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

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

#171

Post by Rapzid » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:34 AM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #11

aeharding wrote: post #4

I've dreamt about this. I would immediately move to the first US city that bans SOV commuters from a significant portion of the city (let's say, a couple square miles), and establishes superblocks where no vehicles are allowed whatsoever, with the old streets converted to green space. Of course, I doubt this will happen in my lifetime.

Isn't the USA empty enough that you could still start such a city today?

Yeah but public transpo doesn't run out that far so you end up with a chicken-egg proble; the people who demonize cars can't get there to start the city..

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

#172

Post by Rapzid » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:43 AM UTC

drstewart wrote: post #10

bananabiscuit wrote: post #7

I’m guessing so many people on HN are anti-car because they live their lives through their computer and never feel the need to travel outside their immediate area? What are you supposed to do if you like to take trips to places hundreds of miles away? What if your job involves visiting many different locations in your city throughout the day? I have family that lives in the same city as me and the difference between…

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.

Cities are designed for people. People like cars.

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

#173

Post by jdnenej » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:47 AM UTC

isostatic wrote: post #166

adjkant wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

They can go through the bus lane. Usually when you design people centric streets you still leave a clearing big enough for vehicles to pass through, it's just they have to go very slow or have siren to alert everyone to move out of the way for an emergency.

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

#174

Post by ygra » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:47 AM UTC

isostatic wrote: post #166

adjkant wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Pedestrian areas in the city center here usually get delivery trucks in the early morning and after ~8:00 or so no cars are allowed in that zone. Seems to work well. Construction sites are an exception and while inconvenient I doubt people insist on bringing construction equipment by wheelbarrow from a km away.

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

#175

Post by benj111 » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:51 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

Are we discussing this as a hypothetical, or as a practical building method?

Plus I don't really want my town to sound like the set of Apocalypse Now.

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

#176

Post by jdnenej » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:55 AM UTC

megaremote wrote: post #155

foobar1962 wrote: post #90

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. No need to wait that long, the regret is felt already. Sydney ripped up its extensive tram network in the 1950s and 1960s to improve the roads for cars. Remnants of the infrastructure remain: cuttings through rocky, hilly areas in particular. My mother (in her 90s now) talks about taking the…

They tried in Melbourne too. A few people stood up and fought to save them, like Robert Risson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Risson

The people I know from Melbourne absolutely love the trams as well and talk shit about how awful it is to get around Sydney

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

#177

Post by tonyedgecombe » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:58 AM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #40

It used to be only wealthy people could afford cars and to live in the suburbs. Now cities are so expensive its poor people who live in the suburbs a long way from train stations and drive in. Makes sense to ban cars now and complete the cycle.

Despite the fact I despise cars I can't help feeling poor people are going to get shafted in this transition.

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

#178

Post by jdnenej » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 7:00 AM UTC

acdha wrote: post #137

nightsd01 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

beefield: a self driving car doesn’t NEED to take up space in a crowded city. It can drive you to work, then you get out, then it can go drive itself to a less crowded area. Then when you’re ready to leave the office it can be there when you’re ready to go.

That sounds like more vehicle miles in downtown areas which are already severely congested. A large part of the problem is that cars are the least spatially-efficient form of transportation: having them drive more miles at peak times isn’t going to work unless we see huge improvements elsewhere, which seems unlikely.

What could be a more realistic option is electric velomobiles (a recumbent bike with an outer shell) which have a capacity of one person and a few bags. You get the benefit of weather protection and convenient speed while being extremely safe and space efficient.

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

#179

Post by jdnenej » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 7:02 AM UTC

megaremote wrote: post #156

criddell wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self-driving cars are going trigger a new wave of automobile growth, at least in the US. They won't be dangerous, will run clean, be super convenient and unbelievably inexpensive to own and operate. They are going to throw gasoline on the sprawl fire. There will certainly be some city centers and other areas closed to car traffic (although probably not most of Manhattan - delivery vehicles are a significant part of t…

> They won't be dangerous, will run clean, be super convenient and unbelievably inexpensive to own and operate. Oh, they will not use tires? Which leave smalls bits of plastic everywhere they go that get washed into our waterway as micro-plastic.

It's not just small bits of rubber you see on the side of the road, it's billions of rubber dust particles that come off the tires and blow in to the air giving you cancer.

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

#180

Post by isostatic » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 7:23 AM UTC

Robotbeat wrote: post #145

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…

Put all the vehicles (of whatever type) underground.

Underground isn't an infinite space. Power, Sewers, basements, vaults, foundations, and existing tunnels.

In London, building a new tunnel for crossrail involved threading a TBM through a gap with 80cm clearance (that's less than 2 cubits).

The deeper you go, the wider the problems above, the more existing infrastrucutre is effected, not to mention the issues of how to return to the surface.

Build decking over all the existing surface streets, only allow electric vehicles on the (current) underground streets, don't allow anything larger than a pushbike on the top.