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

Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 286 posts

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#261

Post by Nullabillity »

noobermin wrote: post #208
Balanceinfinity wrote: post #165

Some cities simply can't do this, such as Los Angeles, Dallas, and Atlanta. It's not in their DNA. Things are simply too far apart and the infrastructure couldn't hold it. Other cities are moving toward "no cars" by simply allowing gridlock to make driving a car worthless. I visit NYC very often, and we used to take cabs all the time. Now, we never do, unless we have so much luggage we can't manage - it's a nightmare…

One thing I'll add, the "allowing gridlock" is like "allowing water to fill a container". It more or less is what an incompressible fluid does which is essentially what traffic is. That's why road widenings don't neccessarily decrease congestion, when you take into the non-linear effects (induced demand).

> induced demand

Oh no, more people can get to their destination by their preferred mode of transportation! How horrible!

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#262

Post by fragmede »

wcarron wrote: post #104
tomtheelder wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly fine, sometimes a problem. It's pretty much like regular bikes (or cars for that matter): some might not work well if there is significant snow/ice, but then you will just need one that is suitable for those sort of conditions. The scooter companies are putting out very low end models that aren't designed for any sort of adverse conditions, and they are scared of lawsuits/blowback from accidents. This sort of…

I hope e-scooters never make it out of infancy. Bikes are infinitely more practical and capable. They are more stable at all speeds. They can have significantly more cargo carrying capacity. Bikes can be fitted (for the most part) with different tires/wheels to handle adverse conditions more easily than a scooter can. I hope for the infanticide of e-scooter transportation. It's a grotesque, subooptimal solution than…

> Bikes can be fitted (for the most part) with different tires/wheels

Maybe there's a level of sensitive to being a bicyclist that I realize, but not that's something I've ever needed to consider mid-day at the office for my commute home. It's not like a hilly mountain bike trail suddenly grew out of the ground while I was on my lunch break that I unexpectedly need to cross in order to get home. (A planned detour the long way home is a different story.)

Personal transport evolves as technology changes. From the original iron and wood bone-shakers during the Victorian era followed by the later penny-farthings, to the chain and derailleur drive-trains that are popular today. Bicycles assume that the locomotive energy comes from a person, and are designed around that.

A useful amount of energy can now be stored in on-board batteries, with motors powerful enough to propel a person forwards, some are more powerful than a person can pedal. Some are even powerful enough for cars (requires a lot more batteries though). Electric motors are quieter and don't have exhaust like gasoline engines, either. (We also have self-balancing technology that lowers the learning curve for single-axle designs.)

Henry Ford, possibly apocryphally, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Shoving an electric motor on a bicycle's a faster horse. Maybe with some imagination we can do better than that.

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#263

Post by badpun »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #57
kevinqiu1 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a Western context with our property situation perhaps but look at Japan. 91% of the population lives in an urban area and even in the most desirable metropolis Tokyo it is relatively affordable: https://www.curbed.com/2017/2/3/14496248/tokyo-real-estate-a... Not every city in the world has to be like New York or San Francisco. Cars should be banned (more or less) in cities. And it should viable for someone to live…

It's expensive to live in a city that's 40% asphalt to move cars around and park cars in. You basically need to pay 40% more for the same living space, since you don't really pay for the moving space. Great way for car companies to force externalities onto everyone else. Don't like cars? "Oh well, you're paying for the road and parking anyway. You can't beat the problem, so you may as well join it."

> You basically need to pay 40% more for the same living space, since you don't really pay for the moving space.

That would be the case if constructing and maintaining roads would be as expensive as constructing and maintaining housing, which I don't think is true.

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#264

Post by strider12 »

Demoneeri wrote: post #215
HorstG wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This only works in bigger cities, where there is plenty of heavily subsidized public transport such as Berlin. Most smaller towns that went car free killed their businesses or made them move to shopping districts on the outskirts which are still reachable by car. Leading to "dead" inner parts of town and very unhappy citizens. Oh, and skyrocketing rents in the subsidized cities such as Berlin...

It's funny that you are using "heavily subsidized public transport" while using the entierly subsidized road system...

Excise tax, Gas Tax, Tolls, Registration Fees, Inspection Fees ... Parking fee's... Cars pay their way to the point of making the country profitable in that regard...

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#265

Post by jroschen »

greenonions wrote: post #243
jroschen wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iowa City and their pedestrian mall is easily one of the best places to spend a couples days at in the Midwest. Being a college town, it’s a bit of an oasis in the Midwest for all sorts of fantastic local restaurants, arts, and people. Without the pedestrian mall, it wouldn’t be half the city it is today. https://thinkiowacity.com

I get an unsecure error viewing that site on mobile.

Sorry about that, for some reason, this site requires www.

https://www.thinkiowacity.com

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#266

Post by PeterStuer »

HorstG wrote: post #196
onreact wrote: post #90

Yeah, I live in Berlin and we have an increasing number of car free zones here where people can move around without being afraid of getting killed. Even children play outside again in such areas without risking their life. Not to mention the lack of noise, pollution and clogged up space with parking cars. Cafes thrive and people stroll around to spend their time and money. Businesses return from the outskirts etc. It…

This only works in bigger cities, where there is plenty of heavily subsidized public transport such as Berlin. Most smaller towns that went car free killed their businesses or made them move to shopping districts on the outskirts which are still reachable by car. Leading to "dead" inner parts of town and very unhappy citizens. Oh, and skyrocketing rents in the subsidized cities such as Berlin...

That is what they claim over here as well. Meanwhile business is booming in the pedestrian zone, with shops actively moving there from other parts, whereas those shopping streets that kept cars are indeed showing some empty spots due to (a) the above, (b) normal churn, with new businesses starting preferring the car free zones as well and (c) stall-wards being trounced by e-commerce.

The same complaints playbook every time in every city (commerce, disabled, deliveries and repairs) with the same success stories each and very time the carfree streets and regions are there.

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#267

Post by jjoonathan »

ogre_codes wrote: post #139
jjoonathan wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Decreasing someone's range increases their costs, a lot, because it effectively makes real estate more scarce and removes distant retail competition (in addition to increasing the real estate cost of retail). My intuition says the effect size is going to be a multiple of what it costs to maintain a cheap car.

This has been demonstrated to be false. Probably one of the biggest reasons is real estate increases in the denser areas as parking infrastructure gets phased out. Parking is a massive waste of land.

Oh? Link me.

My guess: real estate costs go down short-term if you add a bunch of supply by getting rid of parking, and then they go right back up, plus some, once the market equilibrates.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to enjoy having 5x the space at half the cost as when I lived in the city, with 5 grocery stores 10 minutes away instead of 2 grocery stores 30 minutes away. Not to mention parks, trees, and nature trails for running.

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#268

Post by telchar »

noirbot wrote: post #201
greenonions wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to mince words regarding the statistics on cars. You read and responded to the comment, so they clearly drive engagement. Walking, biking, taking the bus, carpooling are incredibly convenient for anyone willing to try, and I certainly support efforts to improve the facilities for these at all opportunities. There are uncomfortable truths that need to be addressed about cars, however, and you don't get anywhere b…

I'm not sure if "convenient" is really the right word for it. I recently moved to a new job, and my commute is now 20-30 minutes by car. My new office has bike facilities and showers, and isn't too far from public transit, and is generally about as optimal as you can get for non-driving commuting in this city. I still drive because biking is A. pretty physically grueling in a number of common weather conditions ( gre…

An e-bike would go a long way to materialize the convenience promised by biking. Prices are coming down quite a bit as well. Maybe look into that, they're fun too.

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#269

Post by gumby »

HorstG wrote: post #212
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yeah, if you get rid of one form of transport there has to be something sufficient to replace it. They could be subways, busses, bikes (think Denmark), etc.

It isn't that nobody thought of busses or trams. Its just that they are always too sparse, slow, limited in times, capacity, safety and comfort. I believe the break-even is of being able to replace cars is somewhere around a 5min schedule over the day and stations in at most 200m walking distance from everywhere. Oh, and of course being comparable in speed to at least a bike. That leaves only subways...

Melbourne trams are more convenient than driving and are free in the city centre. It can work just fine.

Re: Car-Free Streets Will Soon Be the Norm

#270

Post by Doxin »

HorstG wrote: post #196
onreact wrote: post #90

Yeah, I live in Berlin and we have an increasing number of car free zones here where people can move around without being afraid of getting killed. Even children play outside again in such areas without risking their life. Not to mention the lack of noise, pollution and clogged up space with parking cars. Cafes thrive and people stroll around to spend their time and money. Businesses return from the outskirts etc. It…

This only works in bigger cities, where there is plenty of heavily subsidized public transport such as Berlin. Most smaller towns that went car free killed their businesses or made them move to shopping districts on the outskirts which are still reachable by car. Leading to "dead" inner parts of town and very unhappy citizens. Oh, and skyrocketing rents in the subsidized cities such as Berlin...

One alternative, if you're not fond of the idea of banning cars altogether, is to do the same thing that you see a lot over here. Basically any street people live on is a dead end, or almost a dead end. Taking a shortcut through a residential street basically doesn't happen.

Take the neighborhood I live in for example, It's all one-directional traffic with tight corners and speed bumps. It has more exiting streets than entering streets. The end result being a decided lack of traffic, while still being able to get a car to your front door when you need it.

Kids can play in the streets safely enough, There's a couple cars an hour most of the day and the few cars that do pass are going slow enough to not hit any kids. The most dangerous time of day is all the parents getting their kid out of school by car.

You sometimes see a commercial vehicle trying out a new shortcut. People only think that to be a good idea once. Going around is faster than going through in any case.

Carless doesn't have to be an absolute. It's a gradient from six lane highways through your neighborhood on one side, and no cars at all on the other. A balance needs to be found.

Post reply on HN