Would You Opt for a Dense Urban Environment with Driving or Alternative Modes of Transportation?
As a search engine optimization (SEO) specialist at Google, I understand the importance of choosing the right residential environment and commuting method. My personal preference is clear: a dense urban environment that prioritizes driving over alternative modes of transportation. My worst nightmare is living in a place where my car stands as the only reliable option for getting around, while everyone else patiently waits for buses, subways, or rideshares in the rain.
Residential Choices and Commuting Preferences
I currently reside in the suburban areas surrounding Boise, Idaho, a city with a smaller population. In this area, public transportation is extremely sparse. I rarely even notice what the bus system looks like, and when my employer offered to subsidize a bus pass for my commute, I was initially intrigued. However, the reality of using public transportation hit home.
The move to the suburbs was made to escape the overdevelopment of the small town we previously lived in. The journey that once took just ten minutes had stretched to forty-five minutes during rush hour. Despite the significant time saved on driving, taking the bus proved to be a different story.
After conducting research on the bus website, I discovered that riding the bus would extend my commute to an astounding two hours each way. Barring potential subsidies, my arrival time at work, often before 6 AM, would be impossible with public transit. I would have to leave by 05:30 AM and wouldn't return until after 21:30 PM, a 14-hour wait!
Comparing Dense Urban Environments with the Suburbs
My experience with dense urban environments in Los Angeles and Phoenix was more favorable. In these cities, I not only found public transportation to be a practical solution but also enjoyed using it. Despite the challenges of living in a smaller city like Boise, other dense urban areas offer more convenient and reliable public transit options.
Bike commuting is a viable option when the climate permits. However, the practicality of biking is heavily influenced by weather conditions. In Boise, evenings with temperatures above 105°F during the summer, and the smoky air pollution known as "smoke season," make biking far less appealing. During these months, outdoor exercise becomes a health hazard, making indoor alternatives necessary.
Winter weather in Boise presents another challenge. Snow, ice, and sub-zero temperatures would require substantial investment in biking gear, including studded snow tires and insulated riding suits. Cycling the 28 miles each way would be an hour each way, which is generally acceptable. However, the experience in Antwerp, where cyclists brave the elements in clear weather, is a stark contrast. Sharing the road with aggressive drivers in smoky, smoggy conditions in California, however, makes it a less desirable option.
Conclusion
While dense urban environments offer the convenience and efficiency of public transportation and alternative modes of commuting, a sprawling suburban layout like the one surrounding Boise provides greater flexibility and comfort. My preferences align with these suburban attributes, valuing the individual freedom and time efficiency of personal transportation over waiting in the rain or braving harsh weather conditions for public transit.
Ultimately, the decision to live in a dense urban environment or a more suburban area is a highly personal one, influenced by individual preferences, lifestyle, and the specific factors of each location.