4 ms·

You've missed the forest for the trees. The idea is that with fewer cars we would design our urban areas for walking and cycling. Your apartment block wouldn't

You've missed the forest for the trees. The idea is that with fewer cars we would design our urban areas for walking and cycling. Your apartment block wouldn't have only one grocery store nearby, you would have a thriving ecosystem of local stores and restaurants within walking distance. You would take public transport or cycle to work. This is preferable for many reasons. Of course, as you point out, this only works if places are designed around local shopping streets and cycle paths, instead of strip malls and freeways smashing through city centres. Obviously we're not there yet, and a car-free life is unattainable for many as a result. Nobody is saying that this goal is acheivable in the short term. It's an ideal we'd have to work towards gradually, piecing together the required infrastructure and rebuilding the fabric of cities over decades. FWIW I am lucky enough to live in a high density part of an old city, and it is wonderful. I can walk 8 minutes to a small street of shops with almost everything I need. I can cycle to other parts of the city to enjoy other amenities and meet friends. But I don't kid myself that this is possible for most people, yet.

lionkor 3y ago
> Your apartment block wouldn't have only one grocery store nearby, you would have a thriving ecosystem of local stores and restaurants within walking distance. If you visit larger cities in Russia, this is a thing from the USSR times, and probably my favorite thing about the country. I've lived in one of those buildings for a few months in total, 6th floor, in the south of Russia. If you need anything - coffee, groceries, fresh meat or produce, baguette (lol), ready-made food, drinks, medicine, sushi, or anything else, you just take an elevator down to the ground level and walk 0-5 minutes. If you also have a job there (or work from home), you can spend your entire life, with the exception of going on dates, parties, and to specialized doctors that are further away (dentists etc are often in the building too), in 1/2 a square mile of land or so. Its much like a space ship, and its very very cool. These blocks can be very far away from the city center, or right in the center -- it really doesnt make a difference! Contrast that with some modern cities in Europe, where you have to take a bus to get to a store (unless you have a car).
nextlevelwizard 3y ago
>The idea is that with fewer cars we would design our urban areas for walking and cycling. Your apartment block wouldn't have only one grocery store nearby, you would have a thriving ecosystem of local stores and restaurants within walking distance. You would take public transport or cycle to work. This is preferable for many reasons. This very much feels like when people talk about how money is bad and we should get rid of it. Sure it might be preferable, but unless you have literal magical powers it won't happen. All of this shit has to happen at the same time - preferably over night. No one is going to first start these grocery stores just incase cars are banned and if cars are banned first everyone will just move away from these places before these stores are built/started.
- Mashimo 3y ago
  > All of this shit has to happen at the same time - preferably over night. The Netherlands was car centric and shifted towards walkable cities over a longer period.
- freetime2 3y ago
  > All of this shit has to happen at the same time - preferably over night I think it would happen gradually over decades as cities make investments in transportation infrastucture, zoning changes, traffic code, etc. It also doesn't need to happen everywhere at once (although I'm sure some anti-car folks would disagree with me here), the sensible thing would be to start making changes in major metropolitan areas that are already feeling the strain of traffic congestion, polution, and other quality of life issues from having more cars on the road than they can handle.
AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> Nobody is saying that this goal is acheivable in the short term. But many of the proposed car penalties would be onerous if it isn't. The way to solve this is diversity. Stop having laws telling people what they have to do. If someone wants to build an apartment building with ten thousand parking spaces, let them. If they want to build one with zero parking spaces, let them. Then someone will build each one. People will choose where to live based on what they value. We get the status quo dystopia when some fool in the central planning office thinks that everything should be uniform and have a minimum or maximum amount of X or Y. It should not. Variation is beautiful.
- freetime2 3y ago
  > If they want to build one with zero parking spaces, let them. The problem (in many US cities at least) is that people still buy cars even if they don't have a dedicated parking space, and then just park it on the street. Which creates problems for everyone in the city (the article cites that 30% of traffic in New York is people "cruising" and looking for parking spaces, for example). So if you are going to let the market do its job efficiently, you also need to put the costs of street parking on the people who actually use it. The most straightforward way to do that in US is probably with more (and more expensive) metered parking, or eliminating street parking outright if the space can be used more efficiently for some other purpose (bike lanes, bus lanes, etc).
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    > The problem (in many US cities at least) is that people still buy cars even if they don't have a dedicated parking space, and then just park it on the street. That's fine if they live in a 2-unit townhouse and there is plenty of street parking there. If they move into a 10,000 unit high rise with no parking spaces and expect to find street parking near it they're a silly masochist who will quickly learn the error of their ways. > the article cites that 30% of traffic in New York is people "cruising" and looking for parking spaces, for example Then the cost of parking is being put on the people with cars, in the form of time. If they'd rather spend money there are parking apps that will direct them to the nearest available paid parking garage, often at a discount for using the app. > The most straightforward way to do that in US is probably with more (and more expensive) metered parking Which is a tax on people who have less money than time, i.e. the poor. > or eliminating street parking outright But the problem was people driving around because there weren't enough parking spaces? > if the space can be used more efficiently for some other purpose (bike lanes, bus lanes, etc). Street parking is highly efficient because you need the space between buildings anyway for light and air, and putting parking at ground level is much less expensive than building a structure that can support the weight of a vehicle. Bike lanes are mostly useless. I see them all over the place; no bikes in them. And the falling price of ebikes is quickly turning them into obsolete technology, because an ebike can keep up with other motorized vehicle traffic at city speeds and doesn't need a dedicated lane. Bus lanes are entirely useless. Any place with enough bus traffic to justify a dedicated bus lane should instead have a subway line. Do the math. If a 40-passenger bus can carry the same number of people as 40 1-passenger cars spaced 30 feet apart and traveling at 30MPH, to have the bus lane carry as many people as a normal lane would require there to be a full bus every 27 seconds.
jjav 3y ago
> FWIW I am lucky enough to live in a high density part of an old city, and it is wonderful. I live in a low-density US suburb built in the late 90s. The prototypical place that according to the memes, I must drive 30 minutes to the nearest store. > I can walk 8 minutes to a small street of shops with almost everything I need. I can cycle to other parts of the city to enjoy other amenities and meet friends. Also, I can walk in ~10 minutes to stores and entertainment of nearly any type I could need. It's not a binary choice of dense city center or can't walk to anything. Most suburbs can be very walkable.

lionkor 3y ago

> Your apartment block wouldn't have only one grocery store nearby, you would have a thriving ecosystem of local stores and restaurants within walking distance. If you visit larger cities in Russia, this is a thing from the USSR times, and probably my favorite thing about the country. I've lived in one of those buildings for a few months in total, 6th floor, in the south of Russia. If you need anything - coffee, groceries, fresh meat or produce, baguette (lol), ready-made food, drinks, medicine, sushi, or anything else, you just take an elevator down to the ground level and walk 0-5 minutes. If you also have a job there (or work from home), you can spend your entire life, with the exception of going on dates, parties, and to specialized doctors that are further away (dentists etc are often in the building too), in 1/2 a square mile of land or so. Its much like a space ship, and its very very cool. These blocks can be very far away from the city center, or right in the center -- it really doesnt make a difference! Contrast that with some modern cities in Europe, where you have to take a bus to get to a store (unless you have a car).

nextlevelwizard 3y ago

>The idea is that with fewer cars we would design our urban areas for walking and cycling. Your apartment block wouldn't have only one grocery store nearby, you would have a thriving ecosystem of local stores and restaurants within walking distance. You would take public transport or cycle to work. This is preferable for many reasons. This very much feels like when people talk about how money is bad and we should get rid of it. Sure it might be preferable, but unless you have literal magical powers it won't happen. All of this shit has to happen at the same time - preferably over night. No one is going to first start these grocery stores just incase cars are banned and if cars are banned first everyone will just move away from these places before these stores are built/started.

Mashimo 3y ago
> All of this shit has to happen at the same time - preferably over night. The Netherlands was car centric and shifted towards walkable cities over a longer period.
freetime2 3y ago
> All of this shit has to happen at the same time - preferably over night I think it would happen gradually over decades as cities make investments in transportation infrastucture, zoning changes, traffic code, etc. It also doesn't need to happen everywhere at once (although I'm sure some anti-car folks would disagree with me here), the sensible thing would be to start making changes in major metropolitan areas that are already feeling the strain of traffic congestion, polution, and other quality of life issues from having more cars on the road than they can handle.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> Nobody is saying that this goal is acheivable in the short term. But many of the proposed car penalties would be onerous if it isn't. The way to solve this is diversity. Stop having laws telling people what they have to do. If someone wants to build an apartment building with ten thousand parking spaces, let them. If they want to build one with zero parking spaces, let them. Then someone will build each one. People will choose where to live based on what they value. We get the status quo dystopia when some fool in the central planning office thinks that everything should be uniform and have a minimum or maximum amount of X or Y. It should not. Variation is beautiful.

freetime2 3y ago
> If they want to build one with zero parking spaces, let them. The problem (in many US cities at least) is that people still buy cars even if they don't have a dedicated parking space, and then just park it on the street. Which creates problems for everyone in the city (the article cites that 30% of traffic in New York is people "cruising" and looking for parking spaces, for example). So if you are going to let the market do its job efficiently, you also need to put the costs of street parking on the people who actually use it. The most straightforward way to do that in US is probably with more (and more expensive) metered parking, or eliminating street parking outright if the space can be used more efficiently for some other purpose (bike lanes, bus lanes, etc).
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > The problem (in many US cities at least) is that people still buy cars even if they don't have a dedicated parking space, and then just park it on the street. That's fine if they live in a 2-unit townhouse and there is plenty of street parking there. If they move into a 10,000 unit high rise with no parking spaces and expect to find street parking near it they're a silly masochist who will quickly learn the error of their ways. > the article cites that 30% of traffic in New York is people "cruising" and looking for parking spaces, for example Then the cost of parking is being put on the people with cars, in the form of time. If they'd rather spend money there are parking apps that will direct them to the nearest available paid parking garage, often at a discount for using the app. > The most straightforward way to do that in US is probably with more (and more expensive) metered parking Which is a tax on people who have less money than time, i.e. the poor. > or eliminating street parking outright But the problem was people driving around because there weren't enough parking spaces? > if the space can be used more efficiently for some other purpose (bike lanes, bus lanes, etc). Street parking is highly efficient because you need the space between buildings anyway for light and air, and putting parking at ground level is much less expensive than building a structure that can support the weight of a vehicle. Bike lanes are mostly useless. I see them all over the place; no bikes in them. And the falling price of ebikes is quickly turning them into obsolete technology, because an ebike can keep up with other motorized vehicle traffic at city speeds and doesn't need a dedicated lane. Bus lanes are entirely useless. Any place with enough bus traffic to justify a dedicated bus lane should instead have a subway line. Do the math. If a 40-passenger bus can carry the same number of people as 40 1-passenger cars spaced 30 feet apart and traveling at 30MPH, to have the bus lane carry as many people as a normal lane would require there to be a full bus every 27 seconds.

jjav 3y ago

> FWIW I am lucky enough to live in a high density part of an old city, and it is wonderful. I live in a low-density US suburb built in the late 90s. The prototypical place that according to the memes, I must drive 30 minutes to the nearest store. > I can walk 8 minutes to a small street of shops with almost everything I need. I can cycle to other parts of the city to enjoy other amenities and meet friends. Also, I can walk in ~10 minutes to stores and entertainment of nearly any type I could need. It's not a binary choice of dense city center or can't walk to anything. Most suburbs can be very walkable.