5 ms·

I wonder what city will be the first to ban private cars and allow all streets to work this way.

crispyambulance 9y ago
"The first" was probably a town incorporated in the middle ages. Many towns in Europe that have public squares and donkey sized streets ban private cars in their historic cores (or limit them to special permits).
- kuschku 9y ago
  Even earlier. There are historic reports from rome during the time of the senate, banning carts in some streets and areas of the cities during certain times of the day.
- to3m 9y ago
  There's minimal car access during business hours to the walled part of York: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York#Transport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York#Transport
ebiester 9y ago
You don't need to ban cars. You just need to design around people instead of cars. Remove parking minimums. Don't put on-street parking but rather leave it to the free market to handle parking solutions (Yes, that means people pay to park.) Subsidize public transit but road maintenance must be paid by automobile-based taxes. Don't require density, but always zone for the next bigger thing. (The neighborhood is single house? Allow duplexes and MIL units. Is that the neighborhood? Allow 3 story buildings. Don't go from single house to giant skyscrapers, but rather build incrementally bigger.) That means that there will be fewer automobiles, fewer large roads, and less traffic, lending to more density and more maintainable infrastructure.
- ars 9y ago
  How is that designing around people? First you are going to make all the people in the cars nuts because they can't find parking, so they won't come. Next all the people who find public transport tedious and slow won't come. (Yes, even the best public transport is not anywhere near as a good as a car that goes direct, and where you can actually leave your stuff in the car.) Next all the people who hate living in dense places will leave because everything is all squished together, so you are again not designing for people. How is that designing for people? It sounds more like you are designing for livestock. Livestock who don't mind, or have no choice, about living in cramped quarters, and who don't mind wasting a lot of time. No thank you, this is not the kind of city I want.
  - saosebastiao 9y ago
    Luckily, for people like you, you have the vast majority of the world's land area to work with. Cities take up very little space.
  - apendleton 9y ago
    And yet Manhattan is an economic powerhouse, so apparently plenty of people are okay with these restrictions. If you aren't, don't live there.
    - InitialLastName 9y ago
      Most of the areas where people actually live in New York (read: Upper Manhattan and the outer boroughs) have free street parking.
  - dsfyu404ed 9y ago
    The person you're replying to assumes that transportation and demand to live/work/spend money in the city has such a high baseline volume that the city will always be relatively prosperous and the experience of walking in the city is the bottleneck when it comes to making the city better. This is fine if your world view doesn't extend beyond existing large cities. It's like being rich and complaining about having to maintain your vacation homes. Most smaller cities can't take that high baseline amount of economic activity and prosperity for granted so they need to balance luxury stuff like walk-ability, nice parks, etc. with making it easy and cheap to engage in commerce. Luxuries like walk-ability and parks are second to building up a baseline amount of (hopefully diverse) economic activity that won't go away at the next downturn.
- saosebastiao 9y ago
  It is quite likely that if we made cars pay for their direct and indirect costs, the shift towards transit would make it self sustaining or even profitable, allowing us to not have to subsidize it at all.
lmm 9y ago
Oslo is aiming for 2019: https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2017/04/oslo-is-on-track-for-a-car-free-future/522882/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2017/04/oslo-is-on-tr...
0x4f3759df 9y ago
Superblocks: how Barcelona is taking city streets back from cars https://www.vox.com/2016/8/4/12342806/barcelona-superblocks https://www.vox.com/2016/8/4/12342806/barcelona-superblocks
iagovar 9y ago
Look for Pontevedra, Spain.
33W 9y ago
Probably a bad example because of its dependence on tourism, but Mackinac Island has prohibited motor vehicles since 1898: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackinac_Island https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackinac_Island
dilyevsky 9y ago
Not sure about first, but Zermatt, CH already has.

"The first" was probably a town incorporated in the middle ages. Many towns in Europe that have public squares and donkey sized streets ban private cars in their historic cores (or limit them to special permits).

kuschku 9y ago
Even earlier. There are historic reports from rome during the time of the senate, banning carts in some streets and areas of the cities during certain times of the day.
to3m 9y ago
There's minimal car access during business hours to the walled part of York: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York#Transport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York#Transport

ebiester 9y ago

You don't need to ban cars. You just need to design around people instead of cars. Remove parking minimums. Don't put on-street parking but rather leave it to the free market to handle parking solutions (Yes, that means people pay to park.) Subsidize public transit but road maintenance must be paid by automobile-based taxes. Don't require density, but always zone for the next bigger thing. (The neighborhood is single house? Allow duplexes and MIL units. Is that the neighborhood? Allow 3 story buildings. Don't go from single house to giant skyscrapers, but rather build incrementally bigger.) That means that there will be fewer automobiles, fewer large roads, and less traffic, lending to more density and more maintainable infrastructure.

ars 9y ago
How is that designing around people? First you are going to make all the people in the cars nuts because they can't find parking, so they won't come. Next all the people who find public transport tedious and slow won't come. (Yes, even the best public transport is not anywhere near as a good as a car that goes direct, and where you can actually leave your stuff in the car.) Next all the people who hate living in dense places will leave because everything is all squished together, so you are again not designing for people. How is that designing for people? It sounds more like you are designing for livestock. Livestock who don't mind, or have no choice, about living in cramped quarters, and who don't mind wasting a lot of time. No thank you, this is not the kind of city I want.
- saosebastiao 9y ago
  Luckily, for people like you, you have the vast majority of the world's land area to work with. Cities take up very little space.
- apendleton 9y ago
  And yet Manhattan is an economic powerhouse, so apparently plenty of people are okay with these restrictions. If you aren't, don't live there.
  - InitialLastName 9y ago
    Most of the areas where people actually live in New York (read: Upper Manhattan and the outer boroughs) have free street parking.
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  The person you're replying to assumes that transportation and demand to live/work/spend money in the city has such a high baseline volume that the city will always be relatively prosperous and the experience of walking in the city is the bottleneck when it comes to making the city better. This is fine if your world view doesn't extend beyond existing large cities. It's like being rich and complaining about having to maintain your vacation homes. Most smaller cities can't take that high baseline amount of economic activity and prosperity for granted so they need to balance luxury stuff like walk-ability, nice parks, etc. with making it easy and cheap to engage in commerce. Luxuries like walk-ability and parks are second to building up a baseline amount of (hopefully diverse) economic activity that won't go away at the next downturn.
saosebastiao 9y ago
It is quite likely that if we made cars pay for their direct and indirect costs, the shift towards transit would make it self sustaining or even profitable, allowing us to not have to subsidize it at all.

lmm 9y ago

Oslo is aiming for 2019: https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2017/04/oslo-is-on-track-for-a-car-free-future/522882/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2017/04/oslo-is-on-tr...

0x4f3759df 9y ago

Superblocks: how Barcelona is taking city streets back from cars https://www.vox.com/2016/8/4/12342806/barcelona-superblocks https://www.vox.com/2016/8/4/12342806/barcelona-superblocks

iagovar 9y ago

Look for Pontevedra, Spain.

33W 9y ago

Probably a bad example because of its dependence on tourism, but Mackinac Island has prohibited motor vehicles since 1898: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackinac_Island https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackinac_Island

dilyevsky 9y ago

Not sure about first, but Zermatt, CH already has.