I like cars but…
I like cars but…
I can’t help but think that cars (EV included) just aren’t the answer. I feel like bikes aren’t the answer either. I feel like the metro and high speed rail are.
Most people don’t drive because they like driving (US), most people drive because they have to. And that sucks. You shouldn’t feel like you’re forced to drive. Because that’s auto insurance and auto registration that you have to pay.
You can’t eliminate roads altogether. You need at least one or two lanes for fire trucks, ambulances, garbage trucks, etc. but you can create pockets of no car zones.
People like me who like cars, should be able to have places we store our cars. We should have places where we can explore the limits of our cars instead of driving through traffic. But that should be a strictly extracurricular activity.
In the no car pockets, you should be able to walk to a grocery store, hardware store, that has what you need. You should be able to have mixed zoning. Single family units shouldn’t be the norm. If I own a car but it’s not my dedicated form of transportation, I can buy a cooler car and I don’t need a garage next to where I live to store it. I can store it outside no car pockets so that I can take public transport to my car and then take my car to the track.
Yes, it’ll take awhile to get there but why aren’t we doing more to that end? Am I too idealistic?
Rail doesn't carry me to my doorstep. Bike does!
The ultimate solution is a combination of all mobility options, without subsidized personal cars.
People will get the fuck out of their cars real quick if they had to pay the real price for it. Instantly, if long and short distance rail is easily accessible and micro-mobility is available generally.
Why not walk the last mile?
But being able to bike is nice. I just feel like, like cars, we shouldn’t force a bike or car driven society. They should be a choice
Walking is a micro-mobility. I apologize if it didn't come across clearly, but my comment was exactly about choice.
I think the best possible form of transportation to design our cities around is feet. It's extremely feasible to build neighborhoods where 90% of what you need to live and work is within a 10-20 minute walk. Density and mixed use are key.
Then I honestly don't think it matters that much how people get between said neighborhoods. Just by prioritizing walkability we would get rid of 90% of trips.
There are newer developments in suburban BC, that have done the village model. storefronts on bottom, and townhomes, or low highrise above. everything you need for daily existance is in the plaza below. I had culture shock in chicago, where the only way across road from hotel to restaurants was by car. No sidewalks, no pedestrian crossing. Just make a run for it and don't fall in the ditch either side of roadway
That development style is awesome. It's hard to find outside of older, more run down neighborhoods in most cities.
The trouble with walkability is variety. I get in my car, I can reach shopping malls, clothing stores, restaurants of practically any cuisine, and the post office to send a letter.
Years ago I lived in a major city on the east coast with decent public transit and high "walkability index" ratings. I could walk to a bodega, three pubs, two pizza places, a chinese restaurant, an organic grocery store, and the gym. I biked to work and to school, and could take public transit to the regional rails to get out of the city if needed.
I still needed a car.
You can't carry a week's worth of groceries for a family on a bike, and certainly not when it's raining.
Public transit takes two or three times as much time compared to driving point to point. Walking could turn a 20 minute errand into a full day adventure. And if I need a specialty store, or to take my kids to the doctor, I'm not waiting around for a bus that may be an hour behind schedule.
The car should be the backup. There should be other options, more favorable options. Cheaper, cleaner, faster for when you just need to get somewhere. Walking is only a replacement when you live near everywhere you ever need to go and you have enough money to just have everything at your fingertips.
Years ago I lived in a major city on the east coast with decent public transit and high "walkability index" ratings. I could walk to a bodega, three pubs, two pizza places, a chinese restaurant, an organic grocery store, and the gym. I biked to work and to school, and could take public transit to the regional rails to get out of the city if needed.
I still needed a car.
What on Earth for? I honestly can't think of a reason why you would need a car in a situation like that. I live in a very walkable neighborhood but with considerably less amenities and I get by just fine without a car or a bike.
Public transit takes two or three times as much time compared to driving point to point.
No it does not. That's only true if cities invest all of their transportation budget into car-centric infrastructure. Public transit is way more efficient.
I expect what will eventually happen is self drive cars will make owning cars pointless.
If you need a car, you'll summon it Uber style on your phone or your watch, or schedule regularly scheduled pick up and drop off times.
The car shows up, picks you up, takes you to your destination.
Even in cases where people want to own their own cars, they can just drive themselves home when not in use and return when summoned.
The streets are going tp be full of empty self driving cars, because uber and the competitors are going to flood the streets of cars to be sure they're always one ready for their clients.
I feel like their business models are dependent on that happening.
Anytime you want a ride you have it within a minute and it'll take you down the block or across the country nonstop. Safer than a human driver for multiple reasons.
https://www.youtube.com/@RMTransit is a channel about using and designing public transit system. He looks at what works and doesn't work in different systems.
Interesting videosWalking, bikes and various forms of public/mass transit are all good, but are still not sufficient in a North American environment.
- Weather sucks. From ankle deep snow that melts to slush and then freezes to be extremely uneven and slippery makes walking unpleasant to dangerous. As much as my city tries to keep up, there is only so much time and funds to clear snow.
- Not everyone is fully able bodied. I'll skip the obvious mobility impaired that people can identify by sight, but include those who look fully able, but for various reasons cannot. ie people with middle ear issues who cannot ride a bike due to lack of balance, or a medical issue where they can do a 30-40 minute walk, but takes them hours to recover.
- Not everything CAN be within a 15-20 minute walk! There are lots on specialty and mom & pop stores that I go to that require longer range transport.
- If you have kids, and they are involved in extracurricular activities, especially sports, you need a vehicle to get them to and from their destination.
- Whatever city you live in is different than someone else's. From city design, availability and safety of public transit, environment etc. Should every city aspire to be more friendly to those without a car, sure. But the reality is that most cities have spent the last 50 years being built around a car. Making changes to small pockets to be walk-able is a good start, but the reality is that it will be decades before any major overall change would be feasible. Until then we should also look to minimize the environmental impact of cars and EVs are a good start to that.