23 ms·

Pedestrianisation works well in European cities, especially small ones. It's quite common here in the UK, often there are strict time limits on when delivieries

Pedestrianisation works well in European cities, especially small ones. It's quite common here in the UK, often there are strict time limits on when delivieries can be made, e.g. 6-8am when barriers are open to let vehicles in and out. However this model just does not work in the US, outside of very few places. US cities are designed for cars, and without major redevelopment everything's just too far apart - even within the context of a single street - for this to make sense. If you had electric scooters or something though...

adrianN 8y ago
Internalize the cost of parking, drop mandatory parking minimums and change zoning to allows for reasonable density. Wait a few decades and cities probably won't be as car centric as they are now.
betterunix2 8y ago
It took major redevelopment for many US cities to become car-centric, so I am not seeing why we could not do another redevelopment to create pedestrian-friendly cities.
- MrEfficiency 8y ago
  >so I am not seeing why we could not do another redevelopment to create pedestrian-friendly cities. We have 2 local cities that made themselves bike friendly. Property values are going up in that area. However, the people living there were already 10%ers. Its cool to see lots of bike lanes and walkers, but they also managed to price the people that cant afford cars out.
  - hannasanarion 8y ago
    The cycle of gentrification will change that. In 10, 20 years, a new neighborhood will be the hip place to be, all the rich propel will move there, and prices will drop. It'd be nice if the development could happen in the low-income areas from the beginning, but it's hot hopeless.
  - vanderZwan 8y ago
    All the more reason to make pedestrianisation universal, instead of a luxury.
  - 0xCMP 8y ago
    For now at least. As mentioned in other comments it's hard, and expensive, to redevelop entire cities. Politically it's also probably difficult because it's such a big change. Makes sense that those with money to afford making changes privately would have them first. However, it's also likely they will want this nice life in more than just their area and will push for that over time.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- claydavisss 8y ago
  It hasn't happened because most in the US don't need or even want to live in pedestrian focused cities. Americans tend to live in detached single family homes. Americans tend to want space between themselves and their neighbors. Americans do not see their cars as liabilities. Most people don't live in SF/NYC and/or don't read StrongTowns Replacing American suburbia would cost $100 Trillion dollars. More suburbia is being created every day, far outpacing investment in "New Urbanism". In America, when your city/suburb becomes blighted, you can move.
tetromino_ 8y ago
> there are strict time limits on when delivieries can be made, e.g. 6-8am when barriers are open to let vehicles in and out. That is nuts. That means a plumber, electrician, home appliance deliveryman, mover, etc. can only handle one job requiring a vehicle per day. He will have to charge 3-4 times more for his services than someone working in an area where it's feasible to finish 3-4 jobs in a workday. The costs are of course passed on to the customers. Is their car-less life worth living in a pigsty that they can't fix up because laws force contractors to charge exorbitant fees? That means any business will want a dedicated vehicle to haul what they need in the 6-8 am window. This is not just grossly economically inefficient (no outsourcing delivery to third parties), it results in more vehicles sitting idle during the day, using up parking space! And that means moving is a nightmare. Moving a two-bedroom apartment worth of stuff into or out of a truck is, realistically, at least a four hour job. That means a cross-town move that could be done in one workday with sane laws will take at least four workdays (two to load the truck, two to unload) in your crazy UK town. Imagine the costs. How is it moral for you to shackle your people to the land by making relocation unaffordable?
- aembleton 8y ago
  I don't know of any residential areas that have these sorts of restrictions. Its generally in shopping areas. Businesses have to schedule deliveries for these time slots.
- pjc50 8y ago
  When you look into the details of these things you'll nearly always find that there are enough exemptions to make it work. If it was genuinely unliveable people wouldn't live there. People have managed to live in Venice for centuries despite it being physically impossible to get motor vehicles around the centre. https://www.eco-business.com/news/how-a-city-in-spain-got-rid-of-its-cars/ https://www.eco-business.com/news/how-a-city-in-spain-got-ri... "In fact, in most streets there are no physical barriers to keep the cars out. Vehicles making deliveries or locals heading to private garages can still circulate in most places. “What we did is to create loops to keep people from driving through the city,” Lores explains. “If you enter by the south, you leave by the south.” The goal of this strategy, which is complemented by severe parking restrictions in all of the central area, is to get rid of what Pontevedra officials call “unnecessary traffic”.
tim333 8y ago
You could make quite a lot of money by building mixed use retail/residential where the car parks are now.

adrianN 8y ago

Internalize the cost of parking, drop mandatory parking minimums and change zoning to allows for reasonable density. Wait a few decades and cities probably won't be as car centric as they are now.

betterunix2 8y ago

It took major redevelopment for many US cities to become car-centric, so I am not seeing why we could not do another redevelopment to create pedestrian-friendly cities.

MrEfficiency 8y ago
>so I am not seeing why we could not do another redevelopment to create pedestrian-friendly cities. We have 2 local cities that made themselves bike friendly. Property values are going up in that area. However, the people living there were already 10%ers. Its cool to see lots of bike lanes and walkers, but they also managed to price the people that cant afford cars out.
- hannasanarion 8y ago
  The cycle of gentrification will change that. In 10, 20 years, a new neighborhood will be the hip place to be, all the rich propel will move there, and prices will drop. It'd be nice if the development could happen in the low-income areas from the beginning, but it's hot hopeless.
- vanderZwan 8y ago
  All the more reason to make pedestrianisation universal, instead of a luxury.
- 0xCMP 8y ago
  For now at least. As mentioned in other comments it's hard, and expensive, to redevelop entire cities. Politically it's also probably difficult because it's such a big change. Makes sense that those with money to afford making changes privately would have them first. However, it's also likely they will want this nice life in more than just their area and will push for that over time.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
claydavisss 8y ago
It hasn't happened because most in the US don't need or even want to live in pedestrian focused cities. Americans tend to live in detached single family homes. Americans tend to want space between themselves and their neighbors. Americans do not see their cars as liabilities. Most people don't live in SF/NYC and/or don't read StrongTowns Replacing American suburbia would cost $100 Trillion dollars. More suburbia is being created every day, far outpacing investment in "New Urbanism". In America, when your city/suburb becomes blighted, you can move.

tetromino_ 8y ago

> there are strict time limits on when delivieries can be made, e.g. 6-8am when barriers are open to let vehicles in and out. That is nuts. That means a plumber, electrician, home appliance deliveryman, mover, etc. can only handle one job requiring a vehicle per day. He will have to charge 3-4 times more for his services than someone working in an area where it's feasible to finish 3-4 jobs in a workday. The costs are of course passed on to the customers. Is their car-less life worth living in a pigsty that they can't fix up because laws force contractors to charge exorbitant fees? That means any business will want a dedicated vehicle to haul what they need in the 6-8 am window. This is not just grossly economically inefficient (no outsourcing delivery to third parties), it results in more vehicles sitting idle during the day, using up parking space! And that means moving is a nightmare. Moving a two-bedroom apartment worth of stuff into or out of a truck is, realistically, at least a four hour job. That means a cross-town move that could be done in one workday with sane laws will take at least four workdays (two to load the truck, two to unload) in your crazy UK town. Imagine the costs. How is it moral for you to shackle your people to the land by making relocation unaffordable?

aembleton 8y ago
I don't know of any residential areas that have these sorts of restrictions. Its generally in shopping areas. Businesses have to schedule deliveries for these time slots.
pjc50 8y ago
When you look into the details of these things you'll nearly always find that there are enough exemptions to make it work. If it was genuinely unliveable people wouldn't live there. People have managed to live in Venice for centuries despite it being physically impossible to get motor vehicles around the centre. https://www.eco-business.com/news/how-a-city-in-spain-got-rid-of-its-cars/ https://www.eco-business.com/news/how-a-city-in-spain-got-ri... "In fact, in most streets there are no physical barriers to keep the cars out. Vehicles making deliveries or locals heading to private garages can still circulate in most places. “What we did is to create loops to keep people from driving through the city,” Lores explains. “If you enter by the south, you leave by the south.” The goal of this strategy, which is complemented by severe parking restrictions in all of the central area, is to get rid of what Pontevedra officials call “unnecessary traffic”.

tim333 8y ago

You could make quite a lot of money by building mixed use retail/residential where the car parks are now.