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

Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 576 posts

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#311

Post by dont__panic »

Steltek wrote: post #281
atwood22 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are cars and phones giant these days? Is it because nobody wants smaller ones, or because perverse market incentives have distorted offerings in a chase for product growth? Do you have kids? If you did, you’d know that many people want bigger cars. I drive one of the smallest cars you can buy in the U.S. Now that I have a kid, I’m going to buy a big SUV. Kids require a lot of stuff. Taking them on public transp…

When your kids are just a few years older, you'll really appreciate that they can get themselves to their friends, schools, and other destinations without your car's help. We didn't use a stroller on the T and instead opted for baby wearing. When they hit 1yo, we used a cargo bike and that still serves us extremely well to this day. In K-5, they bike themselves to school and camps (not alone, still escorted because c…

Thank you for raising your children in a sustainable way that allows them to participate in society instead of being carted around in vehicles. I'm sure US society creates plenty of roadblocks for that lifestyle that waste your time, money, and effort. But I'm sure your children will thank you someday (if they don't already!) for providing such a human environment to grow up in.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#312

Post by blackoil »

mjevans wrote: post #227
pkulak wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP said _home_, not single family house.

Not OP, but... Apartments suck, a lot, in the US. * Noise; aren't built to sufficient privacy levels. * Smell; laundry, cooking, or whatever... * not designed to scrub, filter, and direct exhaust. * Patios == smoke or grill; even though those are banned by policy. * Somehow cost more than renting elsewhere * Rent seeking causes negative patterns * Car parking hell As much as the anti-car crowd wants to be anti-car, t…

Apartment need not suck.

    * Noise is an easily solvable problem, with insulation.
    * Proper ducts and exhausts can handle smells/smoke.
    * high rents means there is a demand but not enough supply. 
    * car parking can be in basement, easily accessible.
Benefits of a high quality apartment.

   * easy to secure/gate. 
   * grocery, pharmacy,...  are

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#313

Post by dont__panic »

scruple wrote: post #223
dont__panic wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even smaller towns are viable, too. My New England town has around 5,000 people in it. Aside from the early closing times for restaurants and breweries, (8 or 9!?!?!?!), I have access to exactly the same amenities I had in cities before. And lots more outdoor-oriented things as well. Plus... no traffic.

My wife and I are seriously considering our options in smaller towns in New England. Many of them predate the automobile and have the sorts of qualities that are being talked about in this thread.

I highly recommend. Hanover/Lebanon, Burlington, and Montpelier are decent places to start if you want access to arts, music, theatre, etc. If you're willing to compromise on some of those things in favor of outdoor activities, there are a LOT of great small towns in Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine that let you walk and bike to the basics.

If you enjoy biking to establishments, it's worth it to actively think about dirt roads and rail trails in your search -- dirt roads cut car speeds to safe levels, and rail trails let you avoid cars almost entirely. Both make biking miles better.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#314

Post by frenchy »

atwood22 wrote: post #155
dont__panic wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most Americans don't have a choice. Why are cars and phones giant these days? Is it because nobody wants smaller ones, or because perverse market incentives have distorted offerings in a chase for product growth? Why is the USA unbearably car centric? Is it because nobody wants to get around any other way, or because perverse market incentives have distorted the world around us in a chase for GDP growth? Some people…

> Why are cars and phones giant these days? Is it because nobody wants smaller ones, or because perverse market incentives have distorted offerings in a chase for product growth? Do you have kids? If you did, you’d know that many people want bigger cars. I drive one of the smallest cars you can buy in the U.S. Now that I have a kid, I’m going to buy a big SUV. Kids require a lot of stuff. Taking them on public transp…

We must have very different kinds of kids. My kids hate the car, it's basically like jail to them, whereas on the bus we can talk and play together. We don't use the bus, but that's because bus service in our area isn't very good.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#315

Post by CodeWriter23 »

atwood22 wrote: post #224
dont__panic wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those big cars are the kind of "perverse market incentive" I'm talking about. Why do you need a big car to transport your children? Because: - you can't walk anywhere useful with your kids (so you must get in a car) - public transportation is inconvenient or expensive - biking is dangerous - the big car makes you feel safer because all of the other cars are big Why are those things the way that they are? Because peop…

Sorry, you don't have kids so you just don't get it. I didn't get it either before I had a kid. All of the reasons you listed, bad public transport, dangerous biking, safety, etc. have nothing to do with why I want to buy an SUV. There are just so many items involved with raising a child. Yes, you might be able to take public transit so your kid can see the doctor, as long as you time it to be at an off-peak time, bu…

Forgive me if I'm wrong, it sounds like you're in the "Before 1st Grade" phase of life with your kids. When my daughter passed that, there was the magnet school 45 minutes away (but 15 minutes at off-peak), play dates with kids at the magnet school who are flung all over the large metropolitan basin in which we live, Girl Scouts, Theatre Troupe, Acting Lessons, Martial Arts, Bike Rides, Park Days and various other extracurriculars. There are not enough hours in the day to make those trips using public transit where I live. And showing up on time for any of that using transit??? You've got to be kidding.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#316

Post by mr_tristan »

I see these articles focusing on cars and density, and don't seem dive into details of policy decisions.

This year I moved to a city (Spokane, WA) with an abundance of parks and a few smaller commercial businesses within the middle of residential areas, and the amount of interactions I have with neighbors has exploded. Just yesterday, I'm in front of my house breaking down cardboard for recycling, and met someone new just walking over to a nearby park with their dog. This never happened to me in the last 3-4 cities I lived in.

My sense is that policies like parking minimums, restrictions on small commercial businesses in residential areas, access to parks, might actually have a bigger impact than simply trying to have lots of people living on top of each other.

Not that density is bad, or necessarily good, I just don't see it as particularly significant to improving social interaction. Simply stacking people together isn't going to fix this problem.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#317

Post by jeffreyrogers »

Too reductive. If you go to places like Weber County, Utah there's lots of human connection and it's also built for cars. There are lots of things causing people to feel lonely in the modern world and cars are only a part of it. And if you live in certain parts of the country the car is a great tool for feeling more human connection (by getting you to a church or other place with people similar to you for example).

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#320

Post by alistairSH »

foxyv wrote: post #309
Xylakant wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s just wrong. The village I come from in germany has 8000 inhabitants, pretty much only single/double houses, practically no flats and perfectly walkable. Multiple bakeries and grocery stores, never further than 15 minutes walk. It’s just that these small groceries cannot outcompete supermarkets once people are in the habit of going everywhere by car.

> It’s just that these small groceries cannot outcompete supermarkets once people are in the habit of going everywhere by car. This is true to a limited extent. If small grocers and bakeries were allowed to setup in mixed use areas they would do a whole lot better. However sticking them an average of 3 miles from their customers in a horrible strip mall kills them. I would happily pay a premium for having a grocer ju…

If small grocers and bakeries were allowed to setup in mixed use areas

That's the crux of the problem in the US. Vast swaths of land are dedicated to single-family homes (and ONLY single-family homes). You literally couldn't build a small grocery next to these homes if you wanted. And the hurdles to getting a zoning change as so high that developers just build strip malls on the outskirts of town/subdivision.

We're beginning to see some progress in the DC suburbs, with more mixed-use "village centers" being built in the 'burbs. My main complaint with these is the development is done in one pass by a giant corporate developer, leaving the area feeling very sterile (compared to an old urban downtown in a small city, which might not be as clean, but has a more organic mix of businesses). IMO, of course.

Post reply on HN