4 ms·

I look at European city centers where cars often times get thrown out now and: they don’t agree. Profits were way down even before COVID. Even if you offer peop

by Laarlf 6y ago

I look at European city centers where cars often times get thrown out now and: they don’t agree. Profits were way down even before COVID. Even if you offer people the option to not use their car, they will avoid it. No form of transportation will ever be as pleasant to use. Cars don’t make cities unpleasant, cities themselves are unpleasant. No matter if cars exist or not. Bikes, pedestrians and cars must be properly separated to make safe cities. Doing that would maybe convince a few people to take a bike. Or we can go back as you described. Destroy the cities we have built and build small walkable towns. That would mean that you have no say in what your job will be, but your parents do. That’s over 100 year old concept that worked well back then and would probably work well if you built it up again. But with modern demands of “personal freedom” it’s impossible to build.

fvdessen 6y ago
The cities were there for thousands of years before the cars. In fact part of them were literally destroyed to make room for cars. It is from that point that the upper middle class left the city to live in the suburbs. Before they lived in the center. Now they are too many living in the suburbs, the traffic is hell, and everybody loses. Neighbourhoods where they removed the cars are a big success, where have you seen it happen differently ? And I don't understand your issue with the jobs. Most jobs are in the cities, which is why people commute there. Why not live in the city then ?
- Laarlf 6y ago
  I want to see it more often. Go ahead, build cities where every motorized vehicle is illegal. I am all for it. If it is so superior, then people will move to it.
rossng 6y ago
Is there any evidence that removing cars from cities has a negative economic impact? All the stats I've seen point to the exact opposite. For example: * https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/economic-benefits-of-walking-and-cycling https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/econom... * https://cyclingsolutions.info/cost-benefit-of-cycling-infrastructure/ https://cyclingsolutions.info/cost-benefit-of-cycling-infras... * https://cyclingindustry.news/724m-in-economic-benefit-on-80m-active-travel-spend-finds-study/ https://cyclingindustry.news/724m-in-economic-benefit-on-80m... In my anecdotal experience from the UK, high streets have been destroyed because they have failed to keep up with what people want. Decades back, we started copying the US and building lots of out of town shopping centres surrounded by acres of car parking. Town centres started to compete by making it easier to drive in urban areas - but in doing so, they made the environment much less pleasant (loud, dirty, unsafe etc.) Over time, retail became homogenised to the degree that every high street and shopping centre had exactly the same set of shops. This worked until internet shopping arrived. Why go outside to shop when it doesn't offer anything that you can't get on the internet - cheaper, and with a larger selection? Now the only thriving high streets are those that offer something more than the internet can. Unique independent shops; space for people to meet friends and relax; street cafes; art/culture and so on. Removing cars in favour of walking and cycling is one of simplest and most powerful tools available to achieve this.
- Laarlf 6y ago
  The only evidence i have is many cities around where i live tried to make driving to the city centers horrible, made parking expensive and not a long time afterwards the shops were almost regularly switching owners and contents. There are a lot of places empty now. Amazon likes the effort though.
originalvichy 6y ago
I’ve only lived in Nordic capitals but as a pedestrian and citybike cyclist, less cars makes for an endlessly more enjoyable city center. Over here major shopping malls are already situated close to highways+public transit hubs so the city center is already home to more brick and mortar stores. I’d be interested to hear which cities have hated no-car zones.
Daho0n 6y ago
This reads like an American talking about European cities.
- Laarlf 6y ago
  I live in Germany near the Ruhrgebiet.
  - cycomanic 6y ago
    Maybe you should get out of the Ruhrgebiet more often. Pretty much all German cities that implemented Fußgängerzonen (pedestrian only malls) I can think about have thrived, big and small ones. I don't know what time frame you are talking about, but most cities in the Ruhrgebiet have been on a downward spiral since the 80s, so we might be looking more at a case of correlation not causation.
therealx 6y ago
The thing that changes this is good public transport. Not buses - buses have a mindset issue. Subways, light rail, and bikes for the last mile.
- eythian 6y ago
  Busses don't have to have a mindset issue. They don't where I live. You'll just take the bus if it's faster than the tram or goes closer to where you want to be, that's the only consideration involved.
pjerem 6y ago
I have an anecdote about this. In my somehow big city (1m habitants in France), they wanted to create a train line between my city and another one. As every infrastructure projects in France, the project eventually had years of delay (maybe 3 or 4). So at the due date, no train line. But the trains (about 20 of them, IIRC) were acquired and stored somewhere. So we had those trains without rails. Somehow, local politics decided to let them roll temporary on an existing national train line. Nobody anticipated it, but all cities with a train station on this old line started to gain a ton of attractiveness. The real estate prices and population on those cities raised by 30-40% in 2 to 3 years. People were just happy to live countryside while being able to move to work without cars. And that’s totally reasonable since with this high numbers of trains, this line is now able to have a 20min frequency. Eventually, local politics decided to let the trains indefinitely and just buy 20 more for the new line. Which of course, added delay :D —— I have a great car. But I think any mean of transport is really more pleasant than car. The only problem is they are not always all as optimal as a car. But it’s an infrastructure problem. Public transports without rails is as optimal as your car without a road.

by Laarlf 6y ago

fvdessen 6y ago

The cities were there for thousands of years before the cars. In fact part of them were literally destroyed to make room for cars. It is from that point that the upper middle class left the city to live in the suburbs. Before they lived in the center. Now they are too many living in the suburbs, the traffic is hell, and everybody loses. Neighbourhoods where they removed the cars are a big success, where have you seen it happen differently ? And I don't understand your issue with the jobs. Most jobs are in the cities, which is why people commute there. Why not live in the city then ?

Laarlf 6y ago
I want to see it more often. Go ahead, build cities where every motorized vehicle is illegal. I am all for it. If it is so superior, then people will move to it.

rossng 6y ago

Is there any evidence that removing cars from cities has a negative economic impact? All the stats I've seen point to the exact opposite. For example: * https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/economic-benefits-of-walking-and-cycling https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/econom... * https://cyclingsolutions.info/cost-benefit-of-cycling-infrastructure/ https://cyclingsolutions.info/cost-benefit-of-cycling-infras... * https://cyclingindustry.news/724m-in-economic-benefit-on-80m-active-travel-spend-finds-study/ https://cyclingindustry.news/724m-in-economic-benefit-on-80m... In my anecdotal experience from the UK, high streets have been destroyed because they have failed to keep up with what people want. Decades back, we started copying the US and building lots of out of town shopping centres surrounded by acres of car parking. Town centres started to compete by making it easier to drive in urban areas - but in doing so, they made the environment much less pleasant (loud, dirty, unsafe etc.) Over time, retail became homogenised to the degree that every high street and shopping centre had exactly the same set of shops. This worked until internet shopping arrived. Why go outside to shop when it doesn't offer anything that you can't get on the internet - cheaper, and with a larger selection? Now the only thriving high streets are those that offer something more than the internet can. Unique independent shops; space for people to meet friends and relax; street cafes; art/culture and so on. Removing cars in favour of walking and cycling is one of simplest and most powerful tools available to achieve this.

Laarlf 6y ago
The only evidence i have is many cities around where i live tried to make driving to the city centers horrible, made parking expensive and not a long time afterwards the shops were almost regularly switching owners and contents. There are a lot of places empty now. Amazon likes the effort though.

originalvichy 6y ago

I’ve only lived in Nordic capitals but as a pedestrian and citybike cyclist, less cars makes for an endlessly more enjoyable city center. Over here major shopping malls are already situated close to highways+public transit hubs so the city center is already home to more brick and mortar stores. I’d be interested to hear which cities have hated no-car zones.

Daho0n 6y ago

This reads like an American talking about European cities.

Laarlf 6y ago
I live in Germany near the Ruhrgebiet.
- cycomanic 6y ago
  Maybe you should get out of the Ruhrgebiet more often. Pretty much all German cities that implemented Fußgängerzonen (pedestrian only malls) I can think about have thrived, big and small ones. I don't know what time frame you are talking about, but most cities in the Ruhrgebiet have been on a downward spiral since the 80s, so we might be looking more at a case of correlation not causation.

therealx 6y ago

The thing that changes this is good public transport. Not buses - buses have a mindset issue. Subways, light rail, and bikes for the last mile.

eythian 6y ago
Busses don't have to have a mindset issue. They don't where I live. You'll just take the bus if it's faster than the tram or goes closer to where you want to be, that's the only consideration involved.

pjerem 6y ago

I have an anecdote about this. In my somehow big city (1m habitants in France), they wanted to create a train line between my city and another one. As every infrastructure projects in France, the project eventually had years of delay (maybe 3 or 4). So at the due date, no train line. But the trains (about 20 of them, IIRC) were acquired and stored somewhere. So we had those trains without rails. Somehow, local politics decided to let them roll temporary on an existing national train line. Nobody anticipated it, but all cities with a train station on this old line started to gain a ton of attractiveness. The real estate prices and population on those cities raised by 30-40% in 2 to 3 years. People were just happy to live countryside while being able to move to work without cars. And that’s totally reasonable since with this high numbers of trains, this line is now able to have a 20min frequency. Eventually, local politics decided to let the trains indefinitely and just buy 20 more for the new line. Which of course, added delay :D —— I have a great car. But I think any mean of transport is really more pleasant than car. The only problem is they are not always all as optimal as a car. But it’s an infrastructure problem. Public transports without rails is as optimal as your car without a road.