8 ms·
This only works in bigger cities, where there is plenty of heavily subsidized public transport such as Berlin. Most smaller towns that went car free killed thei
by HorstG 7y ago
This only works in bigger cities, where there is plenty of heavily subsidized public transport such as Berlin. Most smaller towns that went car free killed their businesses or made them move to shopping districts on the outskirts which are still reachable by car. Leading to "dead" inner parts of town and very unhappy citizens. Oh, and skyrocketing rents in the subsidized cities such as Berlin...
- Wowfunhappy 7y agoWell yeah, if you get rid of one form of transport there has to be something sufficient to replace it. They could be subways, busses, bikes (think Denmark), etc.
- HorstG 7y agoIt isn't that nobody thought of busses or trams. Its just that they are always too sparse, slow, limited in times, capacity, safety and comfort. I believe the break-even is of being able to replace cars is somewhere around a 5min schedule over the day and stations in at most 200m walking distance from everywhere. Oh, and of course being comparable in speed to at least a bike. That leaves only subways...
- gumby 7y agoMelbourne trams are more convenient than driving and are free in the city centre. It can work just fine.
- shkkmo 7y agoDo you have examples of such smaller cities that tried this and failed?
- amanaplanacanal 7y agoI was wondering this myself. I’ve never heard of this before.
- the8472 7y agoMany historical inner cities in europe only allow inhabitant and delivery traffic, the latter even limited to certain hours of the day. That applies to smaller ones with <100k inhabitants too.
- Demoneeri 7y agoIt's funny that you are using "heavily subsidized public transport" while using the entierly subsidized road system...
- LIV2 7y agoJust about all public road systems are subsidised but are public transport systems?. This will work better in cities with cheap/free public transport
- osdiab 7y agoOr if like in some other parts of the world public transit companies can profit off the development around train stations, and then treat the trains as marketing that literally funnels trainloads of people to their profit centers.
- microcolonel 7y ago> entirely Forgetting fuel taxes?
- asjw 7y agoDisclaimer: I've been car free for the past three years. I agree that roads are public infrastructure, but car owners are heavily taxed in Europe, especially some parts of Europe. In Italy, excluding fuel taxes (which cover 70% of the cost of the fuel BTW) every car owner pays a mandatory "car owning tax" for each car they own, that totals around 5-6 billions euros/year. And it's only the main one, there are several others.
- fragmede 7y agoIn the US, it's called a car registration fee, but it's the same thing - a tax on owning a car.
- strider12 7y agoExcise tax, Gas Tax, Tolls, Registration Fees, Inspection Fees ... Parking fee's... Cars pay their way to the point of making the country profitable in that regard...
- PeterStuer 7y agoThat is what they claim over here as well. Meanwhile business is booming in the pedestrian zone, with shops actively moving there from other parts, whereas those shopping streets that kept cars are indeed showing some empty spots due to (a) the above, (b) normal churn, with new businesses starting preferring the car free zones as well and (c) stall-wards being trounced by e-commerce. The same complaints playbook every time in every city (commerce, disabled, deliveries and repairs) with the same success stories each and very time the carfree streets and regions are there.
- Doxin 7y agoOne alternative, if you're not fond of the idea of banning cars altogether, is to do the same thing that you see a lot over here. Basically any street people live on is a dead end, or almost a dead end. Taking a shortcut through a residential street basically doesn't happen. Take the neighborhood I live in for example, It's all one-directional traffic with tight corners and speed bumps. It has more exiting streets than entering streets. The end result being a decided lack of traffic, while still being able to get a car to your front door when you need it. Kids can play in the streets safely enough, There's a couple cars an hour most of the day and the few cars that do pass are going slow enough to not hit any kids. The most dangerous time of day is all the parents getting their kid out of school by car. You sometimes see a commercial vehicle trying out a new shortcut. People only think that to be a good idea once. Going around is faster than going through in any case. Carless doesn't have to be an absolute. It's a gradient from six lane highways through your neighborhood on one side, and no cars at all on the other. A balance needs to be found.
- onreact 7y agoIn smaller cities you can let people park outside and they will be able to walk in within minutes. That's even better than using crowded public transport. Rents are skyrocketing in Berlin because everybody and their friend wants to visit us or live here. At the same time for decades no new buildings were built. Remember? Supply and demand. Yet rents are still not as high as in New York, London, Paris, Munich or even Hamburg so that people from everywhere flock here.