i met this guy in paris once with the best smile
― plax (ico), Saturday, 22 January 2011 22:22 (thirteen years ago) link
well, okay, you can compare the densities of urban cores, but I think it's helpful/interesting to also look at the densities of entire agglomerations
― the journey you take with bob ross (askance johnson), Saturday, 22 January 2011 22:36 (thirteen years ago) link
though I'm sure trying to define exactly what areas lies in an agglomeration is always going to be problematic
― the journey you take with bob ross (askance johnson), Saturday, 22 January 2011 22:37 (thirteen years ago) link
its not if youre iatee, just start w/yr conclusion say 'the petite couronne' a few times and work yr way backward
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 22 January 2011 22:40 (thirteen years ago) link
gee why would I use the name for the extended parisian metro area in an argument about the paris metro area, killer zing.
― iatee, Saturday, 22 January 2011 22:54 (thirteen years ago) link
haha it has nothing to do w/the metro area
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 22 January 2011 22:59 (thirteen years ago) link
are you sure, here's your friend wikipedia:
'The Petite Couronne[3] (Little Crown, i.e. Inner Ring) is the hub of the urban agglomeration of Paris.'
― iatee, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:02 (thirteen years ago) link
hub of the urban agglomeration of Paris =/ metro area! just look at yr map^
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:03 (thirteen years ago) link
'hub of the urban agglomeration' has 'nothing to do w/ the metro area'
wtf are we even arguing about, I know you're just trolling me
― iatee, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:04 (thirteen years ago) link
i am not, you are being dumb
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:05 (thirteen years ago) link
you guys!
― harlan, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:06 (thirteen years ago) link
I think you're confusing the use of 'metropolitan area' on that map (which is really just the best english translation for aire urbaine) w/ it being a term that means one and only one thing
― iatee, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:08 (thirteen years ago) link
im sry i simply refuse to let iatee make up his own city definitions willy nilly 'jersey city yes staten no s conn not sure penn no wai' will not stand for this amateur tautological urban analysis
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:09 (thirteen years ago) link
just 2 b clear doods
ny: rill bigparis: rill big
― all dogs: go to heaven (m bison), Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:12 (thirteen years ago) link
fwiw there are better ways to calculate density that help to get rid of the 'empty space in connecticut' pointlessness and the 'LA is denser than NY!' challops: http://www.austincontrarian.com/austincontrarian/2008/03/weighted-densit.html http://www.uctc.net/access/37/access37_sprawl.shtml
but I don't think anyone has ever worked out the math for paris
― iatee, Saturday, 22 January 2011 23:16 (thirteen years ago) link
so me and my math-y friend who's into this were talking about it and actually decided to ~crunch the numbers~...sorta interesting cause afaik nobody's done weighted density for paris. didn't just do this to prove myself right, we're into this and were curious. (fwiw pretty sure he thought paris would win.)
again, weighted density = density experienced by average resident. regular density = density experienced by average tract of land (which thus gives equal weight to the center of paris and a farm 25 miles away)
instead of census tracts, we used the 1280 communes and 20 arrondissements that make up the greater paris region, got the individual density for each, multiplied that by (% of total region population) and did a sum of those:
http://www.intercarto.com/cms/produits/1473/136/carte-de-l-ile-de-france-en-communes.html
^1300 communes/arrondissements
result:
3 state new york metro area - 36,369 /mi^2paris metro area (ile de france) - 25,323 /mi^2
others, for reference:5 County SF Bay Area - 11,956 /mi^211 County SF Bay Area - 10,188 /mi^25 County LA - 10,200 /mi^2LA+OC - 12,208/mi^2.manhattan - 113,534/mi^2 bronx - 69,164/mi^2brooklyn - 57,181 /mi^2queens - 44,446/mi^2SI - 13,000 /mi^2
basically ile de france (paris and the 7 departments that surround it) is 'more dense' than the NYC metro area in the same way that LA is more dense than NYC - the total built up area is more evenly distributed. looking at the density numbers like that isn't completely pointless - it tells you something about the sprawl/land-use. but it doesn't really tell you anything about what it's like there, which is why 'LA is the densest city in america seems like an absurdist statement'. the average 'francilien' (resident of the paris metropolitan area) lives in a considerably less dense environment than the average NYC resident. and paris is 'more dense' in the city-boundary calculation (which is pretty pointless w/ paris...in 2011 the city's political boundary doesn't even cover the central business district. that was my only real point at the start of this argument.)
but as a whole the 'average citizen' lives in an area less dense than the average metro new yorker (but way, way denser than the average bay area resident.) the experienced density gap is similar to the gap between brooklyn and queens.
paris' banlieue is a lot more complicated than a lot of people (esp. french people) give it credit for - includes super dense urban regions, castles, la haine-style gigantic housing projects, boring american sprawl, tiny medieval towns, super rural areas, etc...so there are limits to comparing it to LA sprawl. it's crazy dense. way more dense than any region in the united states.
except nyc.
― iatee, Monday, 24 January 2011 16:14 (thirteen years ago) link
er, http://www.intercarto.com/produits_image/image_1473_image_idf-communes.jpg
― iatee, Monday, 24 January 2011 16:15 (thirteen years ago) link
anyway http://thegurglingcod.typepad.com/thegurglingcod/images/2008/02/12/the_more_you_know2.jpg
― iatee, Monday, 24 January 2011 16:17 (thirteen years ago) link
'LA is the densest city in america seems like an absurdist statement'. should be 'LA is the densest city in america' seems like an absurdist statement.
― iatee, Monday, 24 January 2011 16:18 (thirteen years ago) link
londoners:
w/r/t greater london, what's the smallest unit for which area + population data would exist? is there a division smaller than borough?
― iatee, Monday, 24 January 2011 16:27 (thirteen years ago) link
yeah, there are also "wards", about a dozen per borough.
― joe, Monday, 24 January 2011 16:43 (thirteen years ago) link
greater london data super easy to find and use wtg uk
20569.71061 in miles
― iatee, Monday, 24 January 2011 17:15 (thirteen years ago) link
iatee or other mass transit bros, what is your opinion of rapid bus transit as an alternative to rail? My backward ass burg is getting one of these next year and I'm wondering if this is a worthy venture to be cheerleading on a bigger scale.
― Temple Grindin (m bison), Monday, 31 January 2011 01:58 (thirteen years ago) link
iatee is better on this stuff than i am but one of the nice things about bus transit is that it doesnt require a lot of expensive new infrastructure
― max, Monday, 31 January 2011 02:33 (thirteen years ago) link
(though it obv does require some new infrastructure)
― max, Monday, 31 January 2011 02:34 (thirteen years ago) link
generally it's a worthy venture to be cheerleading...but it depends on the cost and the location and the ridership projections etc. if it's a 'good project' then it's worth cheerleading for - and but that depends on the specifics, like where the stops will be, what kind of BRT it is (whether there will be timed lights, prepaid fares, dedicated bus lane etc.) a super well-planned rapid bus system is better than a light-rail system w/ stops in the middle of nowhere. but it's a bummer to get BRT as a light-rail consolation prize. still, dedicated bus lanes can be converted to light-rail in the future (is what people say.)
there's definitely a psychological comfort margin for lots of people w/r/t buses vs. trains and building actual transit infrastructure is always better than painting a bus but in the end it's all in the details.
― iatee, Monday, 31 January 2011 02:45 (thirteen years ago) link
m bise is your burg getting something like this
http://www.geekosystem.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/china-giant-bus-550x205.jpg
― based god kwassa kwassa (dayo), Monday, 31 January 2011 02:47 (thirteen years ago) link
haha I said 'and but'
― iatee, Monday, 31 January 2011 02:48 (thirteen years ago) link
I think I was trying to decide which one to go w/
http://www.viabrt.net/Content/BRTMain.aspx
def the best corridor in sa to try it on...connects our biggest public university, downtown, and medical center
― Temple Grindin (m bison), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:03 (thirteen years ago) link
They put a BRT in on the most traveled non-freeway corridor in my suburban county with dedicated lanes for about half the length, prioritized signals, fares paid at station, stops every mile or so, and 10-minute headways. It's great. King County, the next county over and home of Seattle, is building BRT in several corridors that by all accounts is laughable compared to the one in my county. But they are getting light rail online that will take another 15 years to reach up here so I'm still envious.
― smanging pumpkins (The Reverend), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:14 (thirteen years ago) link
yeah tbh light-rail would be nice (and would prob improve your life substantially) until enough people *want* light-rail in san antonio and until the city is ready to develop around it, it would likely be really underperforming like dallas'. I don't know a lot about san antonio but transit people seem to think that the brt route is good. xp
― iatee, Monday, 31 January 2011 03:17 (thirteen years ago) link
light rail is boss imo, I love spending an afternoon just riding the light rail, looking out the window and thinking baout things
http://www.mtr.com.hk/images/LR_routemap.jpg
― based god kwassa kwassa (dayo), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:19 (thirteen years ago) link
that's a really pretty map
― iatee, Monday, 31 January 2011 03:20 (thirteen years ago) link
yah if you go to the original image its like 2400 pix long, it's greeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaattttttt
― based god kwassa kwassa (dayo), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:21 (thirteen years ago) link
light rail is boss imo
otm
― smanging pumpkins (The Reverend), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:22 (thirteen years ago) link
I think it's interesting that the people on this thread are all 'men of a certain age'...sometimes I wonder if our generation really is a bit different or whether I just live in a bubble.
― iatee, Monday, 31 January 2011 03:57 (thirteen years ago) link
def a bubble
― Temple Grindin (m bison), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:58 (thirteen years ago) link
nah but theres def a generational embrace of transit among young folx in urban enclaves and shit.
― Temple Grindin (m bison), Monday, 31 January 2011 04:01 (thirteen years ago) link
makes it easier to ride around on our fixies and shit
― based god kwassa kwassa (dayo), Monday, 31 January 2011 04:05 (thirteen years ago) link
BRT is actually just a poor substitute for fixie rapid transit w/ dedicated fixie lanes
― iatee, Monday, 31 January 2011 04:07 (thirteen years ago) link
not a big hipster community in sa, fixie rapid transit may be a fair compromise
― Temple Grindin (m bison), Monday, 31 January 2011 04:08 (thirteen years ago) link
fixie rapid transit has been known to increase hipster density but it depends on the hipster zoning laws
― iatee, Monday, 31 January 2011 04:09 (thirteen years ago) link
whiney to thread
― Temple Grindin (m bison), Monday, 31 January 2011 04:12 (thirteen years ago) link
re: buses vs rail
http://www.humantransit.org/2011/02/sorting-out-rail-bus-differences.html
― iatee, Friday, 11 February 2011 16:03 (thirteen years ago) link
glaeser can kinda be a clown but it seems like he's becoming the public face of this type of thinking:
http://portlandtransport.com/archives/2011/02/on_market_urban.htmlhttp://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1969/12/how-skyscrapers-can-save-the-city/8387/1/#/
― iatee, Wednesday, 16 February 2011 16:37 (thirteen years ago) link
I don't recommend his book, I couldn't get past a few chapters. article is okay.
― iatee, Wednesday, 16 February 2011 16:39 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/23/business/economy/23housing.html?hp
Sales of new single-family homes in February were down more than 80 percent from the 2005 peak, far exceeding the 28 percent drop in existing home sales. New single-family sales are now lower than at any point since the data was first collected in 1963, when the nation had 120 million fewer residents.
― iatee, Monday, 25 April 2011 00:30 (thirteen years ago) link
But people are still buying houses, even houses in the suburbs -- it's just that there's so much extra stock that there's no need to buy NEW houses.
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Monday, 25 April 2011 01:08 (thirteen years ago) link
also maybe people's taste has gotten better and they've collectively admitted that American architecture has gone completely to shit until you get to ridiculously unaffordable prices, where it's only gone 75% to shit
― five gone cats from Boston (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Monday, 25 April 2011 01:23 (thirteen years ago) link