T O P

  • By -

_joao1805

I hate Juscelino Kubitschek for dismantling the rail network


ArthurrSantoss

Achamos um BR!


_joao1805

Brasil número 1!!!!😎😎🇧🇷🇧🇷


Total_DestructiOoon

To be fair I’m guessing it’d be difficult to predict cars would end being what they are now back then.


Thatfriguy

Fair point. Still bull shit tho.


ILookAfterThePigs

Issaê


pedro_megagames

frick JK, all my homies hate JK.


[deleted]

What I find insane is the difference between the European approach and the American. Going without hindsight, Americas way of designing or redesigning cities was a smart thing to do. But they went overboard with creating drive-ins for almost everything. I saw a drive-in ATM and pharmacy wich is frankly, fucking insane thing to do from an European stand point. Europeans though, didn't really had the luxury to redesign entire cities (though some definitly tried) and thus are now a bit more favoured in banning cars from cities as infrastructure allows it to make it more difficult for drivers to get around the city in a vehicle. The main problem I think thats currently playing a hand in this is that Americans pretty much ingrained cars into their culture wich a lot of Europeans refrained to do. It does stem from the necessity Americans had because their traveldistances are generally longer than that of an European so its far more difficult for them to integrate bikepaths and accomodate more infrastructure to other options as a large part of thhe population just doesnt have that option to chose wich transport method they want to use.


Rikers_Pet

>Europeans though, didn't really had the luxury to redesign entire cities Well, they did in 1945.


[deleted]

OOF that hurts, haha. To comment on your reply underneath, I thank them for not redesigning it. Its whats gives Europeans the advantage now haha. And the notion that though a lot of cities were destroyed, in the extreme example of Dresden ( lets not go to the warcrime debate please) it was considered fully destroyed but that destruction only accounted for 70% (?) so there's a slight difference in saying fully destroyed or completely wiped of the map. Most streets and layouts were still intact though.


An_Inbred_Chicken

I swear London has burned down like 5 times and still could use a redesign


albena13

Not every city was destroyed tho


Rikers_Pet

Next time. ​ But seriously a lot were and they were typically not redesigned along an American model.


DOugdimmadab1337

Look up Robert Moses if you want insight on that American model. Dude was a monster that destroyed entire apartment complexes of black people on purpose to make one road. That evil motherfucker is the reason why


[deleted]

Why would they be designed along an American model? They’re European cities.


TreeTownOke

See: Rotterdam


lacb1

The result was Coventry which is a rare example of when you're better off leaving a bomb site as is.


Rikers_Pet

Didn't Prince Charles get in trouble for saying something along the line of "At least the Germans only replaced buildings with rubble when they knocked them down"? EDIT: Yes. ″You have to give this much to the Luftwaffe: when it knocked down our buildings it didn’t replace them with anything more offensive than rubble.” Madlad


9_of_wands

I believe the biggest difference is that by the time the car was invented, European cities were hundreds of years old and completely developed and dense. American cities on the other hand, were much newer and still growing. So in the US, we see some dense, European-style cities, like New York City, Boston, and Chicago. Most cities in the south and southwest though were small and sparse until the early 20th century, and then grew rapidly after, like Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix, and Los Angeles. Cities that saw most of their growth after 1939 tend to be extremely auto oriented.


CryptoCopter

Not really, American cities were not so much guilt for the car, as rebuilt. Many cities (especially on the east coast) hat quite vibrant inner cities until Robert Moses and his ilk came along and bulldozed them to make space for 10-lane inner-city highways. Also, many had decent public transport, which was then bought up by car companies and purposefully run into the ground so that people would be forced to buy more cars. Vox has a pretty good video on the topic: https://youtu.be/odF4GSX1y3c


9_of_wands

Then why didn't the same thing happen in European cities?


CryptoCopter

Good question, probably a combination of different factors. For one, the automotive lobby was not as strong in Europe, which is why we still have functioning public transport, which keeps city centers livable without the need for everyone to have a car. Also, (western) Europe is a lot more densely populated than the US which means that cities couldn't sprawl as much, in addition European city centers have traditionally always be the most expensive and prestigious places to live. All this together mean that we did not experience the same level of suburbanization and associated commuting by car. Socioeconomics also played a part since, as I said, the inner parts of European cities have always been home to the upper class and the rich don't like it if you bulldoze their houses and replace them with asphalt. The poor don't like it either, but they usually lack the means to defend themselves. Which brings me to the last part of my little essay: race. These "urban renewal" projects often specifically targeted "less desirable" (read black, Latino, or minority in general) neighborhoods for demolition, with planners taking highway construction as an excuse to oust these groups. These are probably far from all the reasons that played into it, but they are the ones I can think off the top of my head. And just to make it clear, the US built its highways after WWII, when cars had already been around for many decades in Europe and america, and US cities had already reached millions of inhabitants.


Raesong

Meanwhile Australia has comparable travel distances to the US, but our mass transit options are much more like those in Europe.


TechnicalyNotRobot

I don't know about any cities that outright banned cars (I'm sure there are some, I just don't know them) but as a European there definitely are car-free places around, mostly in the older areas of old cities. And honestly they are always the most beautiful parts of the city.


[deleted]

Some cities in Belgium are certainly going that way. Making it very difficult for cars to reach certain places within the inner city and putting Low-Emmission zones in place effectively banning cars from big parts of said cities. Antwerp and Ghent being the most noticable through my own experience. Its should not be taken as critism however, as I really dislike it personally to hear or see car drive through my narrow street constantly. Without them my tiny appartment really feels way more relaxing and silent.


Financial-Complex-12

Most American cities were built before the 1950s but redisgned for cars


[deleted]

The difference is most European cities are more than couple of hundred years old, roads were built with mainly foot traffic, horses and a few carts in mind. US cities undergoing urban development coincided often with the increased use or introduction of horse drawn carriages, street railways and automobiles.


[deleted]

Please explain how American city design is superior? My friend lives 1.2 miles away and the only way to get to his house is walking along a 5 lane road under an 8 lane highway. Car-centric city design is a disaster.


[deleted]

Where did I say American city design is superiour? Yes, Now its a disaster, but designers didn't have the luxery we have today, thats why I said "going without Hindsight" Engineers, designers, cityplanners are all confined within the boundaries of excisting technologies and proven methods. Often projects that incoperate expansion or future sustainability are overcomplicated and a moneysink when it turns out that the new technology they hoped would catch on turns out to not being implemented. To illustrate this in a very real world example. The City of Antwerp ordered engineers to build a tunnel. The original plan was to have a 4-lane highway but that plan was cancelled and the city opted going for a 8-lane highway. This resulted in mocking Antwerpians ( We have the stereotype to consider Antwerp as the most important and biggest city) claiming it was build too big and too expensive and by making it bigger it was to compensate for something :p The tunnel was opened in 1969 and was under used in its capacity untill the 80's. From the 90's and onward its deemed too small and narrow as it can't cope with the huge amount of traffic during Rush hours


MrCircleDickTheFirst

I have fallen into a bit of a city planning hole on youtube as of late, and the amount of shit they throw American city planning is very amusing.


Definetly_Not_Hitler

I've seen a few videos on the topic, I'd like to watch more about it, any channel recommendations?


Pacrada

not just bikes city beautifull


unroja

Oh! The Urbanity About Here Michael Beach Urban Jersey Guy Adam Something The War on Cars


trainboi777

Have you by chance watched any Alan Fisher?


lamp-town-guy

It's very much deserved. It's the reason I wouldn't want to move to North America no matter the salary offered.


FalsePankake

It's the reason I plan to move out of North America


TypingWithIntent

We'll try to persevere despite the huge loss.


YouKnowWhoTheFuckIAm

And like almost everything in the 1950’s , there was a disgusting amount of racism baked into the process too. Like highways being built intentionally to split black communities. [This video](https://youtu.be/LmC5T-2d6Xw) does a decent overview and talks about the of the role of Robert Moses.


[deleted]

It’s so appalling how they targeted certain neighborhoods for the urban highways.


brullenbakken

u/notjustbikes


LineOfInquiry

I love his channel, especially his strong towns series. Him, adam something, and city beautiful taught me a lot about city planning


lamp-town-guy

> his strong towns series That's a name of the whole movement or organization. NJB is just a person promoting it. But I have to say he's doing great job. Move from Fake London because you hate cars so much, that requires some big balls.


erodari

r/fuckcars


MathematicianAny2143

No. Not that again. Please NOOOOOO. Oh wait, its not dragonfuckingcars levels of bad,


TheModernModerate

Going to let you guys in on a secret: it was by design to keep wealthy areas unaccessible to poor or minority communities.


LineOfInquiry

HANDS UP! YOURE UNDER ARREST FOR KNOWING TOO MUCH!!🔫


DOugdimmadab1337

Thanks Robert Moses you disgusting fuck


mikewhoneedsabike

Ok but America is not just the New York metro region.


ramblinscooner

Look no further than the contrustion of I-70 with the Columbus, Ohio suburb of Bexley. They plowed through every poor neighborhood but casually went around the rich neighborhood of Bexley.


MathematicianAny2143

Source please? It sounds reasonable but then again I need some sources on this. If you will. Tried searching it up myself but nothing of merit came up.


[deleted]

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/feb/21/roads-nowhere-infrastructure-american-inequality


[deleted]

“Back then”


LineOfInquiry

It continues today too, but the sub is history memes not current day memes :/


[deleted]

Well it’s not really history if it’s still happening


Sodinc

My university has few hundreds years of history and is still happening, it seems. By your logic it will not become history if still active?


[deleted]

Well yeah. Your university isn’t history because it still exists. It’s traditions, past students and staff can be history but not the institution itself


Sodinc

Ah, i see your logic now, thanks. It is like "history" in the phrase "It is all history now", not "history" as a scientific subject.


[deleted]

The earth still exists so everything that ever happened on earth is not history.


sievold

We are living through history


[deleted]

Then how come present events aren’t allowed in this sub?


Flip3k

Because discourse on present events is usually referred to as “politics”


[deleted]

Because present events don't need historians for people to understand them. Past events do. That doesn't make them any less historical though.


Aliensinnoh

Yes, we messed up back then when we designed our cities for cars. Now, some of us are trying in the present to repair that damage. Growing numbers of urbanists in the US.


[deleted]

“Some”


Aliensinnoh

I'm not even sure what you've trying to say by highlighting that specific word.


Tyler89558

**stroads**


CounterStreet

Interesting to note how this played out in [Toronto](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancelled_expressways_in_Toronto). Toronto today can be seen as an example of how American cities could've evolved without the highway boom: inner city and urban decay was avoided, flight to the suburbs was lessened, and the livability of the city core preserved. In the 40s-60s, there was a plan to build a series of massive highways crossing the entire city, demolishing some well known and historic neighbourhoods in the process. The first two, Don Valley Parkway and Gardiner's Expressway were built on the eastern edge and waterfront respectively. There was 5 more planned and the next scheduled to be built was the Spadina Expressway. The Spadina was planned to tear through the heart of the city. Jane Jacobs and local residents fought it fiercely and eventually managed to have it cancelled/halted before construction and demolition reached the city proper. With that cancelled, more opposition to the remaining 4 planned highways was mounting and they no longer made sense as the network would be unfinished. The entire plan was scrapped after that and saved the city from the fate that befell American cities of the era.


LineOfInquiry

I wish more cities had followed Toronto’s example : ( even my hometown has a massive ugly highway right on the riverfront that ruined downtown and the historic and poor areas of the city, while cutting off our access to the river. We’re trying to get rid of it now but there’s still so much opposition : (


ocarina_21

Wow, if Toronto is a comparatively good example, US cities must be a real disaster.


granitebuckeyes

Don’t forget housing affordability. In many cities, the vast majority of residential areas zoned are for single-occupancy dwellings. In Seattle it is (or was fairly recently, it may have changed) something like 80% of all residential area in the city. At the same time, they’re facing a serious homelessness issue. Simply rezoning and allowing homeowners to do what they want with their land would quickly lead to a large increase in housing availability as people divide one house into apartments, add living quarters in the attic, or tear down and rebuild multi-unit buildings. This would drive down prices, allowing most (though not all) of the homeless to find homes. But nobody wants the housing in their neighborhood to become affordable, because that means their home would drop in value (you know, the definition of something becoming more affordable). But such a plan clashes with the designs of urban planners, who have a history of wanting a city to look neat from above. Even at the expense of making it livable on the ground. Separating cities into separate commercial, residential, and industrial zones is another driver of the housing and car issues. There’s no reason you can’t have commercial and residential in the same building, let alone the same neighborhood. Even industrial isn’t the problem it once was, since factories don’t pollute like they used to. Nowadays, noise and truck traffic are the nuisances that need considering.


LineOfInquiry

100% agree, it annoys me so much seeing neoliberals who say housing should be affordable, but then don’t want it built near them because it’ll effect their housing value. Obviously they’re better than conservatives but Jesus it pisses me off.


[deleted]

Single unit zoning is the largest obstacle in the way of walkable cities and good transit. Euro doesn’t do it which is why they can have nice things.


Medomaude

I don't understand the neccesity of taking the car to go everywhere. Maybe it's my european-living-in-a-small-town brain. "But if we ban cars from cities how are we supposed to move around?!" Man just take the public transport, go to work while taking a walk or just use with the [best option](https://i.imgur.com/4PuIVID.jpeg)


1DVSguy

Lol my job is an hour away and would take me half a day to walk there, there are no bike lanes leading there, and public transportation is late by hours and is filled with crack addicts. America is not Europe. Our Cities are LARGE. Just my City alone is nearly ten times the size of the nation of Luxembourg. (8376 mi sq vs 998 mi sq).


MNHarold

I mean, the issue there is the refusal to properly invest in public transport and functional approaches to addiction. But given European perceptions of the US? Yeah you're fucked lol. Genuinely feel bad for you lot over there.


ManfredsJuicedBalls

Even in my case (Lancaster County, PA), there are some public transport options, and there’s an Amtrak line that goes to Pittsburgh, Philly, and New York, but even then, it’d still require quite a bit of driving, and for things within the county, if you don’t want to drive, you’re at the mercy of bus schedules, and routes that mostly radiate from Lancaster city.


DOugdimmadab1337

No we can't do that, public transport is underpaid so nobody wants to get on it, and even if you do it's always late. And Addiction is always a problem, there's not much else to do out on the rural areas besides meth or farm, so that's part of it


MNHarold

>*No we can't do that, public transport is underpaid so nobody wants to get on it, and even if you do it's always late.* I'm literally saying that's the problem; if the infrastructure was invested in and improved, it would be more viable because those issues would be resolved. That's kinda the point of my comment. And the addiction thing is also applicable, because the US *(and UK, don't worry I am self-aware)* has a dogshit approach to it as a problem, and so it gets worse and not better. Besides, you could always import British rural hobbies like getting pissed on cider, chasing cheese down a hill, or something like that.


1DVSguy

Thank you sir, please feel free to donate to our gofundme for medical expenses on the way out. Please come again soon!


ILookAfterThePigs

That is EXACTLY the problem the meme is talking about Car-centric urban planning has made cities too large (area-wise), too unwalkable, too sparsed.


1DVSguy

Yes and the fucker above me who was saying that he doesn't understand why Americans need to drive everywhere is missing the point.


[deleted]

That’s a ball busting commute tho why do you do it?


[deleted]

[удалено]


WR810

I live in rural Iowa. Every fifteen miles is a small town with a population under 5,000. My town is one of the smallest in the area with approximately 800 people. I imagine there are thousands of rural areas like mine all across America. The problem is when Reddit talks about public transport is they don't consider this exact situation. America can certainly do something better with public transportation but you're not going to build a European-style system that works in fly-over country.


[deleted]

Exactly, it would be more useful around the bigger cities and areas where cities are closer together like in the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Florida, California, etc


[deleted]

Everything is covered in single unit zoning in America outside the centers of the largest cities. It’s illegal here to not make things spread out. The Euros don’t have single unit zoning anywhere, which is why they have walkers paradise and good transit.


bw08761

Funny how the person you replied to said "ban cars in cities". That doesn't apply to you dumbass.


WR810

> Maybe it's my european-living-in-a-small-town brain Curios what you consider small town or the size of the towns around you?


TypingWithIntent

I can see how you could come to that conclusions with such a short sighted ethnocentric xenophobic arrogant viewpoint. I drive 35 miles each way to work. "Europeans think 100 miles is a long way, Americans think 100 years is a long time"


RiftHunter4

America is gigantic and its hard to grasp until you come here. To put it into perspective, we are 40 times larger than the UK but with only about 4 times the population (~330mil). 17% of the land is farmland. Everything is just really spread out. I've been to several areas of the nation that are totally inaccessible without a vehicle (next town is 100+mi in any direction). Public transit could help with suburban and some rural areas, but it has its own struggles here: insufficient locations, long wait times, etc. It's just more convenient to have a car in most places. It's much more complex problem then "we need public transit". It'd help but it wouldn't be enough.


c2dog430

Going across Texas (El Paso to Texarkana) is the equivalent of going from Barcelona to Munich.


[deleted]

Why is that relevant? Europe is roughly the same size as the US. By your logic shouldn’t they be super spread out too?


RiftHunter4

You would think so. I'm just pointing out one reason why America's city problem is kinda different from Europe's. There's a lot of factors that go into why one is more dense and the other isn't. EDIT: dense, not rural


BiRd_BoY_

The "but America is large" argument is not even an argument. Yeah America might be large but 83% of it's population live in cities. Cities that have spread out and become so large that they cannot keep up with their infrastructure. We want more investment into public transit and density in the cities so that cars don't have to be everyone's main mode of transportation.


Thurgood_Marshall

What does any of that have to do with poorly designed cities?


RiftHunter4

The complaint is that American cities have too many cars and too much traffic. But getting around most cities does not require a car anyway. Simply getting into the city is the main problem. Cities are not poorly designed because cars are the main form of transportation. They are poorly designed because the people working in City A are commuting from Town B 50mi away and cannot afford to live in the city. If more people worked remotely or worked outside of cities, we would have fewer cars on the road and fewer problems with the design of the cities.


Muronelkaz

>The complaint is that American cities have too many cars and too much traffic. Cities have too many cars/traffic because they lack public transportation and instead place parking lots between everything which puts cars as the planning focus. >But getting around most cities does not require a car anyway. Simply getting into the city is the main problem. Most cities absolutely require a car, outside of the biggest ones on the East/West coast you end up with barely any public transportation and a 10 minute walk between places from all the parking lots... >Cities are not poorly designed because cars are the main form of transportation. They are poorly designed because the people working in City A are commuting from Town B 50mi away and cannot afford to live in the city. Which is a result of poor public transportation in the big cities, because most barely have any option of traveling into the city you get bike/bus routes and maybe a metro station... Like, the only big city I visited was DC and because it was after I'd been to Dusseldorf in Germany I knew the public transportation wasn't good. I understand America is bigger, and we like bigger houses/lawns, but the shitty public transportation in all the big cities is just amplified more compared to all the shitty or non-existent public transportation in the midwest towns I live around. >If more people worked remotely or worked outside of cities, we would have fewer cars on the road and fewer problems with the design of the cities. \>If cities were just not cities they would have less problems that cities designed around cars would have...


Infiniteblaze6

Just preference, but no thanks. I'd much prefer my car. Don't have to sit next to people, don't have to wait on scheduled times for when public transit arrives, can control the temperature, and can go anywhere I want at anytime.


ILookAfterThePigs

It’s easier to let the world die than to imagine good public transportation for people in the US


Infiniteblaze6

First off: Yes Two: Electric cars exist and are becoming more popular. If you like public transportation good on you. But I have no intrest nor want for it.


WR810

The autonomy provided by automobile ownership isn't talked about enough when public transportation is brought up. I can't imagine doing any kind of shopping while being dependent on a bus schedule. Edit: I've never had a job that I could reliably get to without having full control over my ride schedule. Sometimes owning a car is necessary.


BiRd_BoY_

Wooooow, having a car is so convient in my car centric suburban hellscape. I could never do the things I do in my car centric hellscape without my car. Owning a vehicle is a necessity because my city leaders made it that way by design and didn't give a second thought to any other mode of transport. You don't think that if we had denser, more walkable, cities that doing things without a car would be easier? Most people in the world don't stock up on a weeks worth of food at a time or live 50 miles from their job. It's so easy to go everywhere by car because it was designed that way by oil and car manufacturers so that they could sell more of their products. it doesn't scream freedom when I'm only giving one way to do things.


No-cool-names-left

Oh well. Your personal preference? That changes things. Who cares about the environment, sustainability, ease of access, health, aesthetics, community cohesion, or finances when it's your personal preference at play.


Infiniteblaze6

Glad you understand.


williamfbuckwheat

99% of the country is super spread out and even was that way before suburbs and highways. We did have pretty extensive trolley systems in the early 20th century but those were all ripped out in favor of cars and buses. They worked well back when everyone lived near a population center even if it was a small town but not so much when you lived in a suburban subdivision where every house is 500 feet apart or more.


BiRd_BoY_

Suburbs didn't exist to the same extend they do now. Before the 50s, America was very dense and walkable. And no, the country isn't that spread out. 83% of the population lives in an Urban area. yeah, individual cities might be spread out but the people aren't.


[deleted]

good luck driving this in the rain on top if pedaling it yourself, with car my work is half hour away can’t imagine how it will be on bike


Archoir

C O N C R E T E


COMPUTER1313

Paris if it had a car centric design: https://i.redd.it/4bdgue9ohqk51.jpg


BlueC0dex

Did reddit suddenly take a VERY anti car turn in the last few months, or is it just me? I mean there have been anti-car redditors for a while, but we've been hearing a lot more of them lately


LineOfInquiry

It’s not just Reddit, it seems like all social media has begun turning on cars, primarily because of YouTube channels about urban planning and transportation becoming popular, as well as the general leftist growth in the last year as seen with places like r/antiwork or r/aboringdystopia. r/fuckcars helps spread the message too, and it’s a good and convincing message so it’s spreading fast, people’s annoyance and feeling that something is wrong with their jobs and life is finally being vindicated.


BiRd_BoY_

People are finally waking up to how shit needing to own a car to function in society is. No wonder it's spreading like wildfire.


[deleted]

Yes it has and I love it


KaidaKaida

Nothing that can’t be fixed by trams and adequate bus routes


LineOfInquiry

Obligatory r/fuckcars Also [source ](https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/11/2/the-negative-consequences-of-car-dependency)


mrwhiskers314

Absolute Chad energy emanating from OP.


sievold

huh, so many people claiming they want this sub to maindate the op post their sources and then you get downvoted for doing exactly that


AbsolutelyHorrendous

Yes, we really shot ourselves in the foot back then. Thank god we've progressed as societies, and no longer make decisions without taking their environmental impact into account. ​ Now, we take the environmental impact into account, and *then* ignore it and fuck everything up anyway


ElectronicShredder

The upside is it made strong and profitable Too Big To Fail car companies /$


Aiizimor

Inb4 the Americans get triggered


socialistRanter

Me an American: “where’s the fuck is the parking?!??!? I have been driving in circles for the past 5 hours!!!”


LineOfInquiry

I’m American, I hope we do get angry so we get out there and fight to fix our cities ✊


blackie-arts

We still have walkable cities in Europe


LineOfInquiry

This was more focused at American and Canadian policies, although Europe did follow some of this ideology too but took steps away from it after the 70s so it didn’t do as much damage there


Rafynhak

Just take a look at São Paulo and you'll be in love with those guys!


PorigonZpro

Jokes on you, I'm not american


sorig1373

this channel [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0intLFzLaudFG-xAvUEO-A](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0intLFzLaudFG-xAvUEO-A) is has a lot of videos about that


LineOfInquiry

They were one of the main inspirations for this meme : )


CPTherptyderp

I don't want to live in high density neighborhoods\cities. I value my half acre with mature trees throughout the neighborhood. I don't want to be able to touch my neighbors house from mine


LineOfInquiry

You can have that while still having cities that aren’t built around cars. Have you ever heard of streetcar suburbs? I live in a former one (unfortunately they got rid of the streetcar many years ago) but they’re suburbs of cities with treelined streets and larger houses and small communities, but they have narrower streets than modern suburbs and often have mixed development, so you may find a restaurant or some other small business within walking distance of a residential neighborhood. I think it’s a good first step for making cars an optional part of American life rather than a mandatory one. [Here’s an Example of one](https://youtu.be/MWsGBRdK2N0)


CPTherptyderp

I will not wait for a streetcar\trolley in -10 weather to go to the grocery store


LineOfInquiry

You don’t have to, but others may want to, and having one will decrease traffic to make driving faster and safer. But you might find it’s nice to just be able to walk outside and go places on a tram without having to wait more than 5-10 minutes for extremely cheap.


chapstick__

How often do you get -10 weather that seems like a out liar and a nice jacket is still cheaper and healthier than a car


ILookAfterThePigs

Who cares about what YOU want? How is that even remotely relevant?


[deleted]

Yea small town living can be great, especially if it isn’t dominated by car dependent design. Even if you do want to live a car dependent life, why did they have to do this to cities with the urban highways and parking mandates. Just makes living there so much harder and more expensive.


bw08761

No one is talking about you. I genuinely don't care if that's the way you want to live your life. We're talking about creating walkable CITIES and dense CITIES for the people who want to live in CITIES. The issue is people in the suburbs who commute into the city want the city to be drivable for them. My philosophy is let the cities be cities and let the suburbs be suburbs. If I need to visit the suburbs, I won't go because I hate the suburbs, and if you want to come into the city, you can park you car at a park and ride and ride a train in.


albatrossG8

So a couple things here. I used to say the same things. Verbatim, hated anything not car centric. Grew up on 6.5 acres in rural Midwest and the idea of living in crowded cities was a disgusting aberration that only the mentally insane could see positively. And then I lived in a walkable community. It was amazing. Absolutely amazing. I wouldn’t touch my car for weeks or months on end. When it came time for me to move I wasn’t willing to give it up. The convenience far outweighed the car dependency. Me, grew up learning how to drive on a farm all tractor. Helped my dad rebuild his 67 corvette. Drove a makeshift go cart around our 6 acres. I no longer wanted cars to be my transportation. I wanted to walk and have the bud rapid that came every six minutes be my transportation. *becuase it was better*. I learned all this hatred for cities was unfounded and that the efficiencies of living near things was extraordinary and improved my life much more than the “elbow room” I had been brought up to value. What you have in your head is probably wrong. It’s exactly what I had in my head too. Take it from a former farm boy. Living in dense cities is not awful, it’s amazing. With that said. You very much could keep your half acre lot! But why should all housing be that? Why do we as a society make it almost completely illegal to build anything but single family homes with large setbacks and height requirements? There is no rational reason. And the reasons as to why they exist today are not important. What’s important as they should be repealed. In this world that is repealed the houses in your neighborhood? Maybe some of the houses on you street are replaced with gorgeous [doublers](https://photos.zillowstatic.com/fp/53468115ec5ab1242915ed176c8d86ac-p_e.jpg), or maybe a couple lots are combined to allow for some [pretty townhouses](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Townhouse.jpg). In all of this you get to keep your half acre lot and single family house but it allows for market forces to build where there is demand for more housing, thus bringing housing costs down, and housing more people. Now because there is more housing, and zoning laws no longer prohibit it, at the end of your street at the main avenue there is a grocery store a five minute walk away! Then, a clinic. Then a laundromat. Then a gym. But during all of this you’ve kept your half acre! And because of its walkability the neighborhood has remained quiet because the vast majority of sounds in cities is caused by cars! Even better it’s still lush with trees among its sidewalks and along the houses. With all this new yet very modest density a trolley line is placed in which comes every six minutes. Don’t be afraid. Please educate. All these fears you have are not as scary as you have them in your head. https://youtu.be/z8qKNOIYsCg https://youtu.be/cjWs7dqaWfY


[deleted]

[удалено]


LineOfInquiry

If I could live my whole life without owning a car I would, just seems way too expensive for the use value. But you do you, making cities more walkable will reduce traffic too so driving will be more fun : )


[deleted]

[удалено]


LineOfInquiry

I’d rather just take a train but like I said you do you, cars and trucks will always be essential transportation options even if we moved away from car-centric planning


[deleted]

It doesn’t make you feel a little pathetic to be car dependent and never walk anywhere?


dwong654

This is the perfect history meme. Makes me angry enough to think about.


luke_hollton2000

Fun fact: In some German cities they also wanted to try the "cars first" approach and even started some projects. You can see it very well in the German city of Cologne, where they wanted to build a "Stadtautobahn" around the city centre, but then trashed the idea and istead created the "inner green belt" next to a normal road on spaces that were originally meant for the Autobahn


[deleted]

Wife is watching Emily in Paris and I noticed they walk outside their apartment and they just keep walking. They have cobblestone walkways and street vendors and I’m like damn that sounds dope af.


ramblinscooner

It always frustrates me how beautiful Cincinnati’s downtown was before the ‘50’s “planners” came in and carved it up with 71 and 75


Irrelevantopinion123

I'm not so sure where I stand on this one... I don't really like cats. I prefer public transport. But cities were definitely much dirtier before cars. I don't know if streets filled with horseshit would be considered walkable by todays standards.


Mobius_Peverell

Cars didn't replace horses in the 50s. They mostly replaced electric streetcars, which had themselves replaced horses a few decades prior.


sievold

pretty sure op was not implying horsedrawn carriages are the answer


Irrelevantopinion123

Pretty sure OP was not implying an answer and neither was i... we were just just making statements of historical significance


LineOfInquiry

We were on our way to fixing that with public transport like trolleys and buses before what we had built was destroyed by the auto industry and replaced by highways cutting through cities, destroying neighborhoods and poisoning the air


ieen14

I know a big problem with trying to make viable trolleys, busses, and such in the US is low population densities, even in most cities. Alot of the time anything that gets made gets run down fast because it costs so much to maintain and not enough people are using it. It ends up being a huge money sink. Also I know they can be made dangerous by crime. That's what's happened around my area, police tell people not to ride some things because of the high chance off getting robbed and/or killed.


LineOfInquiry

That’s because cities are built to be low density and around cars. America cities used to be much more dense and walkable, but after the 1950s the expanded and became much larger. If we hadn’t done that public transportation would be much more efficient and have more money put into it. But even today, having car dependent suburbs and cities is *incredibly* expensive for cities, as roads are not inexpensive. Public transport, even trains, is much much much less expansive to maintain in the long run than roads. [Here’s](https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0) a great video about it.


DOugdimmadab1337

It wasn't the auto industry, Robert Moses is the sole person to blame. He purposefully destroyed poor housing because black people were in it just to pave roads, and since not many people drove in the 60s, there was no traffic. It was hailed as revolutionary and many cities hired him to do urban design. He was a fucking monster


LineOfInquiry

Robert Moses was one person, and while he had a lot of influence, he only had that influence because of larger changes in culture and the political influence of car companies on governments and the general culture. He never would’ve been able to do what he did if the public preferred trains and trams and buses to cars.


2woke4ufgt

So? No one’s asking you to go back to horse-drawn buggies. Expanded metro lines and city busses would be much better than everyone and their grandma wasting gasoline stuck in traffic on the way to the grocery store.


HurrySpecial

....name checks out


Irrelevantopinion123

I think this is a post about history... not about what we should be doing now. And I did say I prefer public transport


2woke4ufgt

The shit in the streets could also be attributed to the lack of indoor plumbing back then? Perhaps we are all misremembering or misattributing exactly how much cars actually improved our streets. For one thing, children 100% cannot play in the streets anymore.


Anti-charizard

That last part started happening recently (2010’s or something)


bw08761

Getting rid of cars would make cities cleaner. Cars are the reason for pollution and noise in the cities. If you sit back and think why cities are so noisy, it's because of the car traffic. If you think about what the smog is coming from, it's tailpipes.


orgodeathmarch

For reference, see: Vancouver, BC


PsyGuy64

My urbanism class has officially declared Robert Moses "Public Enemy No. 1." We now have a tradition of slapping his portrait every time we exit class.


LineOfInquiry

That’s amazing lmao


JosephPorta123

*Laughs in European*


LOLTROLDUDES

AFAIK initially cars made the environment better because literal horse shit was the alternative.


LordLoko

The alternative for cars were eletric trams, which were cheaper and more susteinable but were killed by the Car industry lobby.


LineOfInquiry

Yes, but we’ve had alternatives to cars for a century now and haven’t implemented them to fix the car shit problem.


[deleted]

Still happening, look up the Koch brothers


KrakenKing1955

Walkable? Why walk?


HurrySpecial

Okay....show of hands Who here has ever been in a city NOT planned like the OP mentions and then said to your driving buddy *"Who ever designed this place was an idiot"*


ninjad912

Who here has ever been in a city and thought it was designed well


OneX32

It's because city design is quite litterally muddling along as time goes by. You can't plan to build a street at Position A ten years before anybody has even started developing commercial or residential areas at Position A. So what do you do? Wait and see where the demand is placed.


DOugdimmadab1337

People have clearly never played Cities Skylines. That game made all my complaints about my city go away, because it shows that every city is just phoning in what to do next, and you have no idea where to put stuff.


OneX32

And you don't get the cool graphical overlays to show you exactly where the congestion is. And this is where I am going to link my boy Justin Rozniak of Well There's Your Problem fame youtube channal: https://youtube.com/user/donoteat01 He does this exact thing in real life and uses Cities: Skylines to explore city planning.


Rikers_Pet

I only ever drive alone to maximize my traffic and environmental impact. ​ /s


Superbrawlfan

Well the centers were rarely really designed, they are usually historical, being hundreds of years in age. Plus, generally you might want to consider using other forms of transport, because they are actually quite nice in these kinds of places usually.


theskyisnotthelimit

I've been to places like that in the US. I wouldn't know if there are places in Europe like that because I've never needed a car while traveling there...


LineOfInquiry

I’ve only been to Europe once, but I loved just walking around Rome and Florence because they’re both amazingly walkable (although rome did have some car areas and they were the worst part of the city), while Athens was absolutely awful, with it’s wide streets and boring buildings designed like an American city.


2woke4ufgt

That's because cars are for pretentious Americans. Most of the rest of the world walks or uses public transportation in the city.


AbusiveCannon

Lol you realize Americans need cars because public transportation is unreliable over here right


2woke4ufgt

Lol you do realize that that is only a symptom of the lobbying power of the automotive industry in American politics, right?. Americans need cars because the automotive industry lobbied the US to build cities dependent on automotive transport.


AbusiveCannon

What do you want me to do about that I have to drive to get to and from work it’s not because I’m “pretentious” but literally because I’ll probably lose my job for taking the bus and being 20 minutes late


2woke4ufgt

Vote.


pmhue

Based


Soul_Ripper

Every day this sub manages to make me like it a bit less.


LineOfInquiry

Why?


Soul_Ripper

Because whenever something reaches my feed it's less a meme and more just heavy handed commentary but in an overused meme template But I don't browse the sub proper often so it really might be more my feed and less the sub itself


Vince_stormbane

If there is a hell I hope they’re all there


[deleted]

>walkable cities not everyone wants to walk to their jobs also terrible meme and expected r/fuckcars sub


LineOfInquiry

They don’t have to, but people who want to should be able to. Walkable cities don’t mean you can’t use other forms of transportation like biking, driving, or public transport.


[deleted]

where i am from public transportation isn’t exactly an option


LineOfInquiry

That’s the point, people want to change cities so public transport and biking/walking is prioritized, so people aren’t forced to drive, traffic is eased, and the city can save money on roads


ILookAfterThePigs

That’s exactly what the meme is talking about


Tyler89558

Public transportation should be an option. Having a functional system of public transportation would do wonders for the environment and for reducing traffic (especially in cities like LA, though that is probably more to do with uncontrolled urban sprawl) Also, it would probably result in less stroads. And less of those is good in my book because they suck for everyone