6 ms·

Imagine if, in high density areas like Manhattan, cars were simply not allowed. Wow. The thought of how pleasant Manhattan would become if only cabs + busses +

Imagine if, in high density areas like Manhattan, cars were simply not allowed. Wow. The thought of how pleasant Manhattan would become if only cabs + busses + delivery trucks + ambulances were allowed makes me almost too happy. Would be so awesome.

Swizec 7y ago
This is in fact a trend in European city centers. It is wonderful and amazing. Areas where before closing for traffic it didn’t make sense to drive anyway because walking is literally faster due to narrow streets, too many cars, etc. I don’t understand why people choose to drive there unless someone explicitly tells them they can’t.
electric_muse 7y ago
Busses and delivery trucks are the most noisy and polluting! That doesn’t seem like the panacea you suggest.
- komaromy 7y ago
  On a per-unit basis, sure. There are way more cars than buses or delivery trucks though.
  - erik_seaberg 7y ago
    If I can't use my car, a lot more things need to be delivered. Anything I can't carry for half a mile, anything for which I'd be robbed …
    - megaremote 7y ago
      So you will consume less to? Another bonus.
    - abdullahkhalids 7y ago
      1. When everybody is walking outside, instead of transiting through cars, it is a lot harder for pedestrians to be robbed. Also, police actually start caring more about pedestrian safety when so many people are walking. Walkable neighbourhoods can be a lot safer than the safest car-friendly neighbourhoods, with the right system. 2. As for carrying, based on my experience of living in a walkable neighbourhood where thousands of people lived within a kilometer of the central shopping area, a lot of people would bring carts that they would push their groceries home in. If you can push a small wheeled grocery cart through the total 100 meter aisles of the grocery store, then you can push a big wheeled cart the 1000 meter to your house on the sidewalk. Given that I often saw 80 year olds doing that, most healthy people should also be able to do it, no problem.
    - adrianN 7y ago
      Many things could also be delivered with cargo bikes for the last mile with trucks only delivering to neighborhood depots.
- phoobahr 7y ago
  Delivery truck volume scales with demand and has pretty upfront costs. Buss volume scales with funding and political will with upfront costs and delayed realized benefits. Generally supply is outstripped by demand. Personal conveyance volume does not appear to have any of these limiting factors. And has terrible demonstrated density.
- whorleater 7y ago
  Per vehicle yes, per capita no.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago
  > Busses and delivery trucks are the most noisy and polluting Once private cars are off the road, busses and trucks would spend less time in traffic. That increases their economic yield, which in turn, makes a gradual electrification mandate economically feasible.
- pmoriarty 7y ago
  Electric and hybrid buses are much less noisy and pollute much less than their exclusively-fossil-fuel-burning counterparts.
- megaremote 7y ago
  Sure, if you compare 1 to 1. But you have 100s to 1 on any street. A 100 cars are lot more noisy and polluting than one bus. https://www.iwillride.org/what-200-people-look-like-driving-cars-vs-riding-bikes-bus-and-light-rail/ https://www.iwillride.org/what-200-people-look-like-driving-...
catalogia 7y ago
If driving into Manhattan were not an option, I would expect demand for housing in Manhattan would go up[0]. Of course, housing in Manhattan is already incredibly expensive... I'm sure Manhattan would become very pleasant for those who could still afford to live there. [0] (Suppose for the sake of argument my preference for commuting was driving,walking,transit (in that order.) With the option of driving eliminated my second preference would be to walk, which means finding housing closer to my workplace in Manhattan.)
- megaremote 7y ago
  > If driving into Manhattan were not an option, I would expect demand for housing in Manhattan would go up[0]. Of course, housing in Manhattan is already incredibly expensive... Why? And we recover all that wasted space on roads to build parks and a lot more housing.
  - xhgdvjky 7y ago
    it would be a very slow re allocation
- amarshall 7y ago
  Your preference aside, most of the people who commute into Manhattan already take mass transit rather than a car. I don’t think too much would change for most. I don’t know where you live, but NYC is very different than the rest of the U.S. when it comes to transportation. In NYC, only around half of people own a car (in Manhattan it’s even less: around a quarter).
gpm 7y ago
I don't understand why "cabs" is an allowed exception here. Cabs are like cars, except more expensive, and they drive around without anyone using them for transport looking for business. Why are they superior? I'm picking on this example not because I think that list is meant to be complete or perfectly thought out, but because cabs often seem to get exceptions like this (e.g. in HOV lanes) and I really don't understand why. It basically seems like a "I'm rich enough to pay someone to do my driving for me" exception.
- brookside 7y ago
  Cabs don't need parking. (Well, they do, but it's out in my neighborhood in queens.)
- dantheman 7y ago
  You can get rid of parking for cabs/uber/lyft. The amount of real estate taken up by parking in NYC is insane.
- adventured 7y ago
  Cabs could be highly useful for various emergencies or more generally for people in need of urgent singular transport. Ambulances cover the medically injured. Buses cover normal strictly time regimented use. A simple scenario: my son has been injured at home and I need to immediately get home or to the hospital. The bus may take far too long depending. That's an example of an urgent need for singular transport.
  - nikanj 7y ago
    Would you be happier if your taxi wasn't stuck in traffic? I have an inkling that 99% of cars on Manhattan are not urgent emergency
- nabilhat 7y ago
  NYC cabs are cars only because that's the environment they operate in. Think of what a cab would look like in a busy carfree city. Disneyland makes an okay example for North Americans. There's no need to go to the considerable expense of an entire passenger car that's built for worst case freeway scenarios in a carfree city core. Imagine a cab where crumple zones and a three-digit top speed are useless.
randallsquared 7y ago
I just don't understand this. I moved to Manhattan last year, and while there some things I've been annoyed about, it wouldn't have occurred to me to put "cars" on that list. I didn't bring my car here, and having driven a rental a couple times in the city, it's hard for me to imagine why anyone drives here if they don't have to: the experience as a driver is far, far worse than as a pedestrian.
- amarshall 7y ago
  Cars are noisy (engines, superfluous horns) and lower air quality. They often drive aggressively and are a hazard to bicyclists and pedestrians. They cause congestion, slowing buses that are vastly more space-efficient. Look at some of “urban plazas” [1] that have replaced short sections of road and witness how much more peaceful and open the city can feel when roads are removed in favor of people. Or, go down to 14th St. I was there this past week and it was wonderful—so much quieter and more open, and buses were moving smoothly. [1] http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/list-of-plazas.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/list-of-plazas.pdf
  - randallsquared 7y ago
    Yeah, sorry, those reasons make total sense. But, > The thought of how pleasant Manhattan would become if only cabs + busses + delivery trucks + ambulances were allowed makes me almost too happy. was the part that made no sense. Cabs are at least as noisy and air-quality-deficient as other cars, and there will be a lot more of them if other cars are banned from some large part of Manhattan. As a pedestrian (which is every day), I've never felt as threatened by cars as I did when I was driving a rental in NYC, which happened only a couple times.
    - smileysteve 7y ago
      Perhaps the easiest way to implement this is to require all ultra high efficiency vehicles. - UPS already uses natural gas and often hybrid electric - Prius-es are common as cabs (often lower tco)

Swizec 7y ago

This is in fact a trend in European city centers. It is wonderful and amazing. Areas where before closing for traffic it didn’t make sense to drive anyway because walking is literally faster due to narrow streets, too many cars, etc. I don’t understand why people choose to drive there unless someone explicitly tells them they can’t.

electric_muse 7y ago

Busses and delivery trucks are the most noisy and polluting! That doesn’t seem like the panacea you suggest.

komaromy 7y ago
On a per-unit basis, sure. There are way more cars than buses or delivery trucks though.
- erik_seaberg 7y ago
  If I can't use my car, a lot more things need to be delivered. Anything I can't carry for half a mile, anything for which I'd be robbed …
  - megaremote 7y ago
    So you will consume less to? Another bonus.
  - abdullahkhalids 7y ago
    1. When everybody is walking outside, instead of transiting through cars, it is a lot harder for pedestrians to be robbed. Also, police actually start caring more about pedestrian safety when so many people are walking. Walkable neighbourhoods can be a lot safer than the safest car-friendly neighbourhoods, with the right system. 2. As for carrying, based on my experience of living in a walkable neighbourhood where thousands of people lived within a kilometer of the central shopping area, a lot of people would bring carts that they would push their groceries home in. If you can push a small wheeled grocery cart through the total 100 meter aisles of the grocery store, then you can push a big wheeled cart the 1000 meter to your house on the sidewalk. Given that I often saw 80 year olds doing that, most healthy people should also be able to do it, no problem.
  - adrianN 7y ago
    Many things could also be delivered with cargo bikes for the last mile with trucks only delivering to neighborhood depots.
phoobahr 7y ago
Delivery truck volume scales with demand and has pretty upfront costs. Buss volume scales with funding and political will with upfront costs and delayed realized benefits. Generally supply is outstripped by demand. Personal conveyance volume does not appear to have any of these limiting factors. And has terrible demonstrated density.
whorleater 7y ago
Per vehicle yes, per capita no.
JumpCrisscross 7y ago
> Busses and delivery trucks are the most noisy and polluting Once private cars are off the road, busses and trucks would spend less time in traffic. That increases their economic yield, which in turn, makes a gradual electrification mandate economically feasible.
pmoriarty 7y ago
Electric and hybrid buses are much less noisy and pollute much less than their exclusively-fossil-fuel-burning counterparts.
megaremote 7y ago
Sure, if you compare 1 to 1. But you have 100s to 1 on any street. A 100 cars are lot more noisy and polluting than one bus. https://www.iwillride.org/what-200-people-look-like-driving-cars-vs-riding-bikes-bus-and-light-rail/ https://www.iwillride.org/what-200-people-look-like-driving-...

catalogia 7y ago

If driving into Manhattan were not an option, I would expect demand for housing in Manhattan would go up[0]. Of course, housing in Manhattan is already incredibly expensive... I'm sure Manhattan would become very pleasant for those who could still afford to live there. [0] (Suppose for the sake of argument my preference for commuting was driving,walking,transit (in that order.) With the option of driving eliminated my second preference would be to walk, which means finding housing closer to my workplace in Manhattan.)

megaremote 7y ago
> If driving into Manhattan were not an option, I would expect demand for housing in Manhattan would go up[0]. Of course, housing in Manhattan is already incredibly expensive... Why? And we recover all that wasted space on roads to build parks and a lot more housing.
- xhgdvjky 7y ago
  it would be a very slow re allocation
amarshall 7y ago
Your preference aside, most of the people who commute into Manhattan already take mass transit rather than a car. I don’t think too much would change for most. I don’t know where you live, but NYC is very different than the rest of the U.S. when it comes to transportation. In NYC, only around half of people own a car (in Manhattan it’s even less: around a quarter).

gpm 7y ago

I don't understand why "cabs" is an allowed exception here. Cabs are like cars, except more expensive, and they drive around without anyone using them for transport looking for business. Why are they superior? I'm picking on this example not because I think that list is meant to be complete or perfectly thought out, but because cabs often seem to get exceptions like this (e.g. in HOV lanes) and I really don't understand why. It basically seems like a "I'm rich enough to pay someone to do my driving for me" exception.

brookside 7y ago
Cabs don't need parking. (Well, they do, but it's out in my neighborhood in queens.)
dantheman 7y ago
You can get rid of parking for cabs/uber/lyft. The amount of real estate taken up by parking in NYC is insane.
adventured 7y ago
Cabs could be highly useful for various emergencies or more generally for people in need of urgent singular transport. Ambulances cover the medically injured. Buses cover normal strictly time regimented use. A simple scenario: my son has been injured at home and I need to immediately get home or to the hospital. The bus may take far too long depending. That's an example of an urgent need for singular transport.
- nikanj 7y ago
  Would you be happier if your taxi wasn't stuck in traffic? I have an inkling that 99% of cars on Manhattan are not urgent emergency
nabilhat 7y ago
NYC cabs are cars only because that's the environment they operate in. Think of what a cab would look like in a busy carfree city. Disneyland makes an okay example for North Americans. There's no need to go to the considerable expense of an entire passenger car that's built for worst case freeway scenarios in a carfree city core. Imagine a cab where crumple zones and a three-digit top speed are useless.

randallsquared 7y ago

I just don't understand this. I moved to Manhattan last year, and while there some things I've been annoyed about, it wouldn't have occurred to me to put "cars" on that list. I didn't bring my car here, and having driven a rental a couple times in the city, it's hard for me to imagine why anyone drives here if they don't have to: the experience as a driver is far, far worse than as a pedestrian.

amarshall 7y ago
Cars are noisy (engines, superfluous horns) and lower air quality. They often drive aggressively and are a hazard to bicyclists and pedestrians. They cause congestion, slowing buses that are vastly more space-efficient. Look at some of “urban plazas” [1] that have replaced short sections of road and witness how much more peaceful and open the city can feel when roads are removed in favor of people. Or, go down to 14th St. I was there this past week and it was wonderful—so much quieter and more open, and buses were moving smoothly. [1] http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/list-of-plazas.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/list-of-plazas.pdf
- randallsquared 7y ago
  Yeah, sorry, those reasons make total sense. But, > The thought of how pleasant Manhattan would become if only cabs + busses + delivery trucks + ambulances were allowed makes me almost too happy. was the part that made no sense. Cabs are at least as noisy and air-quality-deficient as other cars, and there will be a lot more of them if other cars are banned from some large part of Manhattan. As a pedestrian (which is every day), I've never felt as threatened by cars as I did when I was driving a rental in NYC, which happened only a couple times.
  - smileysteve 7y ago
    Perhaps the easiest way to implement this is to require all ultra high efficiency vehicles. - UPS already uses natural gas and often hybrid electric - Prius-es are common as cabs (often lower tco)