Issues

These pages are devoted to discussion of those issues that appear to be the most controversial regarding the planning and implementation of the TFD concept. Other issue will be added in the future. Suggestions are welcome.

Many regard limiting sprawl as the major  benefit that could be produced by the widespread adoption of TFD projects in the future. Others argue that this effect is unlikely at best and that sprawl is not an evil but a good thing and should be encouraged.

Many argue that the implementation of TFD on a large scale would not produce the desired benefits of reduced auto use and higher levels of rail tansit use when viewed at a regional scale. This is the "too-small-to matter" argument. Others argue that TFD is a step in the right direction but that is should be extended (spatially) to encompass a larger portion of the metropolis and its residential and job locations. Alternative non-auto methods of providing good transit station access and local circulation mobility are explored on this page.

Opponents of all forms of TFD argue that there is no significant market in metropolitan areas for higher density housing - that the vast majority of people still want the large lot and yard associated with conventional suburban development. This page is devoted to a discussion of housing preference studies and conjecture in various locations and price ranges within the metropolis.

Clearly, if urban transit systems to become more competitive with other forms of transportation, they must offer "seamless" transfers to the passengers. In a nutshell, this means that transfers must require little effort and very short waiting times for passengers and that guidance for making them be exceptionally reliable, clear and straightforward. The topics discussed on this page will largely be those associated with the ways that  intermodal transfer facilities must be designed to achieve these objectives.

Last modified: April 20, 2002