Traffic Projections

This week Chuck looks at traffic projections and the reasons why we are so bad at long term estimates of traffic flow.

Projections (55 MB)

Comments

[Jeffrey Jakucyk]

A great talk as always, you hit all the points I was hoping you would. I'd caution about one thing though. While there's definitely similarities, the pre-WWII pattern of development in North America (Canada is just as culpable as the US in this) is not the same historical pattern seen around the rest of the world. Since North America developed almost entirely during the Industrial Revolution, this 1800-1945 period represents something of a transition from traditional urbanism defined by multi-story buildings and very narrow streets to the low slung sprawl of single-use buildings on large lots and a hierarchical road network.

Small towns throughout much of recorded history were thoroughly urban places with multi-story buildings, side by side, and right up to the street. We don't see this in North America. Our towns, with the exception of Main Street, are made up of ersatz farmhouses on large lots with big setbacks and wide streets. This is not a traditional pattern of development, it's a muddled industrial age aesthetic movement that unfortunately makes places that are not only more difficult to walk around in due to being more spread out, but also by enabling automobile usage through the platting of very wide streets.

I believe it was Alexis de Tocqueville who commented on the American proclivity to drive everywhere, in the first half of the 19th century. So even though it was decades before cars were invented, and railroads were in their infancy, American development still required people to have horses and carriages to get around a lot more so than their European, Asian, or South and Central American counterparts. With all the wide streets and non-urban towns, it's no wonder that cars became favored when they finally appeared.

I think it's important to watch out for this. When stating that we should go back to a more traditional pattern of development, it's important to clarify just what pattern you're talking about. Main Street is a great one, and much of the inner city and even some streetcar suburban development seen in larger cities is fine. Just remember that much of small town America is really quite suburban to begin with (except it usually has a well-connected grid of streets), and was dysfunctional in its own time compared to what it could've been.

Have a look at some of Nathan Lewis' writings on the subject. They're well worth the read, and are sumptuously illustrated.

Let's Take a Trip to an American Village

Let's Take a Trip to an American Village 2: Downtown

Let's Visit an American Village 3: How the Suburbs Came to Be

Traditional City/Heroic Materialism Series Archive

[Jeffrey Jakucyk]

(Forgive me if this gets posted twice)

A great talk as always, you hit all the points I was hoping you would. I'd caution about one thing though. While there's definitely similarities, the pre-WWII pattern of development in North America (Canada is just as culpable as the US in this) is not the same historical pattern seen around the rest of the world. Since North America developed almost entirely during the Industrial Revolution, this 1800-1945 period represents something of a transition from traditional urbanism defined by multi-story buildings and very narrow streets to the low slung sprawl of single-use buildings on large lots and a hierarchical road network.

Small towns throughout much of recorded history were thoroughly urban places with multi-story buildings, side by side, and right up to the street. We don't see this in North America. Our towns, with the exception of Main Street, are made up of ersatz farmhouses on large lots with big setbacks and wide streets. This is not a traditional pattern of development, it's a muddled industrial age aesthetic movement that unfortunately makes places that are not only more difficult to walk around in due to being more spread out, but also by enabling automobile usage through the platting of very wide streets.

I believe it was Alexis de Tocqueville who commented on the American proclivity to drive everywhere, in the first half of the 19th century. So even though it was decades before cars were invented, and railroads were in their infancy, American development still required people to have horses and carriages to get around a lot more so than their European, Asian, or South and Central American counterparts. With all the wide streets and non-urban towns, it's no wonder that cars became favored when they finally appeared.

I think it's important to watch out for this. When stating that we should go back to a more traditional pattern of development, it's important to clarify just what pattern you're talking about. Main Street is a great one, and much of the inner city and even some streetcar suburban development seen in larger cities is fine. Just remember that much of small town America is really quite suburban to begin with, and was dysfunctional in its own time compared to what it could've been.

Have a look at some of Nathan Lewis' writings on the subject. They're well worth the read, and are sumptuously illustrated.

Let's Take a Trip to an American Village

Let's Take a Trip to an American Village 2: Downtown

Let's Visit an American Village 3: How the Suburbs Came to Be

Traditional City/Heroic Materialism Series Archive