3 ms·

I wonder if all these sour grapes about cars will simmer down if a generation comes along that can more easily afford them again. The area I live in is pretty

I wonder if all these sour grapes about cars will simmer down if a generation comes along that can more easily afford them again. The area I live in is pretty dense (a mixed commercial-suburbanish area in the most densely-populated state) and also very car-enabled, and it works out fine. The stores I go to are within minutes of driving for me, and work is 10-15 minutes away. I don't know the official term for such a thing, but near my apartment is what's like a micro-city that you can easily walk/bike around while car use isn't very hampered. The major grocery store's plaza gets a large parking lot and otherwise there are street parking areas. In the other direction are major high-traffic roads that connect to interstates. There are also major businesses around here with tech jobs, and they use large complexes with their own large parking lots. There's a lot I don't like about New Jersey but this kind of mixed area seems to work out really well and makes me question the necessity of block-style cities where it's just depressing concrete towers in a grid as far as the eye can see. Maybe there are more solutions that just take some imagination to support both cars and others in increasingly-dense areas. More car bridges, extra lanes by replacing some sidewalks with sky bridges, underground tunnels, parking lots on the roofs, more reversible lanes, allow motorcycles to use shoulders. Just brainstorming here but I don't like the idea of throwing out the baby with the bathwater with cars - nothing else provides the same freedom to spontaneously go wherever you want on your own terms instead of being beholden to transit schedules or only being able to go as far as you can walk or bike.

cup-of-tea 8y ago
> I wonder if all these sour grapes about cars will simmer down if a generation comes along that can more easily afford them again. In the UK you could afford a car on minimum wage. I have a car. I still don't think cities should be designed for cars. How can anyone look at one of those pictures of American five-lane highways of bumper-to-bumper traffic and think that is in any way sane?
- jimmaswell 8y ago
  I'm saying there are probably unexplored good solutions to that kind of congestion. Another I just thought of is the city motivating companies to make shifts not so centered around 9-5. Spread the rush with shifts of 8-4, 10-6, etc.
  - wahern 8y ago
    The 9-5 work schedule went away a long time ago. In places like the Bay Area rush hours are roughly 6-10AM in the morning and 3-7PM in the evening precisely because of differing schedules[1]. And that's for white collar work. Factories and service work have much more varied schedules. [1] There's a long tail, too. IME traffic becomes noticeably heavy around 6AM and 3PM, but there's a long tail after 10AM and 7PM.
    - cup-of-tea 8y ago
      Yep. In the UK on a weekday the M1 near London and M25 start to get busy after 04:00 and stay busy all day.
- HumanDrivenDev 8y ago
  > In the UK you could afford a car on minimum wage. Parent said easily afford, not afford.
  - cup-of-tea 8y ago
    What does easily mean? Not even notice the extra expenditure on the car? When was that ever the case for most people? It's always been a big outgoing, second only to housing.
farnsworth 8y ago
I and many of my peers grew up in suburbs but ended up in cities after college, without owning cars. I always assumed I'd buy a car, move to the suburbs, and live the same lifestyle that I was used to, but once I got accustomed to walking to the grocery store, taking the bus to work, biking anywhere I can, etc, I realized that I actually really prefer this lifestyle and I will live in walkable neighborhoods as long as I can, even if I have kids.

cup-of-tea 8y ago

> I wonder if all these sour grapes about cars will simmer down if a generation comes along that can more easily afford them again. In the UK you could afford a car on minimum wage. I have a car. I still don't think cities should be designed for cars. How can anyone look at one of those pictures of American five-lane highways of bumper-to-bumper traffic and think that is in any way sane?

jimmaswell 8y ago
I'm saying there are probably unexplored good solutions to that kind of congestion. Another I just thought of is the city motivating companies to make shifts not so centered around 9-5. Spread the rush with shifts of 8-4, 10-6, etc.
- wahern 8y ago
  The 9-5 work schedule went away a long time ago. In places like the Bay Area rush hours are roughly 6-10AM in the morning and 3-7PM in the evening precisely because of differing schedules[1]. And that's for white collar work. Factories and service work have much more varied schedules. [1] There's a long tail, too. IME traffic becomes noticeably heavy around 6AM and 3PM, but there's a long tail after 10AM and 7PM.
  - cup-of-tea 8y ago
    Yep. In the UK on a weekday the M1 near London and M25 start to get busy after 04:00 and stay busy all day.
HumanDrivenDev 8y ago
> In the UK you could afford a car on minimum wage. Parent said easily afford, not afford.
- cup-of-tea 8y ago
  What does easily mean? Not even notice the extra expenditure on the car? When was that ever the case for most people? It's always been a big outgoing, second only to housing.

farnsworth 8y ago

I and many of my peers grew up in suburbs but ended up in cities after college, without owning cars. I always assumed I'd buy a car, move to the suburbs, and live the same lifestyle that I was used to, but once I got accustomed to walking to the grocery store, taking the bus to work, biking anywhere I can, etc, I realized that I actually really prefer this lifestyle and I will live in walkable neighborhoods as long as I can, even if I have kids.