What happens when a city bans cars from its streets? • Hacker News Board

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#141

Post by pchristensen » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 1:59 AM UTC

throwing838383 wrote: post #119

pchristensen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Availability of land is the limiting factor inside existing cities, but not for the development of new cities. To build a new city, your limiting factor would be a self-sustaining cluster of economic activity that can attract participants. And that's difficult to bootstrap for a lot of reasons.

To get people to move somewhere, you mainly just need jobs. Everybody wants jobs. There's no choice, people have to go where jobs are because employers have much more bargaining power. So, create some large enough tax incentives for companies to move there, and people will follow.

Jobs alone aren’t enough - look at oil and gas fields in North Dakota and West Texas. You need stable employment, schools, police and fire - you know, Sim City stuff. Also, you need economic opportunity beyond just “jobs” - you need bold entrepreneurial types that tend to get stifled in a pure company town. Kind of like how a company can lose its edge if investors own too much of the company and founders too little. It’s hard to create from scratch.

The closest example to what you’re saying are the artificial capital cities like Brasilia and Canberra, but then you’re talking about the backing and resources of an entire country’s federal budget.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#142

Post by Dylan16807 » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 2:10 AM UTC

bcrosby95 wrote: post #107

criddell wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eventually they will be cheap. How much would you spend for a computer with the processing power of an iPhone in 1990? Thirty years from now that $100k tech package will be $500 and it will be orders of magnitude better. When cars stop colliding with each other, safety standards can be relaxed. Get rid of heavy bumpers and structures added to withstand 50 mph offset crashes. The cars become very light weight which le…

Would you also say we have a very high tolerance for danger when it comes to poisons and heights? Because your statement appears pretty hyperbolic to me when comparing some of the ways people die in the US. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/suicide.htm

> Would you also say we have a very high tolerance for danger when it comes to poisons and heights?

For poisons, absolutely. "Nearly all poisoning deaths in the United States are attributed to drugs" And we handle drug dangers very badly.

For heights, I don't know. Your link says falls which is not the same thing, especially when the elderly are involved. I couldn't find what fraction of those involved heights.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#143

Post by paxys » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 2:33 AM UTC

dudul wrote: post #26

drstewart wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're guessing that because you live in a world that's been designed for cars for 50 years, so you naturally see it as the most convenient option -- because it's been designed that way. Even in NYC. Design cities for people first and not automobiles and you'll be asking why anyone would take a car over a train/bus/bike because it's more expensive, takes longer, and is more of a hassle.

If at 3AM my kid starts feeling very sick, how do I get him to the doctor/hospital in a city where cars are banned? And I'm not trying to be facetious, I think the theory of car-less cities is really appealing, but I honestly don't see how this is a good solution.

Car-free does not mean inaccessible. All cities that have taken these steps have also made exceptions for emergency vehicles, commercial vehicles (with permits) etc. In fact with fewer cars on the road you are going to be able to get to the hospital quicker.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#144

Post by asveikau » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 2:34 AM UTC

vonmoltke wrote: post #55

brenden2 wrote: post #3

I'm so happy to see this idea starting to get mainstream attention. I predict that in 50-100 years we'll look back on the age of the automobile as one of the biggest mistakes in urban planning. Automobiles are dangerous, kill thousands of people every year, contribute significantly to pollution, and cause health problems by discouraging physical activity. They're expensive, inefficient, and cause more harm than good…

> I predict that in 50-100 years we'll look back on the age of the automobile as one of the biggest mistakes in urban planning. I think that's a very hyperbolic prediction. I think elevating the automobile to the detriment of other forms of transportation will be viewed as a mistake, but the automobile itself is no more a mistake than the horse and carriage were. > My dream is that one day most streets in Manhattan w…

> When was this ever true in Manhattan,

Probably not what they are going for, but uptown was relatively undeveloped until surprisingly recently in historical terms.

Also there are lots of famous photos of kids playing on Manhattan streets from circa the '30s and earlier.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#145

Post by Robotbeat » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 2:48 AM UTC

vonmoltke wrote: post #55

brenden2 wrote: post #3

I'm so happy to see this idea starting to get mainstream attention. I predict that in 50-100 years we'll look back on the age of the automobile as one of the biggest mistakes in urban planning. Automobiles are dangerous, kill thousands of people every year, contribute significantly to pollution, and cause health problems by discouraging physical activity. They're expensive, inefficient, and cause more harm than good…

> I predict that in 50-100 years we'll look back on the age of the automobile as one of the biggest mistakes in urban planning. I think that's a very hyperbolic prediction. I think elevating the automobile to the detriment of other forms of transportation will be viewed as a mistake, but the automobile itself is no more a mistake than the horse and carriage were. > My dream is that one day most streets in Manhattan w…

Put all the vehicles (of whatever type) underground.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#146

Post by Robotbeat » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 2:49 AM UTC

opportune wrote: post #101

jandrese wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idyllic dream of vendors lugging their wares through the subway and city streets every day... When construction companies hire armies of people to walk individual I-beams through the city for every project... Where I get to haul my garbage a dozen blocks to the nearest accessible trash pickup location... In the end you still need roads. You don't get to convert all of that space into a park even if you ban cars.

I agree we will still need roads in the foreseeable future, probably the rest of our lifetimes, but it’s not out of the question for materials to dropped into a construction site using drones. Maybe even entire prefabbed buildings or segments of buildings There are significant benefits to this approach other than not having to use roads, but of course the tech isn’t there yet

Do it with tunnels.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#147

Post by hutzlibu » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 2:51 AM UTC

jandrese wrote: post #85

brenden2 wrote: post #3

I'm so happy to see this idea starting to get mainstream attention. I predict that in 50-100 years we'll look back on the age of the automobile as one of the biggest mistakes in urban planning. Automobiles are dangerous, kill thousands of people every year, contribute significantly to pollution, and cause health problems by discouraging physical activity. They're expensive, inefficient, and cause more harm than good…

The idyllic dream of vendors lugging their wares through the subway and city streets every day... When construction companies hire armies of people to walk individual I-beams through the city for every project... Where I get to haul my garbage a dozen blocks to the nearest accessible trash pickup location... In the end you still need roads. You don't get to convert all of that space into a park even if you ban cars.

"You don't get to convert all of that space into a park even if you ban cars. "

Not all the car space maybe, but lots if it.

You don't need parking spaces anymore. No more than 2 lanes for most roads ... that sums up very big.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#148

Post by ericd » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 3:09 AM UTC

opportune wrote: post #115

journalctl wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean this really nicely: it is 100% out of the question for entire buildings or even just materials to be dropped into a construction site with drones. Also, how are you going to get large digging equipment in? Or things like wrecking balls?

Something like an Ibeam could, it would just require something closer in size/larger than a helicopter. A 50 foot Ibeam is a bit over 2 tons; a small modern military helicopter would be able to carry that easily. When I say drone I just mean a remotely controlled copter-thing, not specifically a small one. An entire building is less feasible unless it is small, but it could be done using modular components

If building costs go way up, so do rents for normal people (and less gets built). Just something to consider.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#149

Post by greglindahl » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 3:15 AM UTC

jandrese wrote: post #85

brenden2 wrote: post #3

I'm so happy to see this idea starting to get mainstream attention. I predict that in 50-100 years we'll look back on the age of the automobile as one of the biggest mistakes in urban planning. Automobiles are dangerous, kill thousands of people every year, contribute significantly to pollution, and cause health problems by discouraging physical activity. They're expensive, inefficient, and cause more harm than good…

The idyllic dream of vendors lugging their wares through the subway and city streets every day... When construction companies hire armies of people to walk individual I-beams through the city for every project... Where I get to haul my garbage a dozen blocks to the nearest accessible trash pickup location... In the end you still need roads. You don't get to convert all of that space into a park even if you ban cars.

Literally no city ever banned I-beam delivery with a truck, but sure, I guess we can discuss hypotheticals.

Ditto for your garbage hysteria.

Re: What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

#150

Post by greglindahl » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 3:25 AM UTC

criddell wrote: post #75

brenden2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small deliveries are done by bicycle these days in Manhattan. Large items, like furniture, could be delivered using small electric trucks with special permits for this purpose.

I was thinking more about the fleet of Sysco, UPS, FedEx, DHL, etc... trucks.

... all of which are looking at electric vehicles. And are a small % of the current overall traffic.