4 ms·

The article has nothing to do with that. It's looking at the development over the past 19 years. This "car centric cities" criticism is beginning to get really

The article has nothing to do with that. It's looking at the development over the past 19 years. This "car centric cities" criticism is beginning to get really old here on HN.

anon291 2y ago
Why is it getting old? I go out way more today living in a walkable area than I or my parents did growing up in the suburbs. It's just reality, and the data show that. There's also substantial differences in suburbs, and I don't think it has to do with 'car centric cities'. The suburb I grew up in was car centric but was still much better than the kids of developments i see today. Things are not black and white and exist on a spectrum. Being skeptical of modern subdivision-based development does not mean thinking everywhere needs to be Manhattan. It just means that we should think about adding a cafe, a park, a corner store, a library, etc, and adding things to make it easier when you don't have a car. I am not, and have never been anti-car. If you look through my post history, you'll even see me criticize attempts by various states to limit the sale of internal combustion engine cars. I own a car and drive it when I need to. I also walk and bike and scooter and wahtever
- dingnuts 2y ago
  it's annoying because in many suburbs the problem isn't cars, it's just zoning! all of the problems described in the grandparent, like the lack of a dirt path between complexes, no small stores in the area -- these are ZONING problems, not car problems! we can keep our detached homes and cars and cozy suburbs and still have a convenience store in walking distance, I'm sure of it, if local zoning laws allow it but this subreddit, er I mean website, might as well be r/fuckcars whenever the topic arises
  - mertd 2y ago
    You are correct. Technically it is a zoning problem. But such zoning only became feasible after cars went mainstream. There are many self perpetuating elements of exclusionary zoning and car dependency.
  - skepticATX 2y ago
    Zoning and car-centric design are intimately connected, though. A walkable suburb just can’t support the number of cars that a typical western suburb supports today. If you loosen zoning, what you’re going to end up with is denser development and less room for cars. Streetcar suburbs are an example of this. You have more room than living in the core of the city, but you don’t have enough room for 3 F150s for the family.
    - dkga 2y ago
      This. Zoning and car-centric life are endogenous. I would even add NIMBYism w.r.t. adding public transportation stops or bicycle lanes.
    - bluGill 2y ago
      The streetcar suburbs in my area have larger lots than the new suburbs they are building on the edge of town. Back in those days e*erpone had a garden and so lots were bigger. of coures how the lot is built is different but it isn't size.
  - anon291 2y ago
    If you read my post I literally criticized zoning and never criticized cars.

The article has nothing to do with that. It's looking at the development over the past 19 years. This "car centric cities" criticism is beginning to get really old here on HN.

anon291 2y ago

Why is it getting old? I go out way more today living in a walkable area than I or my parents did growing up in the suburbs. It's just reality, and the data show that. There's also substantial differences in suburbs, and I don't think it has to do with 'car centric cities'. The suburb I grew up in was car centric but was still much better than the kids of developments i see today. Things are not black and white and exist on a spectrum. Being skeptical of modern subdivision-based development does not mean thinking everywhere needs to be Manhattan. It just means that we should think about adding a cafe, a park, a corner store, a library, etc, and adding things to make it easier when you don't have a car. I am not, and have never been anti-car. If you look through my post history, you'll even see me criticize attempts by various states to limit the sale of internal combustion engine cars. I own a car and drive it when I need to. I also walk and bike and scooter and wahtever

dingnuts 2y ago
it's annoying because in many suburbs the problem isn't cars, it's just zoning! all of the problems described in the grandparent, like the lack of a dirt path between complexes, no small stores in the area -- these are ZONING problems, not car problems! we can keep our detached homes and cars and cozy suburbs and still have a convenience store in walking distance, I'm sure of it, if local zoning laws allow it but this subreddit, er I mean website, might as well be r/fuckcars whenever the topic arises
- mertd 2y ago
  You are correct. Technically it is a zoning problem. But such zoning only became feasible after cars went mainstream. There are many self perpetuating elements of exclusionary zoning and car dependency.
- skepticATX 2y ago
  Zoning and car-centric design are intimately connected, though. A walkable suburb just can’t support the number of cars that a typical western suburb supports today. If you loosen zoning, what you’re going to end up with is denser development and less room for cars. Streetcar suburbs are an example of this. You have more room than living in the core of the city, but you don’t have enough room for 3 F150s for the family.
  - dkga 2y ago
    This. Zoning and car-centric life are endogenous. I would even add NIMBYism w.r.t. adding public transportation stops or bicycle lanes.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    The streetcar suburbs in my area have larger lots than the new suburbs they are building on the edge of town. Back in those days e*erpone had a garden and so lots were bigger. of coures how the lot is built is different but it isn't size.
- anon291 2y ago
  If you read my post I literally criticized zoning and never criticized cars.