Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection • Hacker News Board

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

#331

Post by giantrobot » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:24 PM UTC

blackoil wrote: post #312

mjevans wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Your supposed easily solved problems run up against cost or local building codes. Apartments tend to suck because builders put the bare minimum amount of work/cost necessary to get a building up to code. They have shit insulation because it's cheap but up to code. They have bad ducting and poor ventilation because it's cheap but up to code. The building codes are generated more from danger avoidance and other liability more than occupant comfort or efficiency.

Suburban parts of cities often aren't zoned for high density housing because the NIMBYs don't want them near their detached homes. When everyone sees a house as an investment there's no incentive for them to increase housing in their city.

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

#332

Post by irrational » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:25 PM UTC

dont__panic wrote: post #22

I've seen so much anti-car, pro-walkability, pro-transit, pro-bikeability sentiment online recently. I really hope this is proof of the younger generations -- Millenials, Zoomers, and younger folks even -- waking up to the idea that the USA in particular has become a toxic environment thanks to cars. WFH was a big wakeup call, I think -- once you step away from the commute for a year or two, trying to sit in traffic…

I never even had to sit in traffic. I can bike to work through a very nice meadow and forest in about 15 minutes. But after working from home for 2 years, doing even that nice of a commute seems like hell. Never again.

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

#333

Post by aerostable_slug » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:25 PM UTC

dont__panic wrote: post #249

jimmaswell wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of people who are too old and disabled to drive a car are fit to ride a bike instead?

They should also be able to walk . If they can't walk, I suspect assisted living is the only option. Imagine you were diagnosed with epilepsy today, and it was so severe you lost your license to protect others. You can still walk around, take public transit -- probably even ride a bicycle. Where would you live in the USA today?

> If they can't walk, I suspect assisted living is the only option.

This is just a terrible take. I have wrecked knees and there are times when I can't walk any significant distance, and I'm not even 50 years old.

The f-cars people reek of ableism and it gets really tired, and I'm not even speaking from a position as a disabled person (more like occasionally inconvenienced).

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

#334

Post by frumper » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:26 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #158

AlwaysRock wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the hardest parts about buying a home, apart from all the stuff that isnt fun about buying a home, is finding somewhere that is walkable to... anything. I've rented my whole life and spent my entire adult life in cities. The idea of having to get in the car to get milk or something from the corner store, or have to drive to ANY restaurant, or not have some type of walking/running path within a few blocks of my…

> One of the hardest parts about buying a home, apart from all the stuff that isnt fun about buying a home, is finding somewhere that is walkable to... anything. That's because if you want an individual home, you're giving up the customer density required to make those amenities viable. In a world with the internet, at-home delivery, and yes, cars, it's simply not economically viable to create a grocery store that on…

The grocery store doesn't need to be near everyone's home. It just needs to be near your home. Buy a home in a location that suits your needs.

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

#335

Post by greyhair » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:26 PM UTC

When my wife and I bought were looking for a home in 1993, our #1 requirement was that it was a walkable urban environment with a minimum of restaurants, bars, and parks, and preferably, other entertainment as well.

We narrowed it down to four towns in the area near both our jobs, and settled in a town of about 12,000 that is 2 square miles in area. Our neighborhood of single family homes is mostly 50ft x 90ft lots. There are several apartment complexes in town, and also several high rise apartment buildings.

We had a few bars and restaurants when we bought the house, there are more now, plus a very good performing arts theater, a movie theater, and several good parks. It really hit all the points.

The added kicker is that we have a light rail stop in town that can deliver us to Manhattan in 85 minutes.

In spite of that, we know a lot of people that question why we didn't take that same amount of money and buy a much larger house on a full acre out in the suburbs. They really just don't get it.

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

#336

Post by baby » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:27 PM UTC

hardnose wrote: post #247

Steltek wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your positive examples all have one thing in common: they're not happening in cities. Just because a car makes sense in the countryside or beach does not mean it makes sense inside of a city. A problem with our approach to urban planning is that we get large, sterile apartment buildings or detached single family homes but absolutely nothing in between. If that missing middle was allowed by right, you'd find what I en…

>they're not happening in cities. Neither is people willingly moving there. Dense urban living might appeal to young people but once you build a family and priorities change to peace & quiet, safety, good schools, and stable property values, dense urban living loses most of its appeal.

Your comment only makes sense in the US

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

#337

Post by baby » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

oldnetguy wrote: post #62

I lived in New York City my entire life and I am now wanting a house. I am tired of living in an apartment building. This idea that people live together communally within buildings or neighborhoods is very overrated. I have lived in multiple apartments and never has there been a real community there. The building has one holiday party and out of 144 apartments maybe 15 people show up. The posts on the chat board that…

New York really isn’t what I think of city life. You’d have to go to europe for a good example

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

#338

Post by twblalock » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

xsmasher wrote: post #65

falcolas wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right - I do not want to live in dense cities. I did it for years, and hated it. I was happy when I was able to move out into a detached home where I can use speakers and not have to worry about a neighbor getting angry. It's only one neighbor out of the 6 I would share separating walls with, but one is all it takes.

If you could live in a detached home but the next block over had a restaurant or two and a small grocery, wouldn't that be pleasant? Zoning that allows ONLY single-family detached housing, and no retail or business, forces car-dependency. "Detached home or high-rise apartment in a city" is a false dichotomy.

> Zoning that allows ONLY single-family detached housing, and no retail or business, forces car-dependency.

A lot of suburbs are not like that. I've lived in the Bay Area suburbs for most of my life and I don't think I've ever lived more than half a mile from a shopping center with a grocery store and restaurants. Every main road has them. Between the main roads, there are houses.

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

#339

Post by barnabee » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:30 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #278

bmismyname wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope it's a trend, but I think it's more likely that the government will do everything it can to do what's most profitable for the biggest lobbyists. Cars create a huge amount of pointless fake economic activity and bullshit jobs that will never go away.

I think a lot of anti-car people underestimate how much people like their cars. People spend way more on their car than they need to. It's another thing they can customize and personalize. I'm in central Texas and cars are somewhat necessary because of weather. Not enough businesses have employee showers, so biking or walking is often not a realistic option. I also think if real self-driving cars are developed, it's…

I’m anti-car and I love my car!

I drive no more than once or twice a month, to get to the coast or the mountains (or all of Europe via ferry/tunnel) or to move heavy stuff around. It didn’t cost me much but it’s reasonably fast and a joy to drive on country roads.

I can’t think of anything worse than having to drive every or even most days, to work or the shops or to see friends.

I walk almost everywhere, cycle most of the rest, take public transport if it’s really raining or really far (or I am late) and take the occasional Uber when none of those is an option and I still don’t want to drive.

So I don’t think there should be no cars, just [almost] no cars in the middle of most cities and towns, and no need for anyone, anywhere to own one to have a reasonable life.

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

#340

Post by Panther34543 » Thu, Aug 25, 2022, 5:31 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #156

AlwaysRock wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the hardest parts about buying a home, apart from all the stuff that isnt fun about buying a home, is finding somewhere that is walkable to... anything. I've rented my whole life and spent my entire adult life in cities. The idea of having to get in the car to get milk or something from the corner store, or have to drive to ANY restaurant, or not have some type of walking/running path within a few blocks of my…

Town around 50000 is a good bet then. If you can work remotely, find a college town and live outside the center, about a mile. You can bike to anything, take the bus, or just walk. I did this. I have 100 restaurants, too many bars to count, music and theatre (three!) and festivals and arts within trivial distances. No car needed.

Where? A town of 50,000 with 100 restaurants, many bars, and multiple theaters and festivals would be a highly desirable place to live for many, many people.

What area were you referring to?