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

The Stroad

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 351 posts

Re: The Stroad

#81

Post by detaro »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #80
_robbywashere wrote: post #21

I couldn’t agree more with the article. Unfortunately as for America I think people wouldn’t be very happy with turning their stroads into streets. There is a very toxic self centered car culture here; any impediment to it real or imaginary will make people very angry.

> There is a very toxic self centered car culture here; any impediment to it real or imaginary will make people very angry. I have seen more comments and people talking about this toxic car culture than seen it in real life. Not everyone is young, healthy and rich enough to bike. There is a historic racial divide. White folks live in more bike friendly places. https://theconversation.com/the-unbearable-whiteness-of-c…

Are you suggesting it's impossible to have cars while not having a "very toxic self centered car culture"?

Also, bikes are not the only or natural alternative to cars.

Re: The Stroad

#82

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

cozzyd wrote: post #79
woah wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're wrong. People want to live in walkable cities. Property prices prove this.

And the reason people often move out with kids is that it's too expensive to own a large-enough property for most people due to the high demand for walkable places.

there's a very simple solution then. build more walkable places.

Re: The Stroad

#83

Post by farnsworth »

closeparen wrote: post #48
_robbywashere wrote: post #21

I couldn’t agree more with the article. Unfortunately as for America I think people wouldn’t be very happy with turning their stroads into streets. There is a very toxic self centered car culture here; any impediment to it real or imaginary will make people very angry.

Suburbia is a tree. The best residential property is closest to the leaf nodes, since this minimizes through traffic (think cul-de-sac). The best commercial property is closest to the root, since this maximizes it (think McDonalds). The tree empties every morning and fills every night, placing enormous demands on the edges near the root. Those are generally the stroads. Slashing the capacity of a stroad/arterial by t…

The takeaway here is a lesson about how we build cities, not that we should decrease the traffic capacity of some stroads and make no other changes.

Re: The Stroad

#84

Post by adrianN »

closeparen wrote: post #26
mcv wrote: post #3

I don't think this article is making the point veey clearly, but it is a very important point: roads are for long distance connections at speed, streets are for local traffic: reaching houses, shops, people. These stroads try to do both and fail at both because the goals are contradictory; you can't have high speed traffic with lots of side streets and crossing traffic, bikes and pedestrians. It will be too slow for…

We have lots of slow and calm streets in American suburbia, and we love them that way. We value this calm so much that we refuse to admit shopping or even multi-family housing to them, for fear of disturbing it. These uses have to go somewhere, so they go where there is no presumption of an entitlement to low traffic, and that’s the road. The businesses hardly complain; they love to be where the greatest numbers of e…

I don't understand how people think that cars zipping by at high speeds is particularly conductive to impulse shopping. When I'm traveling at high speeds I usually have a goal I want to reach quickly and don't have time to follow any impulses.

Re: The Stroad

#85

Post by cozzyd »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #82
cozzyd wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the reason people often move out with kids is that it's too expensive to own a large-enough property for most people due to the high demand for walkable places.

there's a very simple solution then. build more walkable places.

If only it were so simple. Building walkable places is illegal almost everywhere in the US due to onerous parking minimums, regulations about street design and restrictive zoning. It's still possible to build walkable places with highrises, but low-rise walkable areas like https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9181247,-87.6517955,3a,60y,7... are almost lost art in the US. There are entire major metro areas in the US with no street like this.

Re: The Stroad

#86

Post by treis »

woah wrote: post #78
treis wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this isn't how the world works. It's not Simcity where you lay down neat grids of zones and the dutiful citizens follow your orders. People will want to take advantage of cheap(er) land alongside your "road" so that they can own a house while still having reasonable access to the "street". And boom now you have a stroad. Attempting to use zoning to stop that runs into the problem that by and large people don't wa…

You're wrong. People want to live in walkable cities. Property prices prove this.

But they choose not to. US population is roughly 1/2 suburban, 1/4 rural, and 1/4 urban. Which backs up my point.

Re: The Stroad

#87

Post by treis »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #82
cozzyd wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the reason people often move out with kids is that it's too expensive to own a large-enough property for most people due to the high demand for walkable places.

there's a very simple solution then. build more walkable places.

Walkable places are inherently more expensive because they lack economy of scale. It's why Dunkin Donuts can sell a dozen for $10 but it costs ~$20 for half a dozen at my local walkable place. Granted, there is a quality of ingredients difference but not 4x the cost.

Re: The Stroad

#88

Post by throwaway894345 »

gibolt wrote: post #57

For anyone interested in this topic, I highly recommend this channel's series. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJp5q-R0lZ0_FCUbeVWK6OGLN... 'Not Just Bikes' has a ton of other great videos on the channel about what infrastructure makes a good city and what makes one hostile to residents.

Are there any rankings of US cities (not just the major ones) based on some quantitative analysis of these kinds of design principles?

Re: The Stroad

#89

Post by cozzyd »

treis wrote: post #87
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a very simple solution then. build more walkable places.

Walkable places are inherently more expensive because they lack economy of scale. It's why Dunkin Donuts can sell a dozen for $10 but it costs ~$20 for half a dozen at my local walkable place. Granted, there is a quality of ingredients difference but not 4x the cost.

There are plenty of Dunkin Donuts stores in walkable places. I have a Dunks across the street from my condo and another one around the corner (and several others several blocks away). (I live in this area, which is VERY walkable: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8822495,-87.6254941,1122a,35...)

It's true there are also other, superior, options, but that's a bonus!

Re: The Stroad

#90

Post by whatshisface »

treis wrote: post #86
woah wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're wrong. People want to live in walkable cities. Property prices prove this.

But they choose not to. US population is roughly 1/2 suburban, 1/4 rural, and 1/4 urban. Which backs up my point.

There may be forces at work behind that other than individual home preferences.
Post reply on HN