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

People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 345 posts

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#241

Post by geodel »

troupo wrote: post #171
maxsilver wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's tricky too, because a lot of "low density suburban wastelands" was already significantly phased out over a decade ago, in a lot of the US anyway. People hear "suburbs" and imagine a single-family home on 1 to 2+ acre lots -- something that looks like this -> https://st2.depositphotos.com/1658611/5485/i/950/depositphot... . And while that definitely still happens, it's really limited to the exurbs in the US these…

Those new suburbs are just as bad. They squeeze more people into less space while retaining all the issues of the original suburbs and adding a mass of people on top. A proper suburb should be a mixed-zone small town with proper public transport and amenities you can walk to like European suburbs are. Here's Farsta (10 km from Stockholm): https://maps.app.goo.gl/oAgBhNkvQFw5BVS16?g_st=ic Here's Västerhaninge (30 km f…

I think I have see a lot of places like this in US. The difference is most housing is apartments and rents usually are higher than mortgage payment for twice the size of house.

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#242

Post by dijit »

gadders wrote: post #239
dijit wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue you're having is not understanding how it can be. The lucky truth is that this is not some hypothetical situation, it's a lived reality for me and many more people in Europe. I'm 34 and I don't even have a drivers license; that's freedom. I never needed one. That said: I'm not really talking about an absolute reality (IE; no cars at all). Reducing car usage actually helps those that really need to use a car…

I live in Europe as well. I can understand not owning a car, but never learning to drive is like never learning to swim. Driving is a life skill, whether you own a car or not. Groceries are a lot more than 5% more expensive in a corner shop vs out of town supermarket.

Getting your drivers license is also very costly, must be transferred when you move country, in countries like Sweden (where I live) you have to retake your test every 10 years.

It also requires a lot of time to do anything with it. It's an administrative document, like a passport. You can say "getting a passport is important" and I'd believe you, but better to get it when you need it rather than pre-emptively, because otherwise you're wasting valid years.

I find often that when we do things like taking a drivers license we feel like we are incentivised to use it, when we use it we purchase vehicles and register them and then we have sort of a sunk cost feeling. Once you've invested all that time and cost using it feels cheap so you are more likely to use it.

On the flip side, because I don't have a license I make subtle decisions to avoid using a car, so my life is relatively car-free, on the very rare occasions I do need a car I can hire someone and it works out significantly cheaper in the long run.

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#243

Post by bko »

boplicity wrote: post #119
bko wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any children? I can't imagine car free city is good when you have two or more young children. For one, groceries are a problem as you likely need to stock more food to cook. Sure you can go to the store every other day but that takes a lot of time and is more expensive. Plus you are on a lot tighter schedule. Most people with kids race home to pick up children and don't want to stop by the store and schle…

I live in a city with two young kids. We do very little driving. We live an easy walk to the grocery store and school. A bus stop is on the corner, with buses every few minutes. A car really isn't necessary, and the kids like taking the bus, though we don't do it often. For longer trips, a backpack gets stuffed with snacks and stuff, and we're good to go. The only thing we use a car for regularly is to get to swimmin…

That's great and I'm happy for you.

For me, getting to my parents would take me 2 hours vs 30m and I'd have to adhere to a strict schedule. inlaws would take maybe 4 hours versus 1.5, since there is much better transit to them. So basically my kids would see them a lot less often at a much greater expense.

Shopping locally would cost me an extra few hundred a month and take me maybe 20 hours extra a month.

If the kid is sick I'd have to schlep him to the doctor which would take 30m each way as opposed to a ten min car ride. Hope it's not raining.

I can also drive to more restaurants so I have more choices

Having a car is a convenience that makes my life considerably easier. I gladly trade money for time and convenience. And I can often even get both with more options form shopping

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#244

Post by goblin89 »

CharlieDigital wrote: post #8

I was back in Taiwan last year after an extended absence. It's pretty amazing how easy it is to get around with a combination of the mass rapid transit (MRT) system and high speed rail (HSR). When I was last there, you still needed to take a bus or taxi from TPE to the city center. Now right from TPE airport, you can be in either Taipei city center in 30 minutes (MRT) or on the other end of the island in short order…

I find cities in Taiwan frustrating to navigate without personal transport, at least a bicycle.

Having lived in Kaohsiung for a bit, I observed that very few people use public transport unless they go to/from intercity rail or airport. Buses in particular are unreliable (mostly used by older people), and MRT alone is obviously not enough for the sparse city.

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#245

Post by smeej »

ghaff wrote: post #134
smeej wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went to school in Boston/Cambridge, without a car, and was absolutely flabbergasted how much more convenient the city was with one when I graduated. It was like I hadn't known what I was missing. Places I thought of as "far apart" were really only a 15-minute drive from each other. Getting to the airport really stood out. I thought of it as a two-hour trip, because I had to walk to a bus, then transfer to a train,…

I did as well. The reality was that we leaned on the people who did have cars all the time . To play Thursday night hockey, to buy booze, to get to Chinatown for dinner faster... And, yes, given I was usually carrying luggage I took a taxi to the airport--which is admittedly not a common trip for the random consumer on a personal trip. I know a couple who live in SF without a car, as much as a statement as anything e…

I didn't know anyone on my campus with a car, but I did learn a life hack by accident as a sophomore that I played to my advantage for the rest of college:

If I booked my flight to campus at the beginning of the school year with a very tight connection somewhere, I could run and make the flight, but my luggage would not. Then they would have to deliver it to me at my dorm in a day or two when it arrived!

I would just pack enough for a couple days in my backpack and wait for my suitcases later!

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#246

Post by geodel »

dml2135 wrote: post #189
piva00 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you have any children? I can't imagine car free city is good when you have two or more young children. For one, groceries are a problem as you likely need to stock more food to cook. Sure you can go to the store every other day but that takes a lot of time and is more expensive. Plus you are on a lot tighter schedule. Most people with kids race home to pick up children and don't want to stop by the store and sch…

On top of that… cars have only been around for about a century. Plenty of people raised kids before then.

Well most kids would be productive human resource as soon as they are able to walk without support in that past. They would also keep themselves entertained with other kids on the street and may also get fed in neighbor's home plenty of times.

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#247

Post by underdeserver »

throw0101d wrote: post #219
underdeserver wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure a cop can stop you and ask for ID in most of the world, even most of the west, for no reason.

> […] for no reason. Not in Canada: * https://ccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Know-Your-Rights... * https://www.jeffreismanlaw.ca/when-do-you-have-to-identify-y... * https://collettreadllp.com/know-your-rights/can-you-refuse-t... Further, you don't have to carry ID and can't get into trouble if you don't have any if walking.

Canada is a bit like the US. I would imagine France and Sweden to be the same. But I'll be very surprised if cops need a reason to ask for ID in Spain, Italy, Switzerland, the Netherlands, ...

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#248

Post by enaaem »

apexalpha wrote: post #142

These (American) articles on urbanism and what not always make it seems much more insane than it is. I live in the Netherlands, a country usually lauded for it's bicycles and public transport and what not. And let me tell you: We still drive cars. All the time. Even in Amsterdam, our biggest city, 4/10 families still owns their personal car. In the Netherlands as a whole it's 9.5/10 or so. It's about THE MIX of optio…

It’s important to emphasise that the additional transport options made driving BETTER.

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#249

Post by baq »

lucumo wrote: post #213
baq wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're so focused on driving I feel you're missing the point of designing the space so driving isn't necessary. Your axiom is 'work is far away'. But the point is it only happens if it's convenient to be far away. Design your city in a way it's convenient to be nearby and it'll be nearby. The problem is this design is completely at odds with private car ownership.

> But the point is it only happens if it's convenient to be far away. No. The point is that "work" isn't a generic thing like "supermarket". A specific job is something that needs to fit your personality. If you're the type of person that really digs working for big tech, you aren't going to find a job you enjoy in some small town. You can probably find a job maintaining the website of the local bank, but are you rea…

I completely agree, it's just there's nothing stopping those office jobs to be created next to train stations. Except there aren't enough conveniently located train stations... turns out there are in Paris and London though?

Car dependence is a feature of sprawling cities. If you make your city dense, the jobs will be there. The fact that everyone has a car makes the jobs be all over the place because if employees can't commute further, the jobs will move to them. It's pure game theory.

The big question is how to jump from a stable state of car dependence to a stable state of mass transit and I don't see a way to do that in general.

Re: People hate the idea of car-free cities until they live in one

#250

Post by WindyMiller »

bko wrote: post #243
boplicity wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in a city with two young kids. We do very little driving. We live an easy walk to the grocery store and school. A bus stop is on the corner, with buses every few minutes. A car really isn't necessary, and the kids like taking the bus, though we don't do it often. For longer trips, a backpack gets stuffed with snacks and stuff, and we're good to go. The only thing we use a car for regularly is to get to swimmin…

That's great and I'm happy for you. For me, getting to my parents would take me 2 hours vs 30m and I'd have to adhere to a strict schedule. inlaws would take maybe 4 hours versus 1.5, since there is much better transit to them. So basically my kids would see them a lot less often at a much greater expense. Shopping locally would cost me an extra few hundred a month and take me maybe 20 hours extra a month. If the kid…

The experience of going car-free in a place designed around cars doesn't tell you much about what it would be like to live in a car-free city.
Post reply on HN