Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What happens when a city bans cars from its streets?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 245 posts

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

#161

Post by adrianN »

choeger wrote: post #39

Does anyone really think children will play on the streets when buses, trams, bicycles, emergency services, garbage trucks, and delivery vans still need that space? Does anyone really believe the "empty" parking lots will become public space? Consider two things: First, every apartment block in a city needs access by road for the emergency services. Second, a more livable city will attract more citizens. This in turn…

Children already play on the street in residential areas where traffic is basically nonexistent most of the day. Why do you think that this behavior won't extend to more streets if we ban 90% of the cars?

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

#162

Post by deepGem »

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've thought long and hard about the automobile and it's allure. As much as I hate the inefficiencies, I still believe that for a vast majority of humans, the automobile is their private abode, that takes them to places. We are explorers by heart and ever since the invention of the wheel, we have coveted vehicles. They are our private sanctuaries that propel us from one location to another. No other mode of transport, be it a bus, train or god forbid a plane, provides this level of comfort. We covet our automobiles so dearly that we have decided to ignore the perils of air pollution and traffic stress on our own health. If this is not a testament of our love for the automobile then I don't know what is.

That being said, it's quite clear that the automobile in it's current form is highly space inefficient. The 4 wheeled structure has not undergone any change since the dawn of chariots. I think a change is coming, not sure when, perhaps with the advent of flying cars from Sebastian Thrun.

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

#163

Post by megaremote »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #130

The article's most prominent example of an idyllic, walkable, “car-free” city is Venice, Italy, whose residents do have motor vehicles with full access to the city; they just happen to run on separate waterways. This would imply that the optimal land-based city could have cars, but they'd have to have their infrastructure more sequestered from pedestrians.

> whose residents do have motor vehicles with full access to the city; they just happen to run on separate waterways.

You think everyone in Venice has a boat? No.

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

#164

Post by graup »

jimmaswell wrote: post #114
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.

Why would I want to walk to a train/bus station, wait around, cram into a space full of people (some crazy or smelly or muggers), then walk even more afterwards and probably have to take even more connections, or be forced to use a bike all the time (I use one recreationally but I'd hate to rely on it)? We're not all such smug masochists that we're willing to turn every day into an inconvenient exercise routine and c…

The things you mentioned are all implementation problems not inherent to the mode of transport. Visit any Asian megapolis (HK, Seoul, Singapore...) and you can see how public transportation can be effective and convenient.

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

#165

Post by cscurmudgeon »

choeger wrote: post #39

Does anyone really think children will play on the streets when buses, trams, bicycles, emergency services, garbage trucks, and delivery vans still need that space? Does anyone really believe the "empty" parking lots will become public space? Consider two things: First, every apartment block in a city needs access by road for the emergency services. Second, a more livable city will attract more citizens. This in turn…

Look at SF. They are looking to ban cars from the city center but not drug dealers who deal right in front of govt buildings and mere feet from police offers.

But banning cars gets a lot more airspace for some reason. Totally dysfunctional clown city.

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

#166

Post by isostatic »

adjkant wrote: post #153
vonmoltke wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 It never was, but the car problem always existed because roads needing to be clear for horses caused the same prohibitive issues of using streets for pedestrians. > why do you think it would become true just by getting rid of cars? It wouldn't be just getting rid of cars, its what you do with the space once you get rid of them. Added greenery, protected bike lanes, a lane or two…

And deliveries, not just your amazon prime 2 hour service, but for shops to restock, and building sites to handle tons of equipment, cement, rubble, etc?

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

#167

Post by Razengan »

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…

> My dream is that one day most streets ... will be closed to car traffic and replaced with green space full of trees, flowers, children playing, and usable public space.

While I share that dream, and rarely ever need a car myself, I cannot currently imagine a better alternative to having a personal car in your home for the following situations:

• The most obvious: People who need to be chaperoned: children, the elderly and people with disabilities.

• The next most obvious: Medical emergencies where you don't have to (or don't want to) wait for an ambulance.

• Privacy for groups of people, with group activities (e.g. playing music, making out) confined to the automobile's enclosure.

• Following on the previous point: Going out with the whole family as a single unit, with provisions for taking care of infants etc. right there.

These can be solved if/when fully automatic on-demand cars become widely available, that anyone can request anywhere anytime with a tap on their phone and don't require passengers to learn how to drive. (But I'm afraid they'll be a huge privacy leak, with companies scrambling to record everything that happens in their cars.)

Almost everything else, like shopping, can already be taken care of with current technology and services just fine (e.g. home delivery.)

Until we get Star Trek teleportation.

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

#168

Post by simongray »

deepGem wrote: post #162
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've thought long and hard about the automobile and it's allure. As much as I hate the inefficiencies, I still believe that for a vast majority of humans, the automobile is their private abode, that takes them to places. We are explorers by heart and ever since the invention of the wheel, we have coveted vehicles. They are our private sanctuaries that propel us from one location to another. No other mode of transport…

> I still believe that for a vast majority of humans, the automobile is their private abode, that takes them to places. We are explorers by heart and ever since the invention of the wheel, we have coveted vehicles. They are our private sanctuaries that propel us from one location to another. No other mode of transport, be it a bus, train or god forbid a plane, provides this level of comfort.

I think this is a cultural artefact of a car-centric society.

Cars are not really viewed in this way in my culture (Denmark). They're just another mode of transportation, nothing special about them compared to bicycles, busses, trains, etc. People go with what is most convenient. If you need to get some office work done remotely, then being a passenger in a train saves more time than driving a car. If you want exercise built in to your commute, bicycles are better. In an urban setting, cars are in fact seen as a hassle. They're mostly loved by people in rural areas.

I don't deny that cars have their place, but the kind of exploration potential that a car offers (relatively infrequent, longer distances) can easily be served by rented cars. There is no reason to own a car just to go on infrequent car trips.

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

#169

Post by avar »

deepGem wrote: post #162
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've thought long and hard about the automobile and it's allure. As much as I hate the inefficiencies, I still believe that for a vast majority of humans, the automobile is their private abode, that takes them to places. We are explorers by heart and ever since the invention of the wheel, we have coveted vehicles. They are our private sanctuaries that propel us from one location to another. No other mode of transport…

Helicopters, hovercrafts and yachts also have this appeal. Nobody's saying cars will go away, just that the entirety of human infrastructure might not be constructed around them.

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

#170

Post by benj111 »

Razengan wrote: post #167
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…

> My dream is that one day most streets ... will be closed to car traffic and replaced with green space full of trees, flowers, children playing, and usable public space. While I share that dream, and rarely ever need a car myself, I cannot currently imagine a better alternative to having a personal car in your home for the following situations: • The most obvious: People who need to be chaperoned: children, the elde…

"The most obvious: the elderly and people with disabilities"

Interesting you pick that as your first point, as this is an argument for the opposite.

The 3 groups of people that can't drive, are these 2 and kids.

Post reply on HN