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

211–220 of 576 posts

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

#211

Post by dont__panic »

umvi wrote: post #173
kiba wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noise and air pollution are in part caused by cars. Meanwhile in the suburb, you have lawn mowers and leaf blowers, which I absolutely hate with a passion. I don't know about annoying neighbors and smells. That seems to be a design and engineering issue.

> I don't know about annoying neighbors and smells. If you live in a lower income area, get used to your condo/townhouse occasionally smelling like marijuana and/or tobacco whenever the neighbors decide to hotbox. Also get used to arguments and loud music late at night on weekends. > That seems to be a design and engineering issue. I'm sure you could build hermetically and acoustically sealed condos that keep out all…

Sounds like issues that an HOA (if you're into that) or the police/311 ought to address in a city. I assume that's why these services exist -- to resolve conflicts between people who live in dense environments where there is no option but to resolve the conflict.

If those issues go unresolved, that's a dereliction of city government and apartment administration duty.

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

#212

Post by tjr225 »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #57
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…

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…

We moved to a smaller city(Tacoma) inside of a big city metro(Seattle) for about half of the cost of a SFH in Seattle proper and it’s great. Can walk and bike to multiple grocery stores, beach, parks, etc. If I get the big city itch it’s easy enough to scratch it.

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

#213

Post by falcolas »

pier25 wrote: post #105
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…

r/fuckcars has seen a lot of growth in the past year or so: https://subredditstats.com/r/fuckcars https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/

That subreddit occasionally hit the front page, and lemme tell you, it's full of really fun and nice people who are able to take a nuanced and complex subject and handle it with care.

/s

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

#214

Post by goodpoint »

twblalock wrote: post #6

Most Americans want it to be that way, and that’s why it is that way. Zoning laws didn’t push people into a car lifestyle. Americans created those zoning laws because they like the car lifestyle and want to perpetuate it. The same is true for suburban zoning in general. People have not been tricked into this: this is what they want.

> they like the car lifestyle and want to perpetuate it

Are you sure? Polls show that most people in US are fond of the walkable spaces of university and company campuses, European cities, Disneyworld, even shopping malls.

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

#215

Post by giraffe_lady »

massysett wrote: post #133

I always snicker at these "built for cars" screeds, as though the "cars" are empty self-serving machines that are fulfilling their own needs. Every car has at least one person in it. That person is going shopping, going to work, socializing, etc., or servicing the needs of others - my plumber's van is essential so that he can fix my plumbing. So no, places are not "built for cars" - they are built to satisfy human ne…

Just because it's a person doing necessary things doesn't make the structures themselves noble. If you stand before it and actually look, the scale of a single suburban four-lane intersection is just mind-boggling. The resources put into just one of these in terms of time, money, human effort, skill and ingenuity inspires awe but also disgust. People would shop and socialize without this. Is there really nothing better, more effective for these goals, we could have found to spend such tremendous skill and wealth on? I am ashamed of us if this is the best we can come up with.

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

#216

Post by robbyking »

steve-benjamins wrote: post #181
mancerayder wrote: post #84

High density is for young people. I've lived in ultra high density for decades and it's starting to really hurt. I sleep poorly due to noise (mostly from neighbors) and it's not fun to go for a walk anymore. I'm looking for a rural place to purchase a home because sorry, I just don't want to tolerate people's selfishness anymore. Density should come with more rules, both laws that are enforced as well as cultural rul…

What city is this?

Strawman City

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

#217

Post by dont__panic »

TheBigSalad wrote: post #159
dont__panic wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have lived in multiple major US cities without a car. In NYC it's feasible, but impossible to visit family or friends who live in car-centric places. In most other cities you feel like a distant second-or-third class citizen. Swimming upstream gets tiring after a while.

The problem is that it's too hard to visit family and friends. The solution is to move to a different country where you don't know anyone or even speak the language?

If I'm going to take transportation to rent a car anyway, might as well live someplace I like more, no? It's about optimizing multiple variables, not making every variable of my life perfect.

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

#218

Post by Xylakant »

pif wrote: post #208
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.

Parent wrote: > it's simply not economically viable You replied: > t’s just that these small groceries cannot outcompete supermarkets So you are confirming what he said.

No, I’m not. The stores are economically viable unless you have a car centric culture. Car centric culture makes walkable mid-density neighborhoods unviable.

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

#219

Post by tmh88j »

trgn wrote: post #198
tmh88j wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 feel the same way. I grew up in an urban environment, moved to rural areas, now back in an urban environment. I can't wait to get out of here. Too many people, too much noise and too much energy spen…

> too much noise and too much energy spent looking over your shoulder. That's the bane of american cities. They're noisy, and sociopathy is tolerated by the authorities. Living abroad has shown me cities, significantly more dense than the US, that are neither noisy or unsafe. Walkable cities can be quiet, almost eerily so. America needs more urban environments like that.

> Living abroad has shown me cities, significantly more dense than the US, that are neither noisy or unsafe

Just because you can find quiet isolated pockets in any given city doesn't mean the rest of it is like that. All cities are loud and require being very aware of your surroundings, some more than others. I've spent months traveling through many European cities and been victim of crime and saw a lot of crime. As for being quiet, that's ridiculous. There are still tons of cars and constant construction even in the most walkable cities. Even in Venice where there are no cars it's pretty loud until you wander off into some back walkways.

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

#220

Post by trgn »

coding123 wrote: post #94

Quoted post unavailable.

Maybe not starting from scratch, what is happening in reality is that the car-light movement is growing, and cities are calming traffic. I think this effort will continue, because quality of life in these places is just objectively better.

I was in Boston recently, and the experience is so much better than 10-15 years ago, just because many core neighborhoods are calming traffic. Many other cities are taking similar measures.

imho it's not nearly going fast enough (e.g. I'd like my kids to be independently mobile), but nonetheless, it's happening.

Post reply on HN