around 1/2 as many highway miles per capita per 
>year), and a greater portion of trips are made by public
>transportation.

But in Australia (at least my little bit of it, the bottom middle)
public transport is hardly used.  Petrol is running at about 70c per
litre (with drops to 64c or so if there is a discounting war) but the
public transport is very poorly patornised.

There are a number of theories as to why South Australians prefer to
drive.  Poor public transport to the big dormitory suburbs is one.  NOt
to mention the lousy hours it is available. 

HOwever surveys have indicated that even if the servuce was extended,
people prefer the convenience of their cars - leave when you want, stop
off to do the shopping, etc.

Also, not everyone works in the city, and cross-suburb transport is
usually vey poor.

(All the above are my personal opinion, and not that of the Adelaide
City Council.  Hey I'm a sysad, not a planner!)

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Zebee Johnstone  DoD #605   | You don't own an Italian motorcycle 
     Adelaide City Council       |  - you merely have the privilege 
    zebee@itd.adelaide.edu.au    |    of paying its bills.... 
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: pmitra@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Pritha Mitra-stiff)
Subject: Re: Gasoline Tax and Cities
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 15:31:14 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.162052.4275@msdhsv.ingr.com> foxx@foxxjac.b17a.ingr.com writes:
>trefftz@canidae.cps.msu.edu (Christian Trefftz Dr. Hsu) writes:
>|> There is talk again about higher taxes on gasoline.
>|> Would it have a long term impact on the way cities grow?
>|> Would it make massive transit systems more attractive?
>|> What do you think?
>
>
>I asked this question at one point and have pieced together
>this answer.  Gasoline costs are actually not the major cost
>of private transportation.  I recall an article that placed
>the cost of driving a car at somewhere over $4 a mile (U.S.)
>including maintenance and other necessary costs.  So I believe
>that many people will complain (greatly) about increasing
>gasoline prices, but they will adjust.  As long as people 
>focus on factors such as gasoline which are smaller and are
>able to ignore other greater costs, they will not perceive 
>mass transit as a better option.  
>
>An example is found in extremely crowded areas where people 
>choose mass transit rather than pay exhorbant parking fees.
>These people realize that gasoline cost is less significant
>considering the amount of time they drive versus the amount
>of time they park.
>  --AJ

This is true, gasoline is only a small portion of the cost of
driving a car.  However, people perceive gasoline costs to be
a relatively large part of the cost of driving.  This is
because the other costs of driving -- purchase price of a car,
maintenance costs, insurance -- are fixed costs.  So, when
drivers decide how much to drive, they largely ignore these      
costs, which they will have to pay no matter how many miles
they drive.  Consequently, gasoline prices, and other 'out-of-
pocket' costs -- tolls, parking fees -- can strongly influence
driving habits.

For proof of this look at the situation in Europe, where        
gasoline prices are three times greater than in the U.S. (due
to taxes).  In European countries, people drive much less than
in the U.S. (around 1/2 as many highway miles per capita per 
year), and a greater portion of trips are made by public
transportation.
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: randolph@netcom.com (Randolph Fritz)
Subject: Re: Gasoline Tax and Cities
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 00:57:56 GMT

I believe the "costs" most people actually check when choosing a
transport mode is convenience, working to minimize some combination of
time, stress, and cargo-management difficulty.

__Randolph Fritz
  randolph@netcom.com
  Mountain View, California, Earth
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: micah@ravl.rice.edu (Micah Samuel Rosen)
Subject: Where to study Urbanism(was Re: Death and Life)
Organization: Rice University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:47:52 GMT

The programs in urbanism I am familiar with at this point include:

University of Virginia - graduate students in all divisions of the
			school of Architecture (architecture, landscape
			urban planning, arch. history) can take
			studios and recieve a certificate in American
			Urbanism. This program has been around for
			over ten years now.

University of Miami (FL) - The school of architecture is run by
			Duany and Plater-Zyberk. It offers a post-
			professional Masters of Architecture and 
			Town Planning.

Look for possible emergence of Yale with the recent appointment
of Fred Koetter as Dean of Architecture. (Although I understand
that being dean at Yale is largely ceremonial like many other
schools.)

Others are out there but those are the ones I know. Traditional 
urbanism was hip stuff for architects in the early 80's but has gone
by the wayside with the emergence of Rem Koolhaas (Delirious New
York) and the "Lite City." There are still a few architecture
professors pushing traditional urbanism but such are the tides
of fashion ...


Micah Rosen        Univ. of Virginia B.S. Architecture 1990
Houston, TX        Rice University M. Arch. 1993 
               
                   "Planned communities are for people with no
			plans of their own ... "
From: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Re: Death and Life of Great American Cities
Date: 7 Jan 1993 23:30:21 GMT
Organization: lbl
Distribution: world
Reply-To: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.12.154

In article <C0HytK.J20@knot.ccs.queensu.ca>, calvert@QueensU.CA (John Calvert)
writes:
|> I just finished reading this classic, and checked out a couple of
|> reviews, both from 1961, and more recent. Jane Jacobs seems to
|> get universal accolades. So why don't North American cities
|> conform to her 4 laws of city vitality?
|> 
|> 1. diversity of use
|> 2. small blocks
|> 3. mixed ages of buildings
|> 4. medium high densities

1, 3, and 4 seem clear enough, but is there more to 2 than
just "small blocks"?  I'd always thought that large blocks
allowed a smaller road/non-road area for a city, assuming
constant street widths.  Are small blocks favored for being
more conducive to walking?  square vs long, narrow blocks?

And on a following posting about gas taxes, I'd say that they
are probably a necessary, but by no means sufficient, precondition
for people to reduce auto use.

Bruce Nordman
B_Nordman@lbl.gov
From: karplus@cse.ucsc.edu (Kevin Karplus)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Re: Death and Life of Great American Cities
Date: 9 Jan 93 01:57:10 GMT
Reply-To: karplus@ce.ucsc.edu (Kevin Karplus)
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ararat.ucsc.edu


micah@ravl.rice.edu (Micah Samuel Rosen) says
	The other thing small blocks can encourage is the use
	of all streets by the automobile rather than just main
	arteries. This means that the potential exists for a 
	tight grid of two-lane streets as opposed to high traffic
	six lane (and greater) arteries and the no-thru-traffic
	cul-de-sacs.

There is a design that has the advantages of both: provide a grid of
bike/pedestrian streets, but block them to through automobile traffic,
except along aterials.  You then have neighborhoods bounded by
arterials which are internally well connected for bicyclists and
pedestrians, but which do not have any through traffic.  This can
often be retrofitted to existing street patterns (either by blocking
off part of a grid, as has been done in Berkeley), or by adding
pedestrian and bike passages between cul de sacs (usually harder to
arrange, since the important rights of way often have houses built
directly over them, and so can't be acquired with reasonable political
and economic costs).

Kevin Karplus
(not a professional planner, but a long time bicycle advocate, who
sees incompetent or misguided transportation planning as the main
destructive force in American cities and suburbs)
-- 
Kevin Karplus		karplus@ce.ucsc.edu

Due to budgetary constraints the light at the end of the tunnel is
being turned off.
From: trefftz@canidae.cps.msu.edu (Christian Trefftz Dr. Hsu)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Gasoline Tax and Cities
Date: 7 Jan 93 21:44:28 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Michigan State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: canidae.cps.msu.edu

There is talk again about higher taxes on gasoline.
Would it have a long term impact on the way cities grow?
Would it make massive transit systems more attractive?
What do you think?
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: randolph@netcom.com (Randolph Fritz)
Subject: Automotive congestion as a sign of health
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 20:04:28 GMT

AJ has the right of it--gasoline really isn't most of the cost.  Now
if roads showed up as a line item on tax forms--then people might
sit up & take note.

On a related note, I've decided that automobile traffic congestion can
actually be a sign of urban health--it means that people are crowding
out cars.  What do you-all think?

__R
From: micah@ravl.rice.edu (Micah Samuel Rosen)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Re: Where to study Urbanism(was Re: Death and Life)
Date: 11 Jan 93 15:54:03 GMT
Organization: Rice University

Definitions - copy into faq if you want :

My definition of traditional urbanism is guided by the 
philosophies (not mine) that say life would be great if
we could uninvent the automobile and suburbia and
have everybody living within a fifteen minute walk
of where they worked. At the most reduced it embraced the
idea that density equals urbanism.The position was 
articulated most forcefully in the 1970's and 80's by
an architect named Leon Krier who has written and lectured 
extensively. Krier also has made a proposal for modifications of 
Washington D.C.

Traditional urbanism has been associated with the use
of historical building forms (based on Greek and Roman
buildings) although some architects working with a
modern stylistic palette have embraced the theories.
The association with a particular style of architecture may
have been the downfall of Krier.

Rem Koolhaas is a Dutch architect who has written on the
city extensively as well as doing a fairly large number of
buildings (for a European architect at least) with his
firm the Office for Metropolitan Architecture. (An
OMA monograph has just been published.) In the late
seventies he published a book titled Delirious New York
which illustrated the lack of resolution of modernist
ideas of the city. Currently he is lecturing on the idea
of the "Lite City" (similar to Lite Beer, none of the 
calories none of the taste) which is basically a euphemism for
the current core/edge city condition. His position seems
to be one of resignation to the fact that architects are
involved in a process of city building that is beyond their
control and architects should reduce their ambitions to
designing competent buildings.

I realize their are differences in the discourses on the city
in architecture and urban planning but I certainly think they
can inform each other.

Micah Rosen        Univ. of Virginia B.S. Architecture 1990
                   Rice University M. Arch. 1993 
               
                   "Planned communities are for people with no
			plans of their own ... "
            
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: micah@ravl.rice.edu (Micah Samuel Rosen)
Subject: Re: Death and Life of Great American Cities
Organization: Rice University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:36:57 GMT

Reposting due to faulty distribution :

John Calvert (calvert@mast.queensu.ca) writes :

>To clarify a previous posting: short blocks, although resulting in more
>pavement per square unit of city vitality, lead to many more interactions
>between district neighbours, and visitors. They give people a variety of
>routes to any one destination. They allow the vitality to spread beyond
>the main boulevard or thoroughfare. They stir things up. From personal
>experience I perfer to walk a block with many interesting sidestreets
>to one long corridor.


The other thing small blocks can encourage is the use
of all streets by the automobile rather than just main
arteries. This means that the potential exists for a 
tight grid of two-lane streets as opposed to high traffic
six lane (and greater) arteries and the no-thru-traffic
cul-de-sacs.


Re: Andres Duany (and his wife Elizabeth Plater-Zybert who I've
always suspected is the brains in the team.)

Through numerous conferences and a design studio taught
by an associate of theirs, I've come to realize that
Andres and Elizabeth are formally recreating the American
town but the impact on larger issues is questionable.
They have appealed to the sense of nostalgia in terms
of what a town should look like but the last I heard
few people actually both live AND work in Seaside or the
Kentlands. DPZ projects seem to create more suburban 
enclaves for those who want it both ways.

Of course, this just follows from the fact that it
can be marketed by developers ...

One of my classsmates is preparing his thesis on some
of these towns. Perhaps I can talk him into making it
available when he's done.



Micah Rosen        Univ. of Virginia B.S. Architecture 1990
                   Rice University M. Arch. 1993 
               
                   "Planned communities are for people with no
			plans of their own ... "
From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Re: Gasoline Tax and Cities
Date: 8 Jan 93 21:29:54 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.ucsc.edu


In article <1993Jan8.162052.4275@msdhsv.ingr.com> foxx@foxxjac.b17a.ingr.com writes:
>Gasoline costs are actually not the major cost
>of private transportation.  I recall an article that placed
>the cost of driving a car at somewhere over $4 a mile (U.S.)
>including maintenance and other necessary costs.

Something that it seems necessary to point out over and over is that there
are many different ways to compute the cost of owning/driving a car, and
which one is the "true" cost depends on the situation.

The cost of buying the car, depreciation, parking it where you live,
insuring it, etc.  is largely fixed cost, and to the owner it is "sunk"
cost.  That is, if you decide you have to own a car then you have to
pay these costs whether you drive it or not.  If you paid these costs
and didn't drive the car for a month then the cost per mile that month
would be infinite.

Other costs such as gasoline and oil and tires and to some extent
maintenance are use-dependent costs.  The total cost is of course the
sum of the fixed and use-dependent costs; and the cost per mile is
simply a number that you get when you divide the total cost by the
number of miles driven in some period.

If you are in the car rental business you have additional costs, such
as the people who do the renting and service the cars, so you get some
extra costs there which the car owner does not incur.  Your objective
is to keep the car rented enough to get enough revenue to cover your
costs and have some profit left over.  So cost-per-mile figures obtained
from car rental companies don't really apply to individual car owners.

If you are deciding whether to drive the car you already own from
point A to point B then the cost of gasoline is probably the major cost
you consider.  The sunk costs are already sunk; you aren't going to
need new tires just to make this trip; and you probably won't even
need to add oil or windshield wiper juice.  So the perceived cost of
using the car for the trip is just the cost of the gasoline.
-- 
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu
haynes@cats.bitnet

"Ya can talk all ya wanna, but it's dif'rent than it was!"
"No it aint!  But ya gotta know the territory!"
        Meredith Willson: "The Music Man"
From: spackman@disco-sol.dfki.uni-sb.de (Stephen Spackman)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Re: Gasoline Tax and Cities
Date: 10 Jan 1993 14:35:02 GMT
Organization: DFKI Saarbruecken GmbH, D-W 6600 Saarbruecken
Reply-To: stephen@acm.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: disco-sol.dfki.uni-sb.de
In-reply-to: trefftz@canidae.cps.msu.edu's message of 7 Jan 93 21:44:28 GMT

Perhaps *because* I don't drive, I think I'm in a position to tell you
why transit systems don't work:

	(1) they require cash money or tickets
	(2) they don't run all the time
	(3) they don't handle bulky goods

Together, these restrict not only my perceived mobility but my *real*
mobility: if I am caught with no change in my pocket, or I stay late at
work, or I buy something large in a shop, I'm in trouble in a way I
wouldn't be if I hard a car with me.

Before transit is a serious option, item 2 has to be addresses directly
and absolutely: the *entire network*, including everything needed to
support the user's intuitions about efficient routes, needs to run 24
hours a day, every day (if economics or maintenance dictate substantial
schedule/connection variation, this needs to be countered with active
advice facilities).

Item 3 is a bigger problem than might be imagined because it is easy to
overestimate the predictability of this problem, and to underestimate
its nuisance value. I think it's clear that it has technical solutions
with fairly low transition costs, though.

Item 1 should be addressed by making transit facilities free, if it's
*really* intended to encourage people to abandon driving. But even
failing that it should be reduced to the "car key" level - one item that
you have to carry, and that requires no upkeep. A passive transponder so
that vehicles can record when I use them, and a monthly bill would do
just fine. (Here in Saarbruecken bus passes aren't checked during the
day, so this can serve as test data. Subjectively, the convenience of
busses is indeed *substantially* increased by being able to use
whichever door is free and not having to worry about tickets. But the
monthly hassle to buy a pass is still absurd by comparison to the
automatic billing facilities of other utilities).

This is not to say that there are no psychological factors involved:
people often talk of some further sense of freedom that they get from
having a car, though given the realities of city driving and the fact
that parking spaces are invariably farther afield than busstops, I don't
really see it :-). But where there are hard factors, they should be
considered too ;-).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
stephen p spackman                                       stephen@acm.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: calvert@QueensU.CA (John Calvert)
Subject: Re: Where to study Urbanism(was Re: Death and Life)
Organization: Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 03:02:28 GMT

>Others are out there but those are the ones I know. Traditional 
>urbanism was hip stuff for architects in the early 80's but has gone
>by the wayside with the emergence of Rem Koolhaas (Delirious New
>York) and the "Lite City." There are still a few architecture
>professors pushing traditional urbanism but such are the tides
>of fashion ...

Could I get some definitions here: Traditional Urbanism, Rem Koolhaas,
and Lite City? If there is a faq it might be good to add these if they
are still current.

John
-- 
John Calvert

calvert@mast.queensu.ca
From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
Subject: Re: Death and Life of Great American Cities
Date: 7 Jan 93 22:34:13 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.ucsc.edu


In article <C0HytK.J20@knot.ccs.queensu.ca> calvert@QueensU.CA (John Calvert) writes:
> So why don't North American cities
>conform to her [Jane Jacobs] 4 laws of city vitality?
>
>1. diversity of use
>2. small blocks
>3. mixed ages of buildings
>4. medium high densities
>
I haven't read the book; but those "laws", especially the first 3,
seem to apply quite well to a lot of smaller cities and towns where
the economy and hence the population size is essentially static.
When conversion of raw land to housing takes place it tends to be
that a developer sells building lots to individual families; in
contrast to a big growth situation where a developer divides a huge
tract of land into lots and builds the houses on them all at once.
Then in prosperous cities you get businesses, primarily financial
institutions, with edifice complexes that try to outdo one another
in the height and spiffiness of office buildings they put up.
-- 
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu
haynes@cats.bitnet

"Ya can talk all ya wanna, but it's dif'rent than it was!"
"No it aint!  But ya gotta know the territory!"
        Meredith Willson: "The Music Man"
Newsgroups: alt.planning.urban
From: wday@vaxb.acs.unt.edu
Subject: Any emergency managers out there?
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 21:45:36 GMT

Are there any emergency managers / emergency management planners out
there in netland?

Wayne Day
  WDay@unt.edu - Institute of Emergency Administration & Disaster Planning
                 University of North Texas, Denton, TX

 76703.376@CompuServe.Com - manager: TandyNet forums on CompuServe