5 ms·

It's not the density that makes urban areas unsafe, it's all the cars. A downtown pedestrian street is perfectly safe for kids to hang out and play. Neighbors,

It's not the density that makes urban areas unsafe, it's all the cars. A downtown pedestrian street is perfectly safe for kids to hang out and play. Neighbors, older kids and shopkeepers keep an eye out without being in helicopter mode. In the few cities I've been to that have banned vehicular traffic in downtown areas, you do see bunches of kids running around, as done for millennia.

Misdicorl 7y ago
Yes, vehicle traffic would be by far my #1 worry in high density areas.
- tomaha 7y ago
  It's really about planning. Modern Swiss towns mostly consist of high density buildings with parking underground and most of the areas around the buildings are for walking & biking. The really good thing about high density is that it allows for much more efficient public transport which reduces the need for cars.
  - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
    Just a reminder when talking about the Swiss... they are half the population of New Jersey over twice the area. Maybe their cities planning ideas might not scale?
    - scarejunba 7y ago
      Yes, but Geneva and San Jose have the same density. I think it’s worthwhi to see where scaling breaks down with constant density and also worthwhile to not a priori dismiss the idea as non-scaling.
    - TulliusCicero 7y ago
      I'm sorry, this is hilarious to me. You see, urbanists constantly get pushback from people who know almost nothing about urban planning, or cities in other countries, who say, "uh, you can't apply lessons from Japan/UK/Germany/France/etc., because the US is so much more spread out, duh." And now we have someone arguing literally the opposite. Now it's the US that's apparently too dense. We need a new word for this brand of snowflakey NIH syndrome, where unless you can't prove that [city/country] is exactly the same as [other city/country], there is nothing one could learn from them.
      - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
        I think you read a lot in my post that wasn't there. But also sure... I don't know why you would be so naive to think that scaling issues don't work both ways. Perhaps what works for Switzerland and it's one city over 250k people might not work for USA with it's eighty eight over different climates, areas, densities, geological formations. No, surely I'm just being hilarious :D
- TulliusCicero 7y ago
  With respect, you have it exactly backwards. It's the US, with its predominately low density, car-dominant building style that has vastly more traffic fatalities than higher-density Germany or Japan. It's true that low-density SFH areas often seem more peaceful, but in practice cars there usually travel much faster than they do in higher-density neighborhoods, and it's speed that kills.
  - Misdicorl 7y ago
    Those traffic fatalities are vastly more vehicle-vehicle collisions. I believe the EU even in the last decade legislated car design changes to address the risks of vehicle-pedestrian accidents that are far more prevalent there.
    - TulliusCicero 7y ago
      Of course they're more vehicle-vehicle in the US; hardly anyone walks in America. Just look at the stats. Even the walk-iest big city in the US, NYC, only has like 6% walk mode share. However, controlled for number of trips/distance, being a pedestrian in the US is generally quite dangerous compared to elsewhere.
      - Misdicorl 7y ago
        I see 28% walk share for NYC (pdf warning): http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-citywide-mobility-survey-report-2017.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-citywide-mo...
        TulliusCicero 7y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share
        Misdicorl 7y ago
        That link is only considering commutes to/from work. That traffic is very segregated in suburban communities. Notably, its also usually very far from where children hang out.
shrimpx 7y ago
I think it has nearly zero to do with cars and 100% to do with growing homelessness and grewing drug activity in homeless camps. Nobody who has become weary in Portland claims car traffic. They're all terrified by the growing homelessness and unsafe drug activity in their hood. Needles in your front yard type of thing.

Misdicorl 7y ago

Yes, vehicle traffic would be by far my #1 worry in high density areas.

tomaha 7y ago
It's really about planning. Modern Swiss towns mostly consist of high density buildings with parking underground and most of the areas around the buildings are for walking & biking. The really good thing about high density is that it allows for much more efficient public transport which reduces the need for cars.
- SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
  Just a reminder when talking about the Swiss... they are half the population of New Jersey over twice the area. Maybe their cities planning ideas might not scale?
  - scarejunba 7y ago
    Yes, but Geneva and San Jose have the same density. I think it’s worthwhi to see where scaling breaks down with constant density and also worthwhile to not a priori dismiss the idea as non-scaling.
  - TulliusCicero 7y ago
    I'm sorry, this is hilarious to me. You see, urbanists constantly get pushback from people who know almost nothing about urban planning, or cities in other countries, who say, "uh, you can't apply lessons from Japan/UK/Germany/France/etc., because the US is so much more spread out, duh." And now we have someone arguing literally the opposite. Now it's the US that's apparently too dense. We need a new word for this brand of snowflakey NIH syndrome, where unless you can't prove that [city/country] is exactly the same as [other city/country], there is nothing one could learn from them.
    - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
      I think you read a lot in my post that wasn't there. But also sure... I don't know why you would be so naive to think that scaling issues don't work both ways. Perhaps what works for Switzerland and it's one city over 250k people might not work for USA with it's eighty eight over different climates, areas, densities, geological formations. No, surely I'm just being hilarious :D
TulliusCicero 7y ago
With respect, you have it exactly backwards. It's the US, with its predominately low density, car-dominant building style that has vastly more traffic fatalities than higher-density Germany or Japan. It's true that low-density SFH areas often seem more peaceful, but in practice cars there usually travel much faster than they do in higher-density neighborhoods, and it's speed that kills.
- Misdicorl 7y ago
  Those traffic fatalities are vastly more vehicle-vehicle collisions. I believe the EU even in the last decade legislated car design changes to address the risks of vehicle-pedestrian accidents that are far more prevalent there.
  - TulliusCicero 7y ago
    Of course they're more vehicle-vehicle in the US; hardly anyone walks in America. Just look at the stats. Even the walk-iest big city in the US, NYC, only has like 6% walk mode share. However, controlled for number of trips/distance, being a pedestrian in the US is generally quite dangerous compared to elsewhere.
    - Misdicorl 7y ago
      I see 28% walk share for NYC (pdf warning): http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-citywide-mobility-survey-report-2017.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-citywide-mo...
      - TulliusCicero 7y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share
        Misdicorl 7y ago
        That link is only considering commutes to/from work. That traffic is very segregated in suburban communities. Notably, its also usually very far from where children hang out.

shrimpx 7y ago

I think it has nearly zero to do with cars and 100% to do with growing homelessness and grewing drug activity in homeless camps. Nobody who has become weary in Portland claims car traffic. They're all terrified by the growing homelessness and unsafe drug activity in their hood. Needles in your front yard type of thing.