I think the new urbanists who otherwise have contributed such good ideas about urban livability have taken a seriously wrong turn with their attitude to cars. I'll stipulate that they're responsible for so much blight in the form of parking lots, gas stations, highways, etc., but there is never any turning back the clock on technology. Just as importantly, I have lived in carless cities, car-essential cities, and several in between, and being able to go shopping and stuff a bunch of things in the back of your car is a fairly essential quality-of-life convenience. Likewise being able to drive to work in your own clean car instead of taking a multi-legged commute with filthy, overcrowded public transportation with multiple line switches in the middle is a such a huge quality-of-life upgrade to anybody who has ever commuted by subway or bus that the only thing I can analogize it to is the feeling of your first healthy day after getting over the flu. Insisting we should just build better rail systems that *aren't* filthy, inconvenient, and overcrowded isn't any more persuasive than suggesting we can just build better road systems that aren't as blighted or dangerous - as long as we're reimagining everything from square one, there's no reason we can't imagine better ways to integrate cars while retaining what we love about the pre-automobile environment. And that seems more likely to lead to positive change people can get on board with than telling them they're going to have to find a way to carry their family groceries or new sofa home on the subway.
"Insisting we should just build better rail systems that *aren't* filthy, inconvenient, and overcrowded isn't any more persuasive than suggesting we can just build better road systems that aren't as blighted or dangerous." I think both those are, or can be, persuasive! Urban living wasn't always looked at the way it is in America today, and it isn't in many cities around the world.
There's a legitimate argument, in terms of "turning back the clock on technology," as to how much of our car-oriented landscape actually does follow from the technology, and how much of it is is optional and follows from particular policies. I think the reforms or abolitions on parking minimums in many municipalities, for example, is a really interesting way to suss out a piece of that.
Let me offer this as a question: despite finding the car a major quality-of-life amenity, is there anything you miss from carless cities that you don't find in suburbia or in car-essential cities?
Yes, absolutely! That's the big reason I'd like people thinking about ways to integrate cars into more traditional city plans. So I agree completely that much of what repels people about the car-oriented landscape isn't the car's fault, it's the fault of people who made bad policy choices about how to develop cities that accommodate people whether they're in their cars or not.
The irony is that the traditional, European pedestrian cities tend to be far more laissez-faire about the automobile than American cities that are literally built for it. You can go to one of those Euro cities, walk about the main square, take a pretty picture of the cathedral, pick up some fantastic cheese at the quaint street market, while away some time at one of the sidewalk cafes, and every now and then you'll see someone parking one of their little mini Eurocars right on the sidewalk or somehow squeezing it at 2 mph through a 7-foot wide artery packed with pedestrians, and everyone just shrugs and figures that the person must have some good reason for doing that, while in America - land of freedom! land of the car! - like 98% of our law-enforcement and ostensible crime-fighting apparatus is devoted to enforcing compliance with 1800 page motor vehicle codes and if you even think about parking in that perfectly good spot with the inexplicable no-parking sign you'll be slapped with a ticket and towaway order before you're even done running into the cafe for your morning coffee. We've got the worst of both words: car blight + constant impingements on the freedom the car was built for in the first place.
I know someone who works at Tesla, and he reckons driverless cars will be the norm within a decade. That might well render this entire debate moot.
I think the new urbanists who otherwise have contributed such good ideas about urban livability have taken a seriously wrong turn with their attitude to cars. I'll stipulate that they're responsible for so much blight in the form of parking lots, gas stations, highways, etc., but there is never any turning back the clock on technology. Just as importantly, I have lived in carless cities, car-essential cities, and several in between, and being able to go shopping and stuff a bunch of things in the back of your car is a fairly essential quality-of-life convenience. Likewise being able to drive to work in your own clean car instead of taking a multi-legged commute with filthy, overcrowded public transportation with multiple line switches in the middle is a such a huge quality-of-life upgrade to anybody who has ever commuted by subway or bus that the only thing I can analogize it to is the feeling of your first healthy day after getting over the flu. Insisting we should just build better rail systems that *aren't* filthy, inconvenient, and overcrowded isn't any more persuasive than suggesting we can just build better road systems that aren't as blighted or dangerous - as long as we're reimagining everything from square one, there's no reason we can't imagine better ways to integrate cars while retaining what we love about the pre-automobile environment. And that seems more likely to lead to positive change people can get on board with than telling them they're going to have to find a way to carry their family groceries or new sofa home on the subway.
"Insisting we should just build better rail systems that *aren't* filthy, inconvenient, and overcrowded isn't any more persuasive than suggesting we can just build better road systems that aren't as blighted or dangerous." I think both those are, or can be, persuasive! Urban living wasn't always looked at the way it is in America today, and it isn't in many cities around the world.
There's a legitimate argument, in terms of "turning back the clock on technology," as to how much of our car-oriented landscape actually does follow from the technology, and how much of it is is optional and follows from particular policies. I think the reforms or abolitions on parking minimums in many municipalities, for example, is a really interesting way to suss out a piece of that.
Let me offer this as a question: despite finding the car a major quality-of-life amenity, is there anything you miss from carless cities that you don't find in suburbia or in car-essential cities?
Yes, absolutely! That's the big reason I'd like people thinking about ways to integrate cars into more traditional city plans. So I agree completely that much of what repels people about the car-oriented landscape isn't the car's fault, it's the fault of people who made bad policy choices about how to develop cities that accommodate people whether they're in their cars or not.
The irony is that the traditional, European pedestrian cities tend to be far more laissez-faire about the automobile than American cities that are literally built for it. You can go to one of those Euro cities, walk about the main square, take a pretty picture of the cathedral, pick up some fantastic cheese at the quaint street market, while away some time at one of the sidewalk cafes, and every now and then you'll see someone parking one of their little mini Eurocars right on the sidewalk or somehow squeezing it at 2 mph through a 7-foot wide artery packed with pedestrians, and everyone just shrugs and figures that the person must have some good reason for doing that, while in America - land of freedom! land of the car! - like 98% of our law-enforcement and ostensible crime-fighting apparatus is devoted to enforcing compliance with 1800 page motor vehicle codes and if you even think about parking in that perfectly good spot with the inexplicable no-parking sign you'll be slapped with a ticket and towaway order before you're even done running into the cafe for your morning coffee. We've got the worst of both words: car blight + constant impingements on the freedom the car was built for in the first place.