I hear this discussion also on this side of the pond and I just don't get it: why not reviving public transport? I can't see how even more car-friendly policies - self-driven cars or not - can make the roads more available... I'm in Switzerland and short or long distance, public transport gets you in comparable times with driving. Maybe not for some godforsaken places where you need to switch three buses, but 90% of the trips you're within 20% of the direct drive time (and parking time is never counted).
It's more painful in the US because so much of our built environment is not at a human scale conducive to public transit. Transit uses an implied hub and spoke network system where the base level of spoke is walking, then some combination of buses/trains/subways integrating those walk-sheds.
For huge areas of the country (and yes, this includes those classified as "urban"), the distances are too long, and the scenery too hostile or unexciting, to encourage walking. The more this happens, the more people want cars, and everything about accommodating cars (vs accommodating those on foot) worsens the area for human use: heat islands from parking and roads, danger from the same, dead landscapes, etc. Part of the problem is that cars are great for GDP (road building/maintenence, New rings of suburbs every generation as people flee the old ones, the whole car ecosystem) and horrible for building wealth, and ultimately national policy is all about GDP.
The inertia of this ugly system keeps cars nearly necessary to live and work in most places. And you can live in ways that avoid car use, but all entertainment and recreation and your friends are inaccessible without cars because most people pick the car option when faced with the question.
All of this means that there's no critical mass of people using transit to push for high level of service, and buses (and in some regions trains too) become filthy places to avoid.
Here in Portugal the louder voices speak for public transit - greener, fairer, etc etc. You know the usual arguments.
Unfortunately massive public works are by far our biggest source of grifting. It takes an average of 20 years and $120M/mile (60M €/km) to open a new metro station.
Maybe Switzerland doesn't have this problem, but I'm all for solutions that take funds away from our politician's hands. And the car is great in that respect, as long as you don't advocate to increase road capacity at a massive cost.
I have a dream in which cities will offer free parking on the outskirts in garages, and free light rail/subway transit into the city, with zoning laws that emphasize a walkable city. I can dream, but I think it will require separating people from their cars and getting them comfortable with that.
I'm jealous of parking abundant American cities. In this part of the pond, your choices are between walking, taking a face-planted-against-the-window bus or train, or take your car and spin around for 30 minutes at your destination trying to find somewhere to leave your car.
Neither of these are very good. I'd rather one problem be solved than have a choice between 3 awful compromises.
I use bike to go everywhere. It is a prefect solution:
1. Cheap
2. Takes very little space
3. Good for health
4. In a dense city almost as fast as a car; sometimes faster
For people who doubt biking is possible. In Finland there is a city near arctic circle called Oulu with population of around 100 000 people. They have 2h of day light in winter. Temperatures often go to -10 degrees centigrade. And 22% of all trips are done by bikes. Including children going to primary schools.
The answer to that is not more parking; it's cheap rideshare / carpooling / taxi when weather is bad, and incentivising usage of space-efficient bikes and motorbikes when weather is good.
In fact, London's taxi culture already has (or had) that sort of approach.
Commuting to work, five days a week opens up a lot of possibilities. But it also becomes a source of many problems.
Your commute to and from work are now influenced by traffic. Some days are worse than others, but your boss doesn’t care as long as you are on time.
Fuel/electricity, maintenance, tires, and all the other costs for owning a vehicle add up to be a significant cost. And if you are already paying a premium to drive, might as well capitalise on that.
Eventually you move a little farther from work to buy a bigger house for less, and free up some of your income for other things. That 30 minute commute is now an hour and maybe less on a good day.
Well, if your going to spend two hours a day in a vehicle, might as well buy something more comfortable.
That is the mentality of a slave. Rise up, and employ a chaffeur to drive you where you need to be, and be back in an instant when you need the car again.
More parking just makes the sprawl worse and the traffic awful. Many Americans have commutes well over an hour each way because traffic is so bad. Doing so has a serious negative impact on quality of life and overall health since you’re sitting in a car so much.
This is madness. Despite the pandemic we all went through and the need to avoid unnecessary human contact and proximity, despite the fact that the highest risk of infection has been demonstrably in walkable cities like New York, the old policy of pushing for measures that would force people to travel together, regardless of their preference or safety, hasn't changed. I like to walk, and pre-pandemic I took public transport a lot, despite having access to a car, which I used to drive only rarely. That all changed with the pandemic. Thankfully, I haven't got infected, and I'm convinced that the shelter provided by car's cabin was an important factor. Do not force people into having only exposure laden movement options.
Urban planning is much longer scale than this pandemic.
In my opinion there should be no free parking in inner cities, and no requirements for parking spaces for property developers. Parking should be possible only in market priced parking garages. Parking options could still be built into apartment buildings, again at prices reflecting the cost of land/building costs. It should be markedly cheaper to buy an apartment without parking option.
Suburban areas are different of course, but cities seem to only turn really alive when cars are reduced and population density exceeds 10,000 per square kilometer.
San Francisco has had less COVID-19 fatalities than drug overdoses. New York got heavily infected because up until Mid February the governor considered it just the flu. On top of the feds failing to respond (botched test creation, minimal contact tracing, resistance to travel restrictions). The MTA forbid workers from wearing masks to avoid causing a panic.
No, this is my exact sentiment in Lisbon, Portugal - Europe. A city going on 1000 years. Our parking requirements for new construction and our addiction to free curb parking everywhere have destroyed mobility. There are unnecessary jams at all times of the day thanks to idiotic parking.
I drive daily and have nothing against cars. I hope that small semi-self-driving electric cars will eventually replace our dying public transit. There are many great things about the car. But I hate parking with a passion. In Lisbon we could easily double or triple the speed and amount of traffic flow without any investment by getting rid of a few thousand spots of street parking. Road space should be for people to go about their business, not for storing inert objects.
My hope against hope is that will one day we abolish street parking and invest in world-class automated below-ground parking. Let 1000 underground auto lifts bloom. Done properly it might even jump-start a new globally competitive manufacturing industry, something we haven't had since the 80s.
soco|4 years ago
tbihl|4 years ago
For huge areas of the country (and yes, this includes those classified as "urban"), the distances are too long, and the scenery too hostile or unexciting, to encourage walking. The more this happens, the more people want cars, and everything about accommodating cars (vs accommodating those on foot) worsens the area for human use: heat islands from parking and roads, danger from the same, dead landscapes, etc. Part of the problem is that cars are great for GDP (road building/maintenence, New rings of suburbs every generation as people flee the old ones, the whole car ecosystem) and horrible for building wealth, and ultimately national policy is all about GDP.
The inertia of this ugly system keeps cars nearly necessary to live and work in most places. And you can live in ways that avoid car use, but all entertainment and recreation and your friends are inaccessible without cars because most people pick the car option when faced with the question.
All of this means that there's no critical mass of people using transit to push for high level of service, and buses (and in some regions trains too) become filthy places to avoid.
zemvpferreira|4 years ago
Unfortunately massive public works are by far our biggest source of grifting. It takes an average of 20 years and $120M/mile (60M €/km) to open a new metro station.
Maybe Switzerland doesn't have this problem, but I'm all for solutions that take funds away from our politician's hands. And the car is great in that respect, as long as you don't advocate to increase road capacity at a massive cost.
Simulacra|4 years ago
Shaddox|4 years ago
Neither of these are very good. I'd rather one problem be solved than have a choice between 3 awful compromises.
Isinlor|4 years ago
1. Cheap
2. Takes very little space
3. Good for health
4. In a dense city almost as fast as a car; sometimes faster
For people who doubt biking is possible. In Finland there is a city near arctic circle called Oulu with population of around 100 000 people. They have 2h of day light in winter. Temperatures often go to -10 degrees centigrade. And 22% of all trips are done by bikes. Including children going to primary schools.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wZ0tXMSAfs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU
toyg|4 years ago
In fact, London's taxi culture already has (or had) that sort of approach.
adreamingsoul|4 years ago
Your commute to and from work are now influenced by traffic. Some days are worse than others, but your boss doesn’t care as long as you are on time.
Fuel/electricity, maintenance, tires, and all the other costs for owning a vehicle add up to be a significant cost. And if you are already paying a premium to drive, might as well capitalise on that.
Eventually you move a little farther from work to buy a bigger house for less, and free up some of your income for other things. That 30 minute commute is now an hour and maybe less on a good day.
Well, if your going to spend two hours a day in a vehicle, might as well buy something more comfortable.
LargoLasskhyfv|4 years ago
wayoutthere|4 years ago
poooogles|4 years ago
HPsquared|4 years ago
userulluipeste|4 years ago
distances|4 years ago
In my opinion there should be no free parking in inner cities, and no requirements for parking spaces for property developers. Parking should be possible only in market priced parking garages. Parking options could still be built into apartment buildings, again at prices reflecting the cost of land/building costs. It should be markedly cheaper to buy an apartment without parking option.
Suburban areas are different of course, but cities seem to only turn really alive when cars are reduced and population density exceeds 10,000 per square kilometer.
supertrope|4 years ago
adav|4 years ago
zemvpferreira|4 years ago
I drive daily and have nothing against cars. I hope that small semi-self-driving electric cars will eventually replace our dying public transit. There are many great things about the car. But I hate parking with a passion. In Lisbon we could easily double or triple the speed and amount of traffic flow without any investment by getting rid of a few thousand spots of street parking. Road space should be for people to go about their business, not for storing inert objects.
My hope against hope is that will one day we abolish street parking and invest in world-class automated below-ground parking. Let 1000 underground auto lifts bloom. Done properly it might even jump-start a new globally competitive manufacturing industry, something we haven't had since the 80s.