Let’s not demonize driving, just stop subsidizing it

Re:Let’s not demonize driving, just stop subsidizing it by dashundchen on Friday February 17, 2017 @02:25AM (#13666597)

I'm on mobile so unfortunately I have no easy way to provide comparisons. But living in a rust belt city and being familiar with the difference in development patterns, I suspect those numbers are an artifact of the extent of city limits. I'd be happy to look later.

Ie Leipzigs boundary for that number includes the city and undeveloped/agricultural/rural areas in the surrounding metro, where Detroit's number is the developed city limits, excluding the suburbs, exurbs and agricultural places in the metro.

I don't mean to get too bogged down in this point too much. I wanted to point out there are plenty of lessons we can learn from pre-auto cities to make our future more livable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let’s not demonize driving, just stop subsidizing it by ZoeZoeBee on Friday February 17, 2017 @02:41AM (#13666639)

Yes, I provided you the numbers for city's proper in all cases.

No, Leipzig's boundary for that number does not include their larger Urban Area. Looking at the metropolitan area population of those cities Leipzig is 843,619 while Detroit, the rust belt city you mention, is over 4 million according to OECD.

http://www.oecd.org/gov/regional-policy/all.pdf

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let’s not demonize driving, just stop subsidizing it by dashundchen on Friday February 17, 2017 @02:59AM (#13666698)

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Leipzig,+Germany/@51.32782...

If you compare the official city limits with the satellite view you will see the developed area containing most of the population is much smaller than the city limits, and you might understand what I am getting at. I think the appropriate measure here would be the weighted density, closer to representing the average density a person there would be surrounded by.

[ Parent | on HN ]