4 ms·
It's actually in the article multiple times. The physical design of communities (i.e. - designed around the automobile, not around a person on foot/bicycle) is
by digdugdirk 2y ago
It's actually in the article multiple times. The physical design of communities (i.e. - designed around the automobile, not around a person on foot/bicycle) is what the previous post is referring to, not specifically cars themselves.
Car dependent design is the problem that prevents children from being able to play with friends, because they are dependent on an adult to bring them somewhere.
Car dependent design also has negative feedback loops for community in other ways. Local shops can't compete with big box chains in the suburbs due to economies of scale and are forced to close, further increasing the need to drive further for basic necessities. Cars are dangerous, further decreasing our base level of trust for interaction with our local community.
These are just the surface of the iceberg though - take an open minded approach to reading up on the second and third order effects of car dependent community development before being so quick to dismiss the topic.
- throwaway7ahgb 2y ago>Car dependent design is the problem that prevents children from being able to play with friends These statements as facts aren't helpful because it implies car dependence is the only thing. There is so much history and nuance here. OP is right, making every discussion essentially '/r/fuckcars' doesn't get us anywhere. Anecdote: I grew up in a small suburb, 100% car dependence. However I still walked to grade school and rode my bike on roads/sidewalks where cars are the same now as they were in the 90s.