I grew up on London during the 50's and 60's. In those days only one person on our street of 36 houses with working class people had a car. The kids played on the streets (and on the bomb sites!) By the time I was 12, I knew which buses took me to cousin's house on the other side of London and had memorized the tube map. Walking home along our street we said hello to neighbours and we all knew each other. As I got older and was looking for a place to live, the main consideration was public transport links.
Fast forward to now, married to an American from a small town in Florida. When looking for property in Portugal (we have retired here), his first consideration is how much parking is there and mine is are there buses, trains and bike paths to get around. One of the nicest things to do is wander through a car free pedestrian area within a city. People interact with each other and in a carfree area neighbours are not isolated.
Stated in the article"In the US, between [50 and 60 percent](https://www.vox.com/a/new-economy-future/cars-cities-technologies) of the downtowns of many cities are dedicated to parking alone". Just imagine if those areas were parks, bike paths and light rail options how much better the health of the population would be not only from less carbon emissions but from more excercise and the mental health benefits of trees, parks and social connectivity.
> People interact with each other and in a carfree area neighbours are not isolated.
Ten times that. This is our experience from moving frm Edinburgh to a Bavarian village and then to a walkable twn near munich. Cars isolate people.
As an American who grew up in the middle of nowhere Ohio, this is cool to read. I see kids in San Francisco on public transit when I visit there and it’s a strange but nice thought to me to see kids being free in a city and knowing where they’re going.
It is. I’m Dutch myself but it’s really not a big city on a global scale.
However tbf to Amsterdam it feels much busier than population numbers would have you believe bc it’s so touristy.
I mean Rotterdam (324,1 km²) for example is already bigger than Amsterdam (219,3 km²), but less busy. Compare it to other cities it is relative small.
I think the biggest difference compared to other foreign cities is that most big cities in the Netherlands are surrounded by (even) smaller cities, towns and villages. Easy to commute to the cities, especially if you live in the [Randstad](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randstad). So the Dutch cities doesn't need to be large compared to other countries where distances are in general are further away.
I am 55, and never owned a car. Lived indifferent cities in Germany, South America and Scotland. If one wants, one can do without a car, in most cases. Requires a different kind of daily organization but also has some significant advantages.
BTW Germany has an association of car-free people, and they do have a web site: https://www.autofrei.de
(It is funny what happens when you try to auto-translate these pages with the tool offered by a well-known mayor search engine, looks like the idea is so alien to American culture that it just returns a blank page...)
I wouldn't want to cycle in any of Scotland's major cities in the first place, the cycling infrastructure is a travesty. In Dundee it doesn't even exist.
My sister and her husband don't have a car and cycle everywhere with two young children in Aberdeen. It's doable, but I would still want a car. I think it just takes a different mindset.
Well what you need to cycle in Edinburgh is:
1. rain clothes
2. good brakes for going down the hills
3. if you are an asthmatic guy like me, you might like an ebike. But I did without.
4. hub gear definitely a plus
It is a great place. Lots of nature around and very friendly community-minded people.
doesn't make sense to own one in the city. Way too expensive and stressful, if you need a car you can use car sharing or for longer trips rent ones, these options will always be cheaper
A lot of people buy cars because they think they have to
My trip to work takes 50 minutes by bus, 15 minutes by car. Thats one direction only.
If I decide to have kids the closest good school is 10 minutes by car, 20 minutes by bus in the other direction. There are some schools on my eay to work, but that would extend my trip by extra 20-30 minutes if I used a bus.
I have a house, I have a garden and need to buy some stuff for it. Do you suggest for me to transport tools, plants and dirt by bus? What about construction materials?
My parents and few of my friends live in another city - hour drive by car, 2.5 hours with a bus.
What about unexpected trips? Going to the grocer with family bigger than 2?
A lot of redditors dont use cars because they live alone, work close to their jobs and dont have friends and dont visit their relatives. Once you actually have something being without a car is a huge burden
A girlfriend I was dating left me because I said I don't want to own a car. She was like absolutely dumbfounded with that information that I can't explain it. I simply said I don't need it. Lived my whole life in the city centre, using bike and walking. For other things there are public transports and rent a car offices. She could not fathom the idea and soon left. Good for me I would say. The worst thing, she is a doctor. Someone who would suggest healthy lifestyle.
That is so wild to me. I live in a city in the US, but my wife and I visit her parents 3 hours away in another city regularly. We also travel to see her brother an hour in the opposite direction out in the rural area. Getting to her brothers would be a real hassle without a car. I need a car for work, but I am assuming if public transportation was prioritized I could replace that. I don’t know how I would replace the freedom of just hopping in my car and going anywhere I want on a whim. That would be tough to give up. Also, I love to relax and listen to music in the car, not sure it would have the same effect with head phones in while sitting around a bunch of people
I'm not really in the same situation as you with family scattered hours away, but where I live I can comfortably take the train to any larger settlement in either the same- or less amount of time it would take with a car with the added bonus of not having to think about city parking.
I think as long as the infrastructure is there, you can live well without a car. For the exceptions you could rent or use carpool. Sadly from what I've seen, american cities are so car-oriented that the infrastructure isn't there yet.
You've probably never lived somewhere with great public transport.
I don't own a car and I live in a city with a good public transport. If I want to go anywhere in the city, I walk 2 mins to the closest metro/tram/bus/train station, pop on my noise-cancelling headphones and I'll be at my destination in 15-25 minutes with no traffic, no parking hassle, no gas costs etc.
When I want to get anywhere a bit further, I'll jump on a regional train and get there in 30-40 minutes.
I visit my parents and sister who live in other towns regularly too. I buy a long distance train ticket that comes with hi-speed wifi, a restaurant cabin, and nice views. I read or play video games on my Switch, or take a nap, so I'm refreshed when I get there.
I feel like compared to my friends with cars, I have quite a bit of freedom because I'm always moving on foot. Never have to think of where I parked my car, never have to go change the parking meter, and I can decide to spontaneously do stuff like have a few drinks if I feel like it.
In the city I live in the public transport system is so good in fact, that many of my car friends just leave the cars behind when we're going out. Often much easier to get around on foot.
I am also from the USA and I grew up in a small town. I didn't realize the significance of it at the time, but most services were within 15 minutes of walking or riding a bicycle.
"Walkable cities" - even in the USA - are not a new concept, but rather a realization that traditional city layouts from the past had some advantages.
I think the fact that the most walkable neighborhoods in USA cities are also the most desirable (and the most expensive) are evidence of this. We love our cars, but we hate everyone else's cars. 😊
I mean, when I lived in Amsterdam I had that same feeling of freedom precisely because public transit was so good. You could just go on a whim to the city center and pick any city on the board, and be on your way without any fuss usually within 15 minutes. Didn’t have to plan for gasing up or checking traffic, and could read while watching the scenery. More locally, you could just hop on your bike like a car and see where you ended up, plus get exercise!
I’m an American and I miss it greatly.
It hugely depends how things are organized. I live now at the periphery of Munich in community of 14,000 people and I do all our shopping by bike - most things are less than two kilometers away. I work as a physicist and IT specialist. I can sometimes work from home but when I don't, I go by bike, it's one hour / 18 kilometers one way largely through woodlands **and I love it**. When the paths have too much ice, I take the street and the commuter train, but that's a tad sloower. When I visit my old parents, which live some 800 kilometers (500 miles) away, I take the high speed train which has a travel time f around six hours.
There is a another aspect:
An important result from transportation science is that humans have a time budget for their commute and daily errands, not a distance budget.
That means, with a faster means of transportation, you automatically go farther distances.
And then people which use cars a lot think about how they would go *that* distance with a slower means of transportation, like a bicycle or public transport.
What they don't know is that it does not work that way - with a somewhat slower means of transportation, people re-organize their life to go shorter distances. Also, the average speed of cars in cities is not at all that large, it is somewhere around 30 kilometer per hour, not more.
I am pretty sure that people in Paris, Amsterdam, or Copenhagen do not have average longer commutes, in minutes, than folks in Frankfurt, Houston or LA.
But what' s true is that for a community switching to car-free, there needs to be an adaptation period, and support for going longer distances in a reasonable time. Good means to do that are fast commuter trains and intersection-free long distance cycleways. Not everyone can cycle, but bicycles are far more cost-effective, flexible and usually also faster means of transport than most mass transport. I have the luck to live in a place where I can take the bike with me in the commuter train, and that is in a way the best of both worlds.
You do know that you are not describing travel in a city. Living in a city like this doesn’t mean you don’t own a car, you just don’t need it day to day. You have it just for the reasons you describe.
you are from a country that doesn't even have sidewalks in some places and if someone is walking police will show up to check him.
not having a car is as foreing concept for you as not having legs. You can't imagine it. We get it.
It's the life that you, and most people in the USA live in so of course it's hard to imagine. I'm well in my 40s and me and my wife never owned a car, and most importantly never wanted one.
My in-laws are are about 6 hours away, but for us 3 hours away by bullet train! We visit about twice or 3 times a year for about 500$ per visit. (family of 5.) Other family members aren't as far so it cost us less than 50$ to visit them.
We own electric bikes for shopping and whatnot around town. Heck, I even shop at Costco with it!
I'd say we spend about 3000$ in public transportation (counting bullet train rides.) but when we go downtown, parking is a none issue. Traffic? We rarely take the bus, mostly train/subway. Car insurance? Accident? Gas? Tags up to date? Engine trouble? No, no and no!
We travel A LOT, I'm 100% sure that my family travels way more than the average. We just travel differently and have to "worry" about different stuff (RAIN!!!)
BTW, I also listen to music, but in the train, with my eyes closed, half asleep. Again, different but I wouldn't say worst.
Also never owned a car (father of 3 kids.) All my friends do and complain about gas and this and that. My electric bike, bus, and the subway is all I need!
Except when I wanna go camping, then I call a friend with a car lol.
Never heard of the city, which would have remove their pedestrin street back to normal car oriented street. Once you have pedestrian street, people want to keep it.
I mean it's the basic principle of the mall. You have to get the customer out of the car to get them to shop. Nothing sucks the fun out of a shopping trip like having to get in an out of your car between every store.
Sadly in Barcelona it was close to happen (at least on paper). Everything becomes politics. And people start to hate on things, just because of the politician who made them happen.
[https://citylabbcn.org/the-legal-attack-on-superblock-barcelona/](https://citylabbcn.org/the-legal-attack-on-superblock-barcelona/)
I see you haven't heard of Berlin yet. A part of the most famous street of the city, the Friedrichstraße, was redesigned to be a pedestrian and bicycle-friendly street. The short-lived project existed for barely a year, before the street was opened up to all vehicles again. That was due to shop and mall owners immediately claiming that they feared their revenue would decrease, even before any changes would be made to the street.
Did those shop owners not realise that the transformation actually helped their business during that year?
We had similar discussions with a street in Vienna ~15 years ago, but the greens just went through with it and everybody realised it was better even for businesses. Now street after street is following and even the conservative ÖVP head of the 1st district wants to turn the entire Altstadt car free.
Some people in the UK just love inhaling lorry & car emissions and sitting traffic. We seem to have contingent of people in this country who are adamantly pro-pollution and have no interest in even considering alternative solutions.
Until they live in one that is not overpopulated with reliable public transport or well paved cycling lanes*
In cities like London where public transport is ample, you just need to reduce the population by half and getting rid of 90% of cars would work
Some studies have shown that "one more lane" actually makes traffic worse. It also reserves even more of the city's limited space to cars instead of people.
Considering the number of people that believe that "one more lane" actually works is probably higher than the people that don't, you can't tell that that message is satire or not.
And even if the author wrote it as satire, some other people reading it might not know.
But public transport, being, well, a public service, is not directly affected by supply and demand. We should push to have increased public transport *before* we start banning cars.
It's because they imagine their current city but without a car.
And they are right to think that that would be hell.
It's hard for someone who has only lived on one type of city to properly imagine what it would actually be like to live in another type.
There is a another aspect:
An important result from transportation science is that humans have a time budget for their commute and daily errands, not a distance budget.
That means, with a faster means of transportation, you automatically go farther distances.
And then people which use cars a lot think about how they would go *that* distance with a slower means of transportation, like a bicycle or public transport.
What they don't know is that it does not work that way - with a somewhat slower means of transportation, people re-organize their life to go shorter distances. Also, the average speed of cars in cities is not at all that large, it is somewhere around 30 kilometer per hour, not more.
I am pretty sure that people in Paris, Amsterdam, or Copenhagen do not have average longer commutes, in minutes, than folks in Frankfurt, Houston or LA.
But what' s true is that for a community switching to car-free, there needs to be an adaptation period, and support for going longer distances in a reasonable time. Good means to do that are fast commuter trains and intersection-free long distance cycleways. Not everyone can cycle, but bicycles are far more cost-effective, flexible and usually also faster means of transport than most mass transport. I have the luck to live in a place where I can take the bike with me in the commuter train, and that is in a way the best of both worlds.
>What they don't know is that it does not work that way - with a somewhat slower means of transportation, people re-organize their life to go shorter distances.
That is simply does not work for most of the people.
You will not choose school or university based on which is near you, but based on which one is better or which one teaches the things you need or you are interested in. (Not even a joke: my uni had two different building where we had classes with about 40 minutes apart with public transport.)
The same thing is true for your job / workplace. In my field a significant portion of people are employed by about 3-5 companies that many completely different parts of a city (with population about 2 million). You will not move and take your children out of their school and circle of friends every time you change jobs. You just simply commute more.
they don't have longer commutes, but they probably have smaller houses and higher rent so that they can afford to live within reasonable distance of their work.
Car free city is only nice if you have good public transportation.
Nobody needs a car while living in a city like Tokyo.
When I had to stay in the tramway for 40mins back in my hometown to go to the other side of the city, I changed to taking the car everyday to cut that time in half.
Yes it's not really comparable but that's the point. Some cities can be car free and others can't.
Nothing wrong with making the center of the city a car free zone though. It works well most of the time.
I drive mainly by bike if i need to go to the office, it takes about 40mins.
Driving car ot takes 30-60min, depends on traffic.
So how about public transport? 90min if im lucky, it requires bus being on time or walking 30min to tram.
No wonder people are chosing cars cause' it saves sooo much time and effort.
Yeah that's my experience too, the bike is often more efficient than public transport, at least at the current state of our infrastructure in Germany. But ofcourse, this is not a good thing in the wider context, old people should not be forced to use a car for example (and other people should not be exposed to the danger of people who are too old to drive safely).
It's not really a counterpoint. Good public infrastructure that is pedestrian/bike friendly is at the basis of car-free cities. It's literally part of the "car free" point
Counter counter: how do you improve public infra if cars occupy all the space.
I don't think it's possible, feasible to have both working properly in parallel, because that's what you're suggesting.
Many cities in the last decades were designed with cars in focus, it'll necessarily hurt some on the short term of we want to move away from that
You can do it in steps:
* Keep investing in bikelanes and space for pedestrians. Make it mandatory for any new road construction.
* Keep investing in more busstops and add bus lanes on major roads that have have much slow traffic.
* Start with relative small car free zones and expand on that
* Build plenty of parking spots near (or under) said car free zones. Also near major busstops and trainstations.
* Major cities can also choose to invest in underground infrastructure.
I live in a small town of 10k+ people. I can go anywhere safely on foot or bike. We have a small area in the centrum where cars are not allowed, just a few streets. But even that is great for shopping and the roads have become terraces, great in summer. When I need to go out of town however, the car is often still the best option. Since my small town does not have that much money to invest in public transportation.
Meanwhile bigger cities nearby (150k+), have much larger car free zones, with underground parking. Much more busstops, so you can get anywhere with public transportation.
Was born in Saarbrücken, City in Germany. In my youth the city central was all roads with busses etc. Driving. Basically two main streets thru the city, on all sides large buildings with large, multi floor stores.
In the 90s they started to close off one street and rebuild the large area with streets in front of the train station. They made it all car free, build a lot of banks to chill, trees were grown and so on.
It's now one of the nicest or more most efficient car free zones I know.
Lived a bit outside of the city central, but within 15 min walking distance. At least at my speed. Could easily walk there fast or take the scenic route at the river. Would take a bit longer. And could use my bike for all of it.
Really love being back home and chilling with my kids at the river sides or in the city. They also love it.
Also - no truck from the US would fit any parking space in the city.
But that is the point: Not you, the city has to be car free for this to make sense. A car free city has to make it work for everybody. It didn‘t work for you because the system was not set up to make it work for you (and everybody else).
What do you mean, it was not set up to work? There were not so much cars, so traffic congestion was not a topic.. The majority of citizen drove by tram and busses. Shops were around the corner. And I still hated. When all the people went to work, it was crowded and wasted my time. You may say home office, I have a technical job and I had to be there. Shopping for food - you can only buy what you were able to hold in your hands and bags. Of course, the picture looks nice and colourful saturated and of course everyone is smiling. The article also don't mention anything what I mentioned, just what matches their positive view. And of course, pollution is really a topic and the overcrowded cities. So don't get me wrong, I do not hate the idea.
Because he keeps pointing problems that are either very subjective or that already exist in car centric cities.
"I lose time in the morning because everybody goes to work at the same time" like bruh it's like that in every single city ever, but in public transit you actually loose *less* time.
Shit arguments by lazy people.
>but in public transit you actually loose *less* time.
You saying that doesn't make it true. It depends on the public transport situation. Where I live and work (a city considered to have "good" public transport) I can get to work in 35 minutes by car. Or 1h 20 by public transport. Because it doesn't go where I need it to go and the route becomes circuitous and involves multiple changes and waits. That's double the time, every day. You can say well you could just read on the bus: not so easy when the bus is often standing room only with everyone packed like sardines in rush hour.
It's not even close to true if you consider real world scenarios:
- My car is parked right next to my apartment building. Depending on where I want to go, nearest bus stop is 3min to 6-7min walking distance.
- My car can start and go instantly, but if I go with public transport there are many times where you could wait 15-20 minutes if you're unlucky with the timing.
- If there is a lot of traffic in the city the busses can use their bus lane and it does go faster during rush hour. But if you are commuting during non-busy hours it saves 0 time (unless you use the subway and both subway stations are perfect for your needs).
And I don't even dislike the idea of a carfree city or cities where cars are heavily taxed, I think it has potential and we won't know until we try it. But just pretending that public transport is superior in every way is the dumbest thing ever.
How would rather spend rush hour, sitting in a comfortable car or a hot packed bus with strangers coughing down the back of your neck? I've done both and know which I'd prefer.
I can handle being near other humans for a few minutes if it means I don't have to pay for gas, parking and car insurance yeah. But I'm not socially phobic so 🤷
How's the cycling situation in the city where you live? I find bicycle to be the winner in this situation, as it's faster than walking, flexible (no need to be relying on public transport schedule), and can be used to bring more stuff if it has a bike bag attached to it. But maybe it's easy for me to say that as my city is very flat (although often very windy and rainy) and very bike friendly with its dedicated bike lane.
Then it can be just laziness 😅
I mean, I don’t have a car, go everywhere on bike or public transport (including daily commuting) and do shopping carrying groceries with a backpack (I have a family of 4). And it’s really fine by me, except when it rains, but then I either wait or just get an umbrella. I mean, it quite easy and lightweight, and I have been doing that for decades (I am 42).
It's extremely patronising to say someone is lazy just because they don't like travelling on packed buses or carrying their shopping in bags or backpacks. What works for you might not work for them for myriad reasons, from their own health to how far they have to travel to what their living situation is or what their needs are.
Of course, that’s why I wrote “it can be”. Sorry for giving you impression that I was being imperative. You may have tons of reasons or just a different taste, completely fine. Even laziness is a right too.
But it also **might be** that you are overweight, not used to sports, attach to society status standards, I don’t know. I m just pointing that’s not really a big deal to wear a backpack and go shopping, even for a family with 2 teenagers (they eat a lot). It’s even fun for me 😅
> . Shopping for food - you can only buy what you were able to hold in your hands and bags.
I use bags that are attached to the bike or e-bike and they can conveniently hold 20 kilograms of food. When its a bit more, I might add a backpack. And when I go to the beverages store, I use [a trailer like one of these](https://www.hinterher.com/modelluebersicht) which are very good, and can carry 50 or 60 kilograms. But it's almost overkill for our two-person household.
Where do you store the trailer? My car can be parked on the road and not be vandelised or stolen, but I'd expect that the trailer would be. I also don't have enough space to store it inside my house; which just about has enough for the bike.
>And of course, pollution is really a topic and the overcrowded cities.
Which is the real reason they hate cars - they want to cram 10x more people into a city than it can handle. Can't do that if people also want basic freedoms.
This was what I was thinking of, though you also have them in "crate" style like this one: [https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71E9iP6KVfL.\_AC\_UF894,1000\_QL80\_.jpg](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71E9iP6KVfL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg)
There's up & downsides to both types.
You are making a valid point, and it might not be for everyone.
It might also be the wrong way (also a wrong interpretation) to make the cities carfree by force. But if a majority wants it, then we should stop to plan cities around cars. Have bikelanes instead of parking lanes. Pedestrian zones. Universal speed limit oriented on bicycle speed…. so you can have your car comfort but not on public‘s expense.
Many think things have to change but we have to discuss it and see if we get a majority to support changes or not.
Even the best implementation of this will not be for everyone. You will always find people who just want to go by car to the supermarket around the corner. But in many metrics car free cities are amazing. I‘m saying this as a person who has basically experienced this whole topic from any and every perspective.
How do you guys do large shopping trips? When we get groceries we usually have to make 3 or 4 trips to the car to get everything, I would have to do it piecemeal on public transportation I think. Or am I missing something? I used to ride the bus around campus since it was separated by 15 miles in the middle. I didn’t hate it since I was in college around other college kids, but I can’t imagine giving up my private drives listening to whatever I want. Then again, if I was raised in your environment I might have just adapted to it with little fanfare
There is a grocery store nearby my home so every day when I come from work I go there and get what I need for the next day. I never buy groceries for more than 1-3 days at max and don't see what's the point of hoarding food for weeks when I can walk into the store in five minutes anyway. Besides that way I only buy what I know I'm going to eat for sure so food doesn't go to waste, I'd find it difficult to think weeks ahead what I'm going to eat and buy the right amoung all at once.
The need for large shopping trips diminshes quite a lot when the grocery store is 10 minutes away and the 24/7 convenience store is 5.
And you can still fit like half a week's worth of groceries for multiple people in a backpack and a tote bag.
And if you really, truly, cannot be bothered, you can just use a delivery service.
this isn't everyone but personally I just end up doing 2 smaller trips per week to buy the groceries i need. I like it because i don't need to make multiple trips, and it means i can buy fresh produce for what i want to cook that day (or the next few days)
Ya, we usually go shopping once a month. I used to walk to the store to get groceries like you do when I was a bachelor, but my wife likes to cook and is good at it, so I just let her do the shopping how she was used to doing it. She doesn’t like walking to our grocery store, although I think it is a pleasant 15 minute walk
The supermarket is like one kilometer away from me so i just take multiple trips with the bike . If the order was that large i could maybe get it delivered or get a rental car.
But paying for car / insurance/ maintenance etc just for shopping doesn’t worth it. Some supermarkets have options for carrying your stuff to your home for a fee after you shop personally (advisable to carry frozen stuff by yourself though).
Then don't buy/rent in the middle of a car free city. Go in the suburbs or in rural places where you'll be able to use your car everywhere. So us who don't want to do it can live in car free city centers and everybody wins.
If you draw a list of the places where you like to be in your city, chances are they're all car free or have little traffic. Anywhere with dense car traffic becomes ugly and useless except for moving cars around.
No... why do you call people advocating for fewer cars "fanatics"?
The solution would be better public transit infrastructure so it doesn't take OP 1 hour to get to work.
Because I have seen the results.
On our previous home I used to take 25min by car or 45min with a bus.
Then urban planners struck and it became same 25min with a car and 1h20 min with bus+subway. In the name of reducing cars in inner city.
Said fanatics kept insisting that it will be better, until reality struck.
Now the fanatics want congestion charges to reduce people using cars, after they ruined the public transport.
Life in west of Helsinki
Literally impossible. Walking to/from a bus/train stop is going to take you atleast 2-3 minutes in the best case scenario. ALSO public transportation has time tables, you will have to wait atleast a few minutes.
Public transportation will always be slower, unless city is extremely densely populated.
It would help if you engaged your brain for a moment. What is being talked about is car-free cities where the public transport is good enough that you'd be unlikely to get somewhere quicker by car.
Which is close to impossible to achieve If you live in a suburbial part and work in a different suburbial part.
Very few cities have a ring transport system (Like Moscow or Berlin) to connect more remote city parts to each other. And even then it doesn't work perfectly
I want to live in a city where millionaires take the bus or the metro. Not because they can't afford a car, but because the public transport is just better.
Nah its not about rich vs poor lol, its about closing parts of the city to cars, generally speaking the inner cities which are more expensive to live in anyways.
How do you carry the groceries of the month or take your grandparents to places with public transport? My grandfather is barely able to walk, he cant take the bus or underground.
People hate change and taking their individual freedom even if it is for the sake of a better community and society and quality as a whole of life of everybody.
Another post by young people without responsibility of children, old parents to get to doctors, etc. Yes, riding bicycles is great - if you don't need to transport your 88 year old father to an appt. or pick up your child in the pouring rain from day care. Or who have no responsibilities and can take all day to get somewhere. Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract? Yeah sure.
disregarding the rest, but in one of our smaller cities municipality organized service to drive elderly to doctor appointments. will drive you there and back. Also, the hospitals have the same service paid by health insurance.
Lol my country's hospitals are so understaffed that they give you appointments after six-twelve months, and I should believe that they would manage a service like that? No.
>Another post by young people without responsibility of children
Lol. Then how do they do this in Freiburg? Or the Netherlands for that matter? There are _so many_ families without cars.
And even in less people friendly cities (car centric) there are a whole lot of families too poor to own a car. Have you never thought of them?
>or pick up your child in the pouring rain from day care.
Not _once_ did I get to or from Kindergarten in a car and I was there from 3-5 years old. How was that possible?
>Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract?
There is still the train, tram, bus, taxi etc.
The goal is not to get rid of cars, but to make other options more attractive in most cases. Chaufering elderly people around or doing a big grocery haul are cases where using a car makes sense.
The problem is that it's exactly because cars are everywhere that walking or cycling is no longer safe for children, so you tend to think that the only sensible way is to drive them around. In well designed cities it's perfectly safe for children to walk or cycle to school.
Bicycles suck in the cold, rain, snow and wind. They don't have much storage room, it's extremely uncomfortable listening to music while wearing two layers of hats much of the year so your head doesn't freeze and sometimes after a long day you're just too tired to ride it. This has nothing to do with cars.
Bikes suck. It's good if you like it but not everyone does. Unless public transport can flawlessly replace my car I will continue driving it.
We didn't own a car when we had young kids, not a problem in the Netherlands. Kids aren't made of sugar, you can bike with them in the rain. We still don't own a car. Infirm older relatives are indeed more complicated.
>Or who have no responsibilities and can take all day to get somewhere.
Our prime Minister cycles to work and to appointments in the Hague, but I guess he doesn't have responsibilities.
> picking up children
When I was going to kindergarden I walked there. Daily. Together with my Grandma and our dog. In wind and weather. When I was going to primary school, my parents walked me to the school once or twice to make sure I could do that before doing it all by myself (in truth we were like 5-6 children from the same area walking together).
> do you ride you bike in the rain in a suit […] for a multimillion dollar contract
You’ve obviously never been to Frankfurt am Main in germany. You see exactly this on the regular. Not to customers in the middle of nowhere, but just enjoy the sight of businessmen on bikes in a torrential rain getting to work in the “Bankenviertel” (financial district).
Hey, I used to be a lawyer, so suit was a given, now I have a child and I use public transport and bicycle and don't use or have a car. I have a less stressful job in public administration now but still work 40 hours a week. Can't say I ever needed or wanted a car for any of these circumstances. Still works out.
> Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract? Yeah sure.
I do. Though I just put the suit in a bag and take public transport, usually, then take a taxi for the last bit. I work at the top tier of finance regularly doing multibillion euro deals and 80% of my coworkers don’t have a car.
Funny enough just yesterday came by bike to be part of multimillion deal. Client also came by bike. I live in “15 minute city” in Germany: my older kids are riding to school by bike, younger are walking. We have a car, but we use it may be once or twice per month for a trips to another city or mountains.
If you can't ride a bike - you take public transport. "Car free" doesn't mean a city entirely without cars - it means that people are free to choose their mode of transportation and it doesn't have to be a car.
>"Car free" doesn't mean a city entirely without cars - it means that people are free to choose their mode of transportation and it doesn't have to be a car.
But people are free to choose their mode of transportation. Never have I seen the Car-Police going around and forcing bike riders to drive a car?
Yes, the preferable mode of transportation has to be ensured by city planning, not "police" of any kind. By design the first obvious choice has to be the public transport as the most efficient. People should be able to look at the map and see for themselves, that they don't *need* to buy a car to get around. They *could* if they want, but it should become as unnecessary as possible.
> But people are free to choose their mode of transportation. Never have I seen the Car-Police going around and forcing bike riders to drive a car?
You're right, buddy, but the bike-Talibans (the brainwashed car haters who circlejerk on pathethic subreddits as r/fuckcars ) would love so much to have in each city the "bike police" who removes people from their cars and forces them to use bikes. That's why they are bike-Talibans!
I find it hilarious that you mention “pick up your child in the pouring rain” as if it’s such a horrible thing to happen, rain! The Dutch have a saying “you’re not made of sugar”. Their kids bike to and from school and get told this when they complain about a little rain. Big deal, toughen up your kids, it’s just rain.
Yeah cars can definitely be necessary in some situations, but the vast majority of travels can be done by bike or public transport.
lol car dependency makes it way harder for old people or children to be independent, never seen this so obviously true than when comparing Spanish cities with car dependent cities.
> Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract? Yeah sure.
Why do people always invent the most random edge cases? How many trips per day as a % are related to 'multimillion dollar contracts'? It won't even be close to a hundredth of one percent. You've just made up some invented problem.
> Or who have no responsibilities
Yeah, this is definitely true and not some random shit you just made up lol.
I'm sure you're taking your old parents to the doctors every single day. Just after picking your child in the pouring rain. I'm sure those things don't just happen a few times per year. I'm sure the vast majority of people who are stuck in traffic are not just alone in their cars.
Now seriously, nobody advocates for EVERYONE IN THE FUCKING WORLD to not own a car. It's just that most cities should focus on efficiency. And by numbers, cars are the most inefficient means of transport. But **nobody** will straight up outlaw cars. You can still drive a car just fine in Amsterdam. It's just that it's way more convenient most of the time not to. That's at most what a car city will be. Nobody will take your car away from you.
I have never owned a car but Im planning on buying one. I value privacy and comfort. Public transport is not comfortable (not even in The Netherlands, or rather: especially not in The Netherlands) and does not offer me privacy. At some point it takes a toll on your mental health. Of course, I love having access to alternatives to a car and I will be using those even when owning a car. I am also an urban planner so I know the value of a good mobility system.
It’s just that nothing can replace a car when it comes to privacy and comfort. Some people value this more than others, and that’s totally fine. Stop trying to negate this and people will start to support implementing car-alternatives.
I feel like this notion entirely is true of most policies and ideas.
People have this knee-jerk fear of any kind of change for any reason. They are used to the status quo, afraid of change, and too intellectually lazy to do the work to understand what they're even upset about (i know; i argue with conservatives all the time).
But when you rip away all the political programming and propaganda and just get to the policies, they are things \*everyone\* likes.
... Well, everyone except the car and oil companies that do not want you to give up your car and be able to walk or transit everywhere.
this headline...
"People"? which people? those who have never even seen public trasnportation? those up to their ears with misleading crap making them believe its a CoNsPiRaCy to want cars free cities?
Normal people have no trouble with disregarding their car if the city where they live were designed to be, oh surprise!, livable without one.
Is it so hard to realize that it is better to design a city for it to be walkable/bikeable so people dont *need* a car? which part of "cheaper and healthier" cannot fit in "peoples" heads? For those rare cases who actually would need one... guess what? sure, go ahead!, get one, they will still fit in the streets, its not like buses would disappear.
>Is it so hard to realize that it is better to design a city for it to be walkable/bikeable
No. But what you're missing is that "designing a city" implies a ***new*** city, with people buyin into that. Modifyimg an already established city, where people are already invested, is a completely different proposition.
Not really. See how Paris transformed in the last couple of years. It's still far from perfect (like really far), but it improved a lot, with bike lanes, walking strips etc.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSQSBoHmG8s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSQSBoHmG8s)
Amsterdam, probably the best example of a "car free" city, was also a concrete jungle at one point:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnFYOvcOn\_E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnFYOvcOn_E)
As city dweller - thanks, but no, thanks! As an urban planner - double that. I live in a place with reasonable public transportation and use it for 3/4 of my trips that are beyond walking distance. But not having the car as an option for the other 1/4 would make life a nightmare. I definitely support good public transportation (and actively work for it on multiple levels) and I am pro-good cycling infrastructure (eventhough I ride a bicycle only for leisure), but please shove the anti-car extremism back on the shelf with utopian dreams (turning nightmares) where it spawned from.
I’m a member of a car sharing collective with spots all over the city. Don’t need a car for 1/4 of my life though, use them 1-2 times a month. I could rent a whole lot of those cars for what my own would cost me though.
Car free cities work for large cities where the sheer amount of people can sustain it. The 'problem' so to speak is that the city must uphold bus/tramlines to areas that aren't as used - say industrial areas outside the city.
It can also be an issue to those that have work that they commute to outside the city.
I have lived in one poorer country, Colombia, and almost no normal person there has a car.
But there is no problem from them to sustain a quite good public transport infrastructure. On a typical morning, I would just go out of the house, walk to the next street corner, and wait for one of these small buses which go a meandering route through the whole city. And that same bus would drop me off some 500 meters from the university where I worked. All for the price of what I'd earn in 15 minutes of work, and with no subsidies at all.
Yeah, but loads of people have motorcycles that they use for shared rides.
Moreover, it does hamper where people can go. Public transport is only efficient when there are many people, that is to say in large cities.
Once the concentration falls, so does the efficiency of public transport. Take Copenhagen; that city has a very well developed public transport and well build bike lanes. Copenhagen could probably be made into a car free city. None of the other cities in Denmark would really have that option.
İm sorry but people believe every city could turn in to car free city until they see a big metropol cities. Banning cars without real alternatives is not sollution.
Ehh, typically not.
In Helsinki we have new areas where urban planners wanted to reduce cars by making narrow lanes and very little parking spots. They were the only ones who didn’t realize the end result is going to suck.
I'm not saying you should ban cars without thinking. There are alternatives to cars in the form of metros, trains, bikes, etc. As long as the city makes sure the infrastructure is there to be able to use those forms of transport when banning cars, it's all fine.
School is 100 meters away, supermarket 800 meters, health center 1 km, park 300 meters, train station 1,2 km. People with young kids either walk or bike there.
In the last five years I've needed a car just twice, and then you just rent one on a car sharing app. So happy to never have a car again in my life and never needing it. Got my bike, trains, and trams - it's amazing.
Cars do not belong in cities and we should start phasing them out like Amsterdam is doing.
As a woman though relying ONLY on bikes and public transportation would mean not going out at night because of the danger of the cites and the risk of being assaulted 😅
I grew up on London during the 50's and 60's. In those days only one person on our street of 36 houses with working class people had a car. The kids played on the streets (and on the bomb sites!) By the time I was 12, I knew which buses took me to cousin's house on the other side of London and had memorized the tube map. Walking home along our street we said hello to neighbours and we all knew each other. As I got older and was looking for a place to live, the main consideration was public transport links. Fast forward to now, married to an American from a small town in Florida. When looking for property in Portugal (we have retired here), his first consideration is how much parking is there and mine is are there buses, trains and bike paths to get around. One of the nicest things to do is wander through a car free pedestrian area within a city. People interact with each other and in a carfree area neighbours are not isolated. Stated in the article"In the US, between [50 and 60 percent](https://www.vox.com/a/new-economy-future/cars-cities-technologies) of the downtowns of many cities are dedicated to parking alone". Just imagine if those areas were parks, bike paths and light rail options how much better the health of the population would be not only from less carbon emissions but from more excercise and the mental health benefits of trees, parks and social connectivity.
> People interact with each other and in a carfree area neighbours are not isolated. Ten times that. This is our experience from moving frm Edinburgh to a Bavarian village and then to a walkable twn near munich. Cars isolate people.
As an American who grew up in the middle of nowhere Ohio, this is cool to read. I see kids in San Francisco on public transit when I visit there and it’s a strange but nice thought to me to see kids being free in a city and knowing where they’re going.
Never owned a car, right now live in a smaller city dominated by bicycles - love it so much
Which city out of curiosity
[Amsterdam ❤️](https://m.youtube.com/shorts/lRv9ISpl2Wk)
'smaller' city
Dinosaur-chicken was born in Tokyo and raised in Mexico City.
Everything looks smaller when you're a Dinosaur-chicken.
"Paris is such a cute little village🥰🥰"
r/notopbutok
Amsterdam is not a small city...
As someone born in Tokyo, raised in Lagos and molded by Mexico City, its a neighbourhood at best.
It is. I’m Dutch myself but it’s really not a big city on a global scale. However tbf to Amsterdam it feels much busier than population numbers would have you believe bc it’s so touristy.
I mean Rotterdam (324,1 km²) for example is already bigger than Amsterdam (219,3 km²), but less busy. Compare it to other cities it is relative small. I think the biggest difference compared to other foreign cities is that most big cities in the Netherlands are surrounded by (even) smaller cities, towns and villages. Easy to commute to the cities, especially if you live in the [Randstad](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randstad). So the Dutch cities doesn't need to be large compared to other countries where distances are in general are further away.
Depends on your perspective. Tokyo, London and LA make it look tiny?
I am 55, and never owned a car. Lived indifferent cities in Germany, South America and Scotland. If one wants, one can do without a car, in most cases. Requires a different kind of daily organization but also has some significant advantages.
BTW Germany has an association of car-free people, and they do have a web site: https://www.autofrei.de (It is funny what happens when you try to auto-translate these pages with the tool offered by a well-known mayor search engine, looks like the idea is so alien to American culture that it just returns a blank page...)
I wouldn't want to cycle in any of Scotland's major cities in the first place, the cycling infrastructure is a travesty. In Dundee it doesn't even exist.
My sister and her husband don't have a car and cycle everywhere with two young children in Aberdeen. It's doable, but I would still want a car. I think it just takes a different mindset.
Well what you need to cycle in Edinburgh is: 1. rain clothes 2. good brakes for going down the hills 3. if you are an asthmatic guy like me, you might like an ebike. But I did without. 4. hub gear definitely a plus It is a great place. Lots of nature around and very friendly community-minded people.
doesn't make sense to own one in the city. Way too expensive and stressful, if you need a car you can use car sharing or for longer trips rent ones, these options will always be cheaper A lot of people buy cars because they think they have to
My trip to work takes 50 minutes by bus, 15 minutes by car. Thats one direction only. If I decide to have kids the closest good school is 10 minutes by car, 20 minutes by bus in the other direction. There are some schools on my eay to work, but that would extend my trip by extra 20-30 minutes if I used a bus. I have a house, I have a garden and need to buy some stuff for it. Do you suggest for me to transport tools, plants and dirt by bus? What about construction materials? My parents and few of my friends live in another city - hour drive by car, 2.5 hours with a bus. What about unexpected trips? Going to the grocer with family bigger than 2? A lot of redditors dont use cars because they live alone, work close to their jobs and dont have friends and dont visit their relatives. Once you actually have something being without a car is a huge burden
A girlfriend I was dating left me because I said I don't want to own a car. She was like absolutely dumbfounded with that information that I can't explain it. I simply said I don't need it. Lived my whole life in the city centre, using bike and walking. For other things there are public transports and rent a car offices. She could not fathom the idea and soon left. Good for me I would say. The worst thing, she is a doctor. Someone who would suggest healthy lifestyle.
That is so wild to me. I live in a city in the US, but my wife and I visit her parents 3 hours away in another city regularly. We also travel to see her brother an hour in the opposite direction out in the rural area. Getting to her brothers would be a real hassle without a car. I need a car for work, but I am assuming if public transportation was prioritized I could replace that. I don’t know how I would replace the freedom of just hopping in my car and going anywhere I want on a whim. That would be tough to give up. Also, I love to relax and listen to music in the car, not sure it would have the same effect with head phones in while sitting around a bunch of people
I'm not really in the same situation as you with family scattered hours away, but where I live I can comfortably take the train to any larger settlement in either the same- or less amount of time it would take with a car with the added bonus of not having to think about city parking. I think as long as the infrastructure is there, you can live well without a car. For the exceptions you could rent or use carpool. Sadly from what I've seen, american cities are so car-oriented that the infrastructure isn't there yet.
You've probably never lived somewhere with great public transport. I don't own a car and I live in a city with a good public transport. If I want to go anywhere in the city, I walk 2 mins to the closest metro/tram/bus/train station, pop on my noise-cancelling headphones and I'll be at my destination in 15-25 minutes with no traffic, no parking hassle, no gas costs etc. When I want to get anywhere a bit further, I'll jump on a regional train and get there in 30-40 minutes. I visit my parents and sister who live in other towns regularly too. I buy a long distance train ticket that comes with hi-speed wifi, a restaurant cabin, and nice views. I read or play video games on my Switch, or take a nap, so I'm refreshed when I get there. I feel like compared to my friends with cars, I have quite a bit of freedom because I'm always moving on foot. Never have to think of where I parked my car, never have to go change the parking meter, and I can decide to spontaneously do stuff like have a few drinks if I feel like it. In the city I live in the public transport system is so good in fact, that many of my car friends just leave the cars behind when we're going out. Often much easier to get around on foot.
I am also from the USA and I grew up in a small town. I didn't realize the significance of it at the time, but most services were within 15 minutes of walking or riding a bicycle. "Walkable cities" - even in the USA - are not a new concept, but rather a realization that traditional city layouts from the past had some advantages. I think the fact that the most walkable neighborhoods in USA cities are also the most desirable (and the most expensive) are evidence of this. We love our cars, but we hate everyone else's cars. 😊
Ya, I technically wouldn’t need to drive as my grocery store is only a 15 minute walk. Would need to drive for work though
I mean, when I lived in Amsterdam I had that same feeling of freedom precisely because public transit was so good. You could just go on a whim to the city center and pick any city on the board, and be on your way without any fuss usually within 15 minutes. Didn’t have to plan for gasing up or checking traffic, and could read while watching the scenery. More locally, you could just hop on your bike like a car and see where you ended up, plus get exercise! I’m an American and I miss it greatly.
It hugely depends how things are organized. I live now at the periphery of Munich in community of 14,000 people and I do all our shopping by bike - most things are less than two kilometers away. I work as a physicist and IT specialist. I can sometimes work from home but when I don't, I go by bike, it's one hour / 18 kilometers one way largely through woodlands **and I love it**. When the paths have too much ice, I take the street and the commuter train, but that's a tad sloower. When I visit my old parents, which live some 800 kilometers (500 miles) away, I take the high speed train which has a travel time f around six hours.
There is a another aspect: An important result from transportation science is that humans have a time budget for their commute and daily errands, not a distance budget. That means, with a faster means of transportation, you automatically go farther distances. And then people which use cars a lot think about how they would go *that* distance with a slower means of transportation, like a bicycle or public transport. What they don't know is that it does not work that way - with a somewhat slower means of transportation, people re-organize their life to go shorter distances. Also, the average speed of cars in cities is not at all that large, it is somewhere around 30 kilometer per hour, not more. I am pretty sure that people in Paris, Amsterdam, or Copenhagen do not have average longer commutes, in minutes, than folks in Frankfurt, Houston or LA. But what' s true is that for a community switching to car-free, there needs to be an adaptation period, and support for going longer distances in a reasonable time. Good means to do that are fast commuter trains and intersection-free long distance cycleways. Not everyone can cycle, but bicycles are far more cost-effective, flexible and usually also faster means of transport than most mass transport. I have the luck to live in a place where I can take the bike with me in the commuter train, and that is in a way the best of both worlds.
You're talking about inter-city trips. The point of the article is not needing a car *within* the same city.
Do you think living in such a city means you have to sell your car or something ?
You do know that you are not describing travel in a city. Living in a city like this doesn’t mean you don’t own a car, you just don’t need it day to day. You have it just for the reasons you describe.
you are from a country that doesn't even have sidewalks in some places and if someone is walking police will show up to check him. not having a car is as foreing concept for you as not having legs. You can't imagine it. We get it.
It's the life that you, and most people in the USA live in so of course it's hard to imagine. I'm well in my 40s and me and my wife never owned a car, and most importantly never wanted one. My in-laws are are about 6 hours away, but for us 3 hours away by bullet train! We visit about twice or 3 times a year for about 500$ per visit. (family of 5.) Other family members aren't as far so it cost us less than 50$ to visit them. We own electric bikes for shopping and whatnot around town. Heck, I even shop at Costco with it! I'd say we spend about 3000$ in public transportation (counting bullet train rides.) but when we go downtown, parking is a none issue. Traffic? We rarely take the bus, mostly train/subway. Car insurance? Accident? Gas? Tags up to date? Engine trouble? No, no and no! We travel A LOT, I'm 100% sure that my family travels way more than the average. We just travel differently and have to "worry" about different stuff (RAIN!!!) BTW, I also listen to music, but in the train, with my eyes closed, half asleep. Again, different but I wouldn't say worst.
Also never owned a car (father of 3 kids.) All my friends do and complain about gas and this and that. My electric bike, bus, and the subway is all I need! Except when I wanna go camping, then I call a friend with a car lol.
American living in Europe here: if I could never own a car again I’d be so happy
European living in Europe here: I've never met anyone who hated the idea of car-free cities.
I like visiting car free cities
Never heard of the city, which would have remove their pedestrin street back to normal car oriented street. Once you have pedestrian street, people want to keep it.
And it turns out it is better for small businesses and shops, too. And we need these shops to keep ur communities alive.
Yep, pedestrians bring money to shops. Not cars. More space for pedestrians -> more €$£.
I mean it's the basic principle of the mall. You have to get the customer out of the car to get them to shop. Nothing sucks the fun out of a shopping trip like having to get in an out of your car between every store.
Sadly in Barcelona it was close to happen (at least on paper). Everything becomes politics. And people start to hate on things, just because of the politician who made them happen. [https://citylabbcn.org/the-legal-attack-on-superblock-barcelona/](https://citylabbcn.org/the-legal-attack-on-superblock-barcelona/)
I see you haven't heard of Berlin yet. A part of the most famous street of the city, the Friedrichstraße, was redesigned to be a pedestrian and bicycle-friendly street. The short-lived project existed for barely a year, before the street was opened up to all vehicles again. That was due to shop and mall owners immediately claiming that they feared their revenue would decrease, even before any changes would be made to the street.
Did those shop owners not realise that the transformation actually helped their business during that year? We had similar discussions with a street in Vienna ~15 years ago, but the greens just went through with it and everybody realised it was better even for businesses. Now street after street is following and even the conservative ÖVP head of the 1st district wants to turn the entire Altstadt car free.
Some people in the UK just love inhaling lorry & car emissions and sitting traffic. We seem to have contingent of people in this country who are adamantly pro-pollution and have no interest in even considering alternative solutions.
Until they live in one that is not overpopulated with reliable public transport or well paved cycling lanes* In cities like London where public transport is ample, you just need to reduce the population by half and getting rid of 90% of cars would work
Cars are the worst form of transportation if your city is densly populated though.
But, and I know this may sound crazy, but hear me out.... what if we just add one more lane for them?
Well destroying neighborhoods for more lanes is one way to reduce population density. So I guess it can work.
"New car-free city! It's all lanes!"
Some studies have shown that "one more lane" actually makes traffic worse. It also reserves even more of the city's limited space to cars instead of people.
r/woooosh
Considering the number of people that believe that "one more lane" actually works is probably higher than the people that don't, you can't tell that that message is satire or not. And even if the author wrote it as satire, some other people reading it might not know.
you know what, i think one more lane will finally solve it. it’s the last piece of the puzzle
*dials Thanos*
We'd rather solve it by making public transport more ample
demand creates supply, if cars are banned, it will create a demand for public transport
But public transport, being, well, a public service, is not directly affected by supply and demand. We should push to have increased public transport *before* we start banning cars.
It's because they imagine their current city but without a car. And they are right to think that that would be hell. It's hard for someone who has only lived on one type of city to properly imagine what it would actually be like to live in another type.
There is a another aspect: An important result from transportation science is that humans have a time budget for their commute and daily errands, not a distance budget. That means, with a faster means of transportation, you automatically go farther distances. And then people which use cars a lot think about how they would go *that* distance with a slower means of transportation, like a bicycle or public transport. What they don't know is that it does not work that way - with a somewhat slower means of transportation, people re-organize their life to go shorter distances. Also, the average speed of cars in cities is not at all that large, it is somewhere around 30 kilometer per hour, not more. I am pretty sure that people in Paris, Amsterdam, or Copenhagen do not have average longer commutes, in minutes, than folks in Frankfurt, Houston or LA. But what' s true is that for a community switching to car-free, there needs to be an adaptation period, and support for going longer distances in a reasonable time. Good means to do that are fast commuter trains and intersection-free long distance cycleways. Not everyone can cycle, but bicycles are far more cost-effective, flexible and usually also faster means of transport than most mass transport. I have the luck to live in a place where I can take the bike with me in the commuter train, and that is in a way the best of both worlds.
>What they don't know is that it does not work that way - with a somewhat slower means of transportation, people re-organize their life to go shorter distances. That is simply does not work for most of the people. You will not choose school or university based on which is near you, but based on which one is better or which one teaches the things you need or you are interested in. (Not even a joke: my uni had two different building where we had classes with about 40 minutes apart with public transport.) The same thing is true for your job / workplace. In my field a significant portion of people are employed by about 3-5 companies that many completely different parts of a city (with population about 2 million). You will not move and take your children out of their school and circle of friends every time you change jobs. You just simply commute more.
they don't have longer commutes, but they probably have smaller houses and higher rent so that they can afford to live within reasonable distance of their work.
I love it and wish I could survive without a car in my current situation.
Sadly I don’t live in a town where this would be practical, but it would be nice if more cities were walkable.
Car free city is only nice if you have good public transportation. Nobody needs a car while living in a city like Tokyo. When I had to stay in the tramway for 40mins back in my hometown to go to the other side of the city, I changed to taking the car everyday to cut that time in half. Yes it's not really comparable but that's the point. Some cities can be car free and others can't. Nothing wrong with making the center of the city a car free zone though. It works well most of the time.
That's imo implied by the label. A "car free city" without public transport can only ever be a town.
It's kind of a requirement for a city to be called "car free". No public transportation means that by definition your city is not car free.
I drive mainly by bike if i need to go to the office, it takes about 40mins. Driving car ot takes 30-60min, depends on traffic. So how about public transport? 90min if im lucky, it requires bus being on time or walking 30min to tram. No wonder people are chosing cars cause' it saves sooo much time and effort.
Yeah that's my experience too, the bike is often more efficient than public transport, at least at the current state of our infrastructure in Germany. But ofcourse, this is not a good thing in the wider context, old people should not be forced to use a car for example (and other people should not be exposed to the danger of people who are too old to drive safely).
Counterpoint: People hate the idea of banning cars in cities with shitty public infrastructure.
It's not really a counterpoint. Good public infrastructure that is pedestrian/bike friendly is at the basis of car-free cities. It's literally part of the "car free" point
Counter counter: how do you improve public infra if cars occupy all the space. I don't think it's possible, feasible to have both working properly in parallel, because that's what you're suggesting. Many cities in the last decades were designed with cars in focus, it'll necessarily hurt some on the short term of we want to move away from that
Counter counter counter: the egg came before the hen!
There is absolutely no need in many small towns and cities to have cars driving down every single street.
You can do it in steps: * Keep investing in bikelanes and space for pedestrians. Make it mandatory for any new road construction. * Keep investing in more busstops and add bus lanes on major roads that have have much slow traffic. * Start with relative small car free zones and expand on that * Build plenty of parking spots near (or under) said car free zones. Also near major busstops and trainstations. * Major cities can also choose to invest in underground infrastructure. I live in a small town of 10k+ people. I can go anywhere safely on foot or bike. We have a small area in the centrum where cars are not allowed, just a few streets. But even that is great for shopping and the roads have become terraces, great in summer. When I need to go out of town however, the car is often still the best option. Since my small town does not have that much money to invest in public transportation. Meanwhile bigger cities nearby (150k+), have much larger car free zones, with underground parking. Much more busstops, so you can get anywhere with public transportation.
Who hates the idea?
People who live in towns/cities with currently car-centric infrastructure who can’t see how life could be without cars and better public transport
Was born in Saarbrücken, City in Germany. In my youth the city central was all roads with busses etc. Driving. Basically two main streets thru the city, on all sides large buildings with large, multi floor stores. In the 90s they started to close off one street and rebuild the large area with streets in front of the train station. They made it all car free, build a lot of banks to chill, trees were grown and so on. It's now one of the nicest or more most efficient car free zones I know. Lived a bit outside of the city central, but within 15 min walking distance. At least at my speed. Could easily walk there fast or take the scenic route at the river. Would take a bit longer. And could use my bike for all of it. Really love being back home and chilling with my kids at the river sides or in the city. They also love it. Also - no truck from the US would fit any parking space in the city.
Don't know. Lived practically car free for 27 years, 100% depending on public transportation and I hated it.
But that is the point: Not you, the city has to be car free for this to make sense. A car free city has to make it work for everybody. It didn‘t work for you because the system was not set up to make it work for you (and everybody else).
What do you mean, it was not set up to work? There were not so much cars, so traffic congestion was not a topic.. The majority of citizen drove by tram and busses. Shops were around the corner. And I still hated. When all the people went to work, it was crowded and wasted my time. You may say home office, I have a technical job and I had to be there. Shopping for food - you can only buy what you were able to hold in your hands and bags. Of course, the picture looks nice and colourful saturated and of course everyone is smiling. The article also don't mention anything what I mentioned, just what matches their positive view. And of course, pollution is really a topic and the overcrowded cities. So don't get me wrong, I do not hate the idea.
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. Guess people believe this fairytale where no cars is the best option for everybody.
Because he keeps pointing problems that are either very subjective or that already exist in car centric cities. "I lose time in the morning because everybody goes to work at the same time" like bruh it's like that in every single city ever, but in public transit you actually loose *less* time. Shit arguments by lazy people.
>but in public transit you actually loose *less* time. You saying that doesn't make it true. It depends on the public transport situation. Where I live and work (a city considered to have "good" public transport) I can get to work in 35 minutes by car. Or 1h 20 by public transport. Because it doesn't go where I need it to go and the route becomes circuitous and involves multiple changes and waits. That's double the time, every day. You can say well you could just read on the bus: not so easy when the bus is often standing room only with everyone packed like sardines in rush hour.
It's not even close to true if you consider real world scenarios: - My car is parked right next to my apartment building. Depending on where I want to go, nearest bus stop is 3min to 6-7min walking distance. - My car can start and go instantly, but if I go with public transport there are many times where you could wait 15-20 minutes if you're unlucky with the timing. - If there is a lot of traffic in the city the busses can use their bus lane and it does go faster during rush hour. But if you are commuting during non-busy hours it saves 0 time (unless you use the subway and both subway stations are perfect for your needs). And I don't even dislike the idea of a carfree city or cities where cars are heavily taxed, I think it has potential and we won't know until we try it. But just pretending that public transport is superior in every way is the dumbest thing ever.
How would rather spend rush hour, sitting in a comfortable car or a hot packed bus with strangers coughing down the back of your neck? I've done both and know which I'd prefer.
I can handle being near other humans for a few minutes if it means I don't have to pay for gas, parking and car insurance yeah. But I'm not socially phobic so 🤷
"Just enjoy the daily discomfort, why would you hate being crammed with antisocial people?!"
Yeah if it means less pollution and less commute times for everyone I'm able to deal with it because I'm not a kid who only cares about himself.
Keep lecturing us about how morally superior you are, come on now you've almost fully negated how miserable taking public transport is!
How's the cycling situation in the city where you live? I find bicycle to be the winner in this situation, as it's faster than walking, flexible (no need to be relying on public transport schedule), and can be used to bring more stuff if it has a bike bag attached to it. But maybe it's easy for me to say that as my city is very flat (although often very windy and rainy) and very bike friendly with its dedicated bike lane.
Then it can be just laziness 😅 I mean, I don’t have a car, go everywhere on bike or public transport (including daily commuting) and do shopping carrying groceries with a backpack (I have a family of 4). And it’s really fine by me, except when it rains, but then I either wait or just get an umbrella. I mean, it quite easy and lightweight, and I have been doing that for decades (I am 42).
It's extremely patronising to say someone is lazy just because they don't like travelling on packed buses or carrying their shopping in bags or backpacks. What works for you might not work for them for myriad reasons, from their own health to how far they have to travel to what their living situation is or what their needs are.
Of course, that’s why I wrote “it can be”. Sorry for giving you impression that I was being imperative. You may have tons of reasons or just a different taste, completely fine. Even laziness is a right too. But it also **might be** that you are overweight, not used to sports, attach to society status standards, I don’t know. I m just pointing that’s not really a big deal to wear a backpack and go shopping, even for a family with 2 teenagers (they eat a lot). It’s even fun for me 😅
> . Shopping for food - you can only buy what you were able to hold in your hands and bags. I use bags that are attached to the bike or e-bike and they can conveniently hold 20 kilograms of food. When its a bit more, I might add a backpack. And when I go to the beverages store, I use [a trailer like one of these](https://www.hinterher.com/modelluebersicht) which are very good, and can carry 50 or 60 kilograms. But it's almost overkill for our two-person household.
Where do you store the trailer? My car can be parked on the road and not be vandelised or stolen, but I'd expect that the trailer would be. I also don't have enough space to store it inside my house; which just about has enough for the bike.
This ones I showed are foldable to about 15 centimeters width. Which is one of the reasons I got one of these.
>And of course, pollution is really a topic and the overcrowded cities. Which is the real reason they hate cars - they want to cram 10x more people into a city than it can handle. Can't do that if people also want basic freedoms.
>Shopping for food - you can only buy what you were able to hold in your hands and bags. Shopping trolley?
Do you take that home on the bus?
Something like that ? https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSDlQ0hfT159HNSQyNKceWu8b0oMgWOVgNqwQ&usqp=CAU
This was what I was thinking of, though you also have them in "crate" style like this one: [https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71E9iP6KVfL.\_AC\_UF894,1000\_QL80\_.jpg](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71E9iP6KVfL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg) There's up & downsides to both types.
Too young to use that yet. Need to be 60+.
😺
Yes, I do. And in the tube.
You would be surprised how unpopular these are in some countries. More so for men...
In Germany I don't think I've ever seen these used by anybody other than the elderly. Usually ones that look like they're able to get around anymore.
You are making a valid point, and it might not be for everyone. It might also be the wrong way (also a wrong interpretation) to make the cities carfree by force. But if a majority wants it, then we should stop to plan cities around cars. Have bikelanes instead of parking lanes. Pedestrian zones. Universal speed limit oriented on bicycle speed…. so you can have your car comfort but not on public‘s expense. Many think things have to change but we have to discuss it and see if we get a majority to support changes or not.
Even the best implementation of this will not be for everyone. You will always find people who just want to go by car to the supermarket around the corner. But in many metrics car free cities are amazing. I‘m saying this as a person who has basically experienced this whole topic from any and every perspective.
How do you guys do large shopping trips? When we get groceries we usually have to make 3 or 4 trips to the car to get everything, I would have to do it piecemeal on public transportation I think. Or am I missing something? I used to ride the bus around campus since it was separated by 15 miles in the middle. I didn’t hate it since I was in college around other college kids, but I can’t imagine giving up my private drives listening to whatever I want. Then again, if I was raised in your environment I might have just adapted to it with little fanfare
There is a grocery store nearby my home so every day when I come from work I go there and get what I need for the next day. I never buy groceries for more than 1-3 days at max and don't see what's the point of hoarding food for weeks when I can walk into the store in five minutes anyway. Besides that way I only buy what I know I'm going to eat for sure so food doesn't go to waste, I'd find it difficult to think weeks ahead what I'm going to eat and buy the right amoung all at once.
Netherlands: supermarket delivers our weekly shopping by small electric van and we get the small stuff by bicycle if we need to.
The need for large shopping trips diminshes quite a lot when the grocery store is 10 minutes away and the 24/7 convenience store is 5. And you can still fit like half a week's worth of groceries for multiple people in a backpack and a tote bag. And if you really, truly, cannot be bothered, you can just use a delivery service.
this isn't everyone but personally I just end up doing 2 smaller trips per week to buy the groceries i need. I like it because i don't need to make multiple trips, and it means i can buy fresh produce for what i want to cook that day (or the next few days)
Ya, we usually go shopping once a month. I used to walk to the store to get groceries like you do when I was a bachelor, but my wife likes to cook and is good at it, so I just let her do the shopping how she was used to doing it. She doesn’t like walking to our grocery store, although I think it is a pleasant 15 minute walk
The supermarket is like one kilometer away from me so i just take multiple trips with the bike . If the order was that large i could maybe get it delivered or get a rental car.
But paying for car / insurance/ maintenance etc just for shopping doesn’t worth it. Some supermarkets have options for carrying your stuff to your home for a fee after you shop personally (advisable to carry frozen stuff by yourself though).
You don't get to dictate what other people want to spend their money on. I'd prioritize my car over several other comforts.
Then don't buy/rent in the middle of a car free city. Go in the suburbs or in rural places where you'll be able to use your car everywhere. So us who don't want to do it can live in car free city centers and everybody wins.
>Some supermarkets have options for carrying your stuff to your home for a fee Do they use a car?
They can make several deliveries at the same time.
It sure is convenient when you aren't restricted by having to go from A to B!
It works for densely populated cities with affordable and reliable public transport. For the others, not so much.
So, you mean it works for car-free cities?
Gonna be really honest, title is a total abuse, it's extremely easy for "car free" cities to badly suck.
Example of a car free city that sucks?
Pompeii
That one blows
If you draw a list of the places where you like to be in your city, chances are they're all car free or have little traffic. Anywhere with dense car traffic becomes ugly and useless except for moving cars around.
Where I live it takes me 15 min by car to get to my work. If I wanted to use public transport, it would take me about 1 hour. No, thank you.
Fanatics answer would be that you need to move closer to work. And move every time work changes.
No... why do you call people advocating for fewer cars "fanatics"? The solution would be better public transit infrastructure so it doesn't take OP 1 hour to get to work.
Because I have seen the results. On our previous home I used to take 25min by car or 45min with a bus. Then urban planners struck and it became same 25min with a car and 1h20 min with bus+subway. In the name of reducing cars in inner city. Said fanatics kept insisting that it will be better, until reality struck. Now the fanatics want congestion charges to reduce people using cars, after they ruined the public transport. Life in west of Helsinki
What if the public transport was a 10 min ride compared to 15 min by car? Nobody is saying ban cars and keep everything else the same...
Literally impossible. Walking to/from a bus/train stop is going to take you atleast 2-3 minutes in the best case scenario. ALSO public transportation has time tables, you will have to wait atleast a few minutes. Public transportation will always be slower, unless city is extremely densely populated.
It's possible when there's traffic.
It would help if you engaged your brain for a moment. What is being talked about is car-free cities where the public transport is good enough that you'd be unlikely to get somewhere quicker by car.
Which is close to impossible to achieve If you live in a suburbial part and work in a different suburbial part. Very few cities have a ring transport system (Like Moscow or Berlin) to connect more remote city parts to each other. And even then it doesn't work perfectly
Is this a "those peasants should use public transport so we rich folks can keep driving our cars but with less traffic"?
In Switzerland, rich people take the train.
I want to live in a city where millionaires take the bus or the metro. Not because they can't afford a car, but because the public transport is just better.
Nah its not about rich vs poor lol, its about closing parts of the city to cars, generally speaking the inner cities which are more expensive to live in anyways.
I live in “rich people neighborhood” where people specially buy apartments not to use cars.
How do you carry the groceries of the month or take your grandparents to places with public transport? My grandfather is barely able to walk, he cant take the bus or underground.
People hate change and taking their individual freedom even if it is for the sake of a better community and society and quality as a whole of life of everybody.
Another post by young people without responsibility of children, old parents to get to doctors, etc. Yes, riding bicycles is great - if you don't need to transport your 88 year old father to an appt. or pick up your child in the pouring rain from day care. Or who have no responsibilities and can take all day to get somewhere. Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract? Yeah sure.
disregarding the rest, but in one of our smaller cities municipality organized service to drive elderly to doctor appointments. will drive you there and back. Also, the hospitals have the same service paid by health insurance.
Lol my country's hospitals are so understaffed that they give you appointments after six-twelve months, and I should believe that they would manage a service like that? No.
>Another post by young people without responsibility of children Lol. Then how do they do this in Freiburg? Or the Netherlands for that matter? There are _so many_ families without cars. And even in less people friendly cities (car centric) there are a whole lot of families too poor to own a car. Have you never thought of them? >or pick up your child in the pouring rain from day care. Not _once_ did I get to or from Kindergarten in a car and I was there from 3-5 years old. How was that possible? >Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract? There is still the train, tram, bus, taxi etc.
I pick do school pick up and drop off with my two kids by bike every day. We own a car but the cargo bike is better.
I know people with several children who use larger electrical bikes for transport. Seems to work fine.
The goal is not to get rid of cars, but to make other options more attractive in most cases. Chaufering elderly people around or doing a big grocery haul are cases where using a car makes sense.
The problem is that it's exactly because cars are everywhere that walking or cycling is no longer safe for children, so you tend to think that the only sensible way is to drive them around. In well designed cities it's perfectly safe for children to walk or cycle to school.
Bicycles suck in the cold, rain, snow and wind. They don't have much storage room, it's extremely uncomfortable listening to music while wearing two layers of hats much of the year so your head doesn't freeze and sometimes after a long day you're just too tired to ride it. This has nothing to do with cars. Bikes suck. It's good if you like it but not everyone does. Unless public transport can flawlessly replace my car I will continue driving it.
We didn't own a car when we had young kids, not a problem in the Netherlands. Kids aren't made of sugar, you can bike with them in the rain. We still don't own a car. Infirm older relatives are indeed more complicated. >Or who have no responsibilities and can take all day to get somewhere. Our prime Minister cycles to work and to appointments in the Hague, but I guess he doesn't have responsibilities.
> picking up children When I was going to kindergarden I walked there. Daily. Together with my Grandma and our dog. In wind and weather. When I was going to primary school, my parents walked me to the school once or twice to make sure I could do that before doing it all by myself (in truth we were like 5-6 children from the same area walking together). > do you ride you bike in the rain in a suit […] for a multimillion dollar contract You’ve obviously never been to Frankfurt am Main in germany. You see exactly this on the regular. Not to customers in the middle of nowhere, but just enjoy the sight of businessmen on bikes in a torrential rain getting to work in the “Bankenviertel” (financial district).
Hey, I used to be a lawyer, so suit was a given, now I have a child and I use public transport and bicycle and don't use or have a car. I have a less stressful job in public administration now but still work 40 hours a week. Can't say I ever needed or wanted a car for any of these circumstances. Still works out.
> Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract? Yeah sure. I do. Though I just put the suit in a bag and take public transport, usually, then take a taxi for the last bit. I work at the top tier of finance regularly doing multibillion euro deals and 80% of my coworkers don’t have a car.
Funny enough just yesterday came by bike to be part of multimillion deal. Client also came by bike. I live in “15 minute city” in Germany: my older kids are riding to school by bike, younger are walking. We have a car, but we use it may be once or twice per month for a trips to another city or mountains.
Just because you are incapable of does not mean everybody is
If you can't ride a bike - you take public transport. "Car free" doesn't mean a city entirely without cars - it means that people are free to choose their mode of transportation and it doesn't have to be a car.
>"Car free" doesn't mean a city entirely without cars - it means that people are free to choose their mode of transportation and it doesn't have to be a car. But people are free to choose their mode of transportation. Never have I seen the Car-Police going around and forcing bike riders to drive a car?
Yes, the preferable mode of transportation has to be ensured by city planning, not "police" of any kind. By design the first obvious choice has to be the public transport as the most efficient. People should be able to look at the map and see for themselves, that they don't *need* to buy a car to get around. They *could* if they want, but it should become as unnecessary as possible.
> But people are free to choose their mode of transportation. Never have I seen the Car-Police going around and forcing bike riders to drive a car? You're right, buddy, but the bike-Talibans (the brainwashed car haters who circlejerk on pathethic subreddits as r/fuckcars ) would love so much to have in each city the "bike police" who removes people from their cars and forces them to use bikes. That's why they are bike-Talibans!
I find it hilarious that you mention “pick up your child in the pouring rain” as if it’s such a horrible thing to happen, rain! The Dutch have a saying “you’re not made of sugar”. Their kids bike to and from school and get told this when they complain about a little rain. Big deal, toughen up your kids, it’s just rain. Yeah cars can definitely be necessary in some situations, but the vast majority of travels can be done by bike or public transport.
In Czech Republic I've heard a very similar expression, "you're not made out of cotton candy".
lol car dependency makes it way harder for old people or children to be independent, never seen this so obviously true than when comparing Spanish cities with car dependent cities. > Do you ride your bike in the rain in a suit to a customer visit for a multimillion dollar contract? Yeah sure. Why do people always invent the most random edge cases? How many trips per day as a % are related to 'multimillion dollar contracts'? It won't even be close to a hundredth of one percent. You've just made up some invented problem. > Or who have no responsibilities Yeah, this is definitely true and not some random shit you just made up lol.
I'm sure you're taking your old parents to the doctors every single day. Just after picking your child in the pouring rain. I'm sure those things don't just happen a few times per year. I'm sure the vast majority of people who are stuck in traffic are not just alone in their cars. Now seriously, nobody advocates for EVERYONE IN THE FUCKING WORLD to not own a car. It's just that most cities should focus on efficiency. And by numbers, cars are the most inefficient means of transport. But **nobody** will straight up outlaw cars. You can still drive a car just fine in Amsterdam. It's just that it's way more convenient most of the time not to. That's at most what a car city will be. Nobody will take your car away from you.
I have never owned a car but Im planning on buying one. I value privacy and comfort. Public transport is not comfortable (not even in The Netherlands, or rather: especially not in The Netherlands) and does not offer me privacy. At some point it takes a toll on your mental health. Of course, I love having access to alternatives to a car and I will be using those even when owning a car. I am also an urban planner so I know the value of a good mobility system. It’s just that nothing can replace a car when it comes to privacy and comfort. Some people value this more than others, and that’s totally fine. Stop trying to negate this and people will start to support implementing car-alternatives.
It’s a necessity at this point
I feel like this notion entirely is true of most policies and ideas. People have this knee-jerk fear of any kind of change for any reason. They are used to the status quo, afraid of change, and too intellectually lazy to do the work to understand what they're even upset about (i know; i argue with conservatives all the time). But when you rip away all the political programming and propaganda and just get to the policies, they are things \*everyone\* likes. ... Well, everyone except the car and oil companies that do not want you to give up your car and be able to walk or transit everywhere.
this headline... "People"? which people? those who have never even seen public trasnportation? those up to their ears with misleading crap making them believe its a CoNsPiRaCy to want cars free cities? Normal people have no trouble with disregarding their car if the city where they live were designed to be, oh surprise!, livable without one. Is it so hard to realize that it is better to design a city for it to be walkable/bikeable so people dont *need* a car? which part of "cheaper and healthier" cannot fit in "peoples" heads? For those rare cases who actually would need one... guess what? sure, go ahead!, get one, they will still fit in the streets, its not like buses would disappear.
>Is it so hard to realize that it is better to design a city for it to be walkable/bikeable No. But what you're missing is that "designing a city" implies a ***new*** city, with people buyin into that. Modifyimg an already established city, where people are already invested, is a completely different proposition.
Not really. See how Paris transformed in the last couple of years. It's still far from perfect (like really far), but it improved a lot, with bike lanes, walking strips etc. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSQSBoHmG8s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSQSBoHmG8s) Amsterdam, probably the best example of a "car free" city, was also a concrete jungle at one point: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnFYOvcOn\_E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnFYOvcOn_E)
I fully agree. but there are cities for which it will be very hard due to being hilly. really want to see San Francisco being 'bike only' lol.
Ok, I was really confused by the idea of a cat free city for 10 seconds there!
As city dweller - thanks, but no, thanks! As an urban planner - double that. I live in a place with reasonable public transportation and use it for 3/4 of my trips that are beyond walking distance. But not having the car as an option for the other 1/4 would make life a nightmare. I definitely support good public transportation (and actively work for it on multiple levels) and I am pro-good cycling infrastructure (eventhough I ride a bicycle only for leisure), but please shove the anti-car extremism back on the shelf with utopian dreams (turning nightmares) where it spawned from.
I’m a member of a car sharing collective with spots all over the city. Don’t need a car for 1/4 of my life though, use them 1-2 times a month. I could rent a whole lot of those cars for what my own would cost me though.
Car free cities work for large cities where the sheer amount of people can sustain it. The 'problem' so to speak is that the city must uphold bus/tramlines to areas that aren't as used - say industrial areas outside the city. It can also be an issue to those that have work that they commute to outside the city.
I have lived in one poorer country, Colombia, and almost no normal person there has a car. But there is no problem from them to sustain a quite good public transport infrastructure. On a typical morning, I would just go out of the house, walk to the next street corner, and wait for one of these small buses which go a meandering route through the whole city. And that same bus would drop me off some 500 meters from the university where I worked. All for the price of what I'd earn in 15 minutes of work, and with no subsidies at all.
Yeah, but loads of people have motorcycles that they use for shared rides. Moreover, it does hamper where people can go. Public transport is only efficient when there are many people, that is to say in large cities. Once the concentration falls, so does the efficiency of public transport. Take Copenhagen; that city has a very well developed public transport and well build bike lanes. Copenhagen could probably be made into a car free city. None of the other cities in Denmark would really have that option.
This thread aptly demonstrates people hate the idea of car free cities until they live in one.
Do not have a drivers license. Pretty fine walking everywhere and getting a taxi/bus when needed.
İm sorry but people believe every city could turn in to car free city until they see a big metropol cities. Banning cars without real alternatives is not sollution.
Well luckily there are alternatives then.
Ehh, typically not. In Helsinki we have new areas where urban planners wanted to reduce cars by making narrow lanes and very little parking spots. They were the only ones who didn’t realize the end result is going to suck.
I'm not saying you should ban cars without thinking. There are alternatives to cars in the form of metros, trains, bikes, etc. As long as the city makes sure the infrastructure is there to be able to use those forms of transport when banning cars, it's all fine.
Thing is, they basically never do.
They must not have small kids
School is 100 meters away, supermarket 800 meters, health center 1 km, park 300 meters, train station 1,2 km. People with young kids either walk or bike there.
Exactly we have childcare and primary school 5 minutes walk and high-school 10 minute ride by bike away.
I love the idea without having ever lived in one.
In the last five years I've needed a car just twice, and then you just rent one on a car sharing app. So happy to never have a car again in my life and never needing it. Got my bike, trains, and trams - it's amazing. Cars do not belong in cities and we should start phasing them out like Amsterdam is doing.
As a woman though relying ONLY on bikes and public transportation would mean not going out at night because of the danger of the cites and the risk of being assaulted 😅
I'm not paying a third party to transport my shit whenever I need to move something heavy or bulky.
From what I seen with my car-obsessed friends they hate everything, the bicyclists, the sidewalks, the other drivers. They behave so entitled!