6 ms·

I think it’s no easy task to reform a city away from being car-centric. In my home town of Ghent (in Belgium), we’ve had several iterations of a traffic plan th

I think it’s no easy task to reform a city away from being car-centric. In my home town of Ghent (in Belgium), we’ve had several iterations of a traffic plan that gradually reduces the number of parking spaces, rises taxes and car related costs, makes streets one way or deprioritises cars (e.g. a car doesn’t have priority over a bike anymore) etc. It’s not easy but the city today is a lot more liveable than it was when all this started.

skeletal88 6mo ago
But then public transport has to improve also. You cant make owning a car impossible without offering alternatives.
- tikhonj 6mo ago
  None of the changes in the comment make owning a car impossible, they just make driving marginally less privileged over walking and biking.
  - the_biot 6mo ago
    No, it's worse than that. The city council very much implemented an anti-car (harassment) policy, to the point that car owners felt hounded by their own council's policies. It seriously wasn't a matter of "marginally less privileged".
    - TimK65 6mo ago
      Motorists are incredibly fragile. I'm glad Paris has had a mayor who could stand up to their entitled whinging.
      - yulker 6mo ago
        Interesting how correctly naming them motorists sharpens how "the default" is often to be presumed drivers and pedestrians and cyclists are marginal
        rootusrootus 6mo ago
        I don’t know that it’s a helpful distinction. A lot of people do it all - drive, walk, bike, and take public transit. Only in this kind of discussion do I see people declaring it a team you have to choose.
      - dwedge 6mo ago
        Motorists are an easy scapegoat but without alternatives it's just political handwaving. And most people are motorists. Take my city for example. I work in an office block around a 15 minute walk from the centre, which has free parking for employees. Monday this week the city announced that the land is now paid parking to the city effective immediately. When it was pointed out they they hadn't provided any of the necessary signage or machines for this, they decided it was illegal to park there at all, with fines and tow trucks for non compliance. An email from them suggested "cycling or using public transport as the weather is nicer". I cannot stress this enough. No warning, no compromise, no other use for this land, just an immediate draconian announcement. It's very easy to call another group entitled if you're not one of them
        enriquto 6mo ago
        > the city announced that the land is now paid parking to the city what a strange way to put it... why didn't they just say that they are not using any more taxpayer money to finance your parking space? Land in a city is not "for free". > It's very easy to call another group entitled if you're not one of them yeah, well: my point, exactly!
        bluGill 6mo ago
        You miss the larger point not mentioned: all those motorists will be mad and looking to vote for someone next election that will undo it all.
        input_sh 6mo ago
        Your job in any political office is not to leave everything as-is and to cement yourself into that position, but to make marginal improvements, even if doing so costs you the next elections or inconveniences people (hopefully only temporarily). Most of those marginal improvements can only be seen as something positive in retrospective, not while they're being made. While they're being made, they'll always be unpopular, as the voter base is usually not keen on defending the people that are currently in charge. That doesn't mean they won't show up in the next elections, just that they are quieter in the meantime.
      - stef25 6mo ago
        > Motorists are incredibly fragile Until you throw yourself in front of my car
        alamortsubite 6mo ago
        > > Motorists are incredibly fragile > Until you throw yourself in front of my car Fragile with regard to their egos, as illustrated here.
    - jadyoyster 6mo ago
      Imagine how "hounded" everyone else feels by driver friendly polies in other cities.
    - Mawr 6mo ago
      The starting point is anti-anything-but-a-car, so it's understandable that in the process of getting to any sort of parity you'd feel like it's "harassment". It's like claiming getting rid of slavery is "harassment", because your unfair privileges are being taken back.
    - hamdingers 6mo ago
      When one is accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.
- rsynnott 6mo ago
  Generally, restrictions on cars make public transport better automatically, as they make buses work better.
  - zahlman 6mo ago
    It certainly helps the buses move more efficiently, but it can't do much about things like bus stop placement, or just generally sense of place as you start or end your trip.
    - alamortsubite 6mo ago
      > it can't do much about things like bus stop placement Why not? Fewer cars means more room for bus stops.
      - zahlman 6mo ago
        Because there has to be a place where the bus stop could sensibly be. A history of car-centric design often eliminates those opportunities.
        alamortsubite 6mo ago
        I see. I think you're talking about stop placement on a higher level? Removing street parking can free up room for lots of extra stops, which can help with bus bunching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_bunching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_bunching
        zahlman 6mo ago
        I'm talking about what you physically see, or even step over, at the actual physical location where you're contemplating putting the bus stop; which is there because people were only thinking about cars when doing the zoning and construction.
      - bluGill 6mo ago
- stalfie 6mo ago
  Alternatives naturally become more viable over time as more and more people find car use impossible, but its kind of hard to tell in advance which lanes of public transport are most necessary to improve. So imo the best solution is just to do it, and then see what happens and adapt. It's too hard to plan out everything in advance, and if you try you get deadlocked politically and nothing ends up happening. So you just find the best lever you can to reduce traffic immediately, and just start pressing it. But you warn everyone that you're pressing it, and when you do so you do it slowly. The reality is that a lot of traffic is simply unnecessary, and dissipates once you add some friction. The most extreme example of that is the rise of remote work during and after Covid. As it turns out, none of these people actually needed to go anywhere. And more generally, cars induce their own demand simply by virtue of being the fastest and most comfortable option, and they shape the environment around them to depend on them. Small local shops get outcompeted by distant behemoths due it being more convenient to drive. People move to a large house in a distant suburb rather than a small apartment because they know it's just thirty minutes away from work by car anyways. The easier it is to drive, the more entrenched driving becomes. And any way you slice it, undoing that process will cause pain, so you might as well go ahead and start, because you're never going to find a way to prevent the consequences anyway.
jstummbillig 6mo ago
Honest question: What is the hard part? If you took all of that stuff and did it as quickly as you could somewhere else, what's would be the biggest issue? People + resistance to change of any kind? The outcome seems so obviously good. I have never heard of anyone complaining about a city becoming less car centric, but maybe somehow it's an under-represented story?
- alistairSH 6mo ago
  Effectively NIMBYism, but for cars. The political backlash would stop all progress. People don’t like change, even for the better.
- gotwaz 6mo ago
  Well I sold off my car after realizing I enjoyed the bike ride to work. Then a year later an older family member had a health crisis requiring hospital visits at all possible times of the day and night for many months. Couldnt always rely on cabs and that was the only time I regretted selling the car. But we got through it with friends and fam sharing transport duties. Quite a crazy period so I could imagine it becoming real complicated for certain issues.
- pizza234 6mo ago
  There are places where car is simply the mean of transport - to the point where using the car is preferred to literally a five minutes walk. In contexts like this, using a car is perceived as a right - restricting usage doesn't make people think "I'll take the chance to use the bike", rather "How the f*ck do I get there now?".
  - apothegm 6mo ago
    The trouble is that the backlash occurs even in places that are pedestrian and transit dominated.
- pandaman 6mo ago
  You have not heard people complaining about cities impeding traffic, likely, because of the bubble you live in. That is the thing that makes regular people to run for the city offices. A whole lot of recent "urbanization" is not going to survive for long because of this IMHO.
jfengel 6mo ago
It's a good illustration of why solving climate change isn't just a matter of individual actions. We need to reconsider the whole infrastructure, and you can't do that from the bottom up.
Gud 6mo ago
The cities were recently reformed to be car-centric(1960s) and can be easily reverted. All it takes is an understanding how fucked up it is to operate a 2 tonne personal vehicle everywhere you go(if you are able, which most people aren't, legally or mentally), spread the general knowledge and make a long term commitment to public transport, walking and bicycling. :-)
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]

skeletal88 6mo ago

But then public transport has to improve also. You cant make owning a car impossible without offering alternatives.

tikhonj 6mo ago
None of the changes in the comment make owning a car impossible, they just make driving marginally less privileged over walking and biking.
- the_biot 6mo ago
  No, it's worse than that. The city council very much implemented an anti-car (harassment) policy, to the point that car owners felt hounded by their own council's policies. It seriously wasn't a matter of "marginally less privileged".
  - TimK65 6mo ago
    Motorists are incredibly fragile. I'm glad Paris has had a mayor who could stand up to their entitled whinging.
    - yulker 6mo ago
      Interesting how correctly naming them motorists sharpens how "the default" is often to be presumed drivers and pedestrians and cyclists are marginal
      - rootusrootus 6mo ago
        I don’t know that it’s a helpful distinction. A lot of people do it all - drive, walk, bike, and take public transit. Only in this kind of discussion do I see people declaring it a team you have to choose.
    - dwedge 6mo ago
      Motorists are an easy scapegoat but without alternatives it's just political handwaving. And most people are motorists. Take my city for example. I work in an office block around a 15 minute walk from the centre, which has free parking for employees. Monday this week the city announced that the land is now paid parking to the city effective immediately. When it was pointed out they they hadn't provided any of the necessary signage or machines for this, they decided it was illegal to park there at all, with fines and tow trucks for non compliance. An email from them suggested "cycling or using public transport as the weather is nicer". I cannot stress this enough. No warning, no compromise, no other use for this land, just an immediate draconian announcement. It's very easy to call another group entitled if you're not one of them
      - enriquto 6mo ago
        > the city announced that the land is now paid parking to the city what a strange way to put it... why didn't they just say that they are not using any more taxpayer money to finance your parking space? Land in a city is not "for free". > It's very easy to call another group entitled if you're not one of them yeah, well: my point, exactly!
        bluGill 6mo ago
        You miss the larger point not mentioned: all those motorists will be mad and looking to vote for someone next election that will undo it all.
        input_sh 6mo ago
        Your job in any political office is not to leave everything as-is and to cement yourself into that position, but to make marginal improvements, even if doing so costs you the next elections or inconveniences people (hopefully only temporarily). Most of those marginal improvements can only be seen as something positive in retrospective, not while they're being made. While they're being made, they'll always be unpopular, as the voter base is usually not keen on defending the people that are currently in charge. That doesn't mean they won't show up in the next elections, just that they are quieter in the meantime.
    - stef25 6mo ago
      > Motorists are incredibly fragile Until you throw yourself in front of my car
      - alamortsubite 6mo ago
        > > Motorists are incredibly fragile > Until you throw yourself in front of my car Fragile with regard to their egos, as illustrated here.
  - jadyoyster 6mo ago
    Imagine how "hounded" everyone else feels by driver friendly polies in other cities.
  - Mawr 6mo ago
    The starting point is anti-anything-but-a-car, so it's understandable that in the process of getting to any sort of parity you'd feel like it's "harassment". It's like claiming getting rid of slavery is "harassment", because your unfair privileges are being taken back.
  - hamdingers 6mo ago
    When one is accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.
rsynnott 6mo ago
Generally, restrictions on cars make public transport better automatically, as they make buses work better.
- zahlman 6mo ago
  It certainly helps the buses move more efficiently, but it can't do much about things like bus stop placement, or just generally sense of place as you start or end your trip.
  - alamortsubite 6mo ago
    > it can't do much about things like bus stop placement Why not? Fewer cars means more room for bus stops.
    - zahlman 6mo ago
      Because there has to be a place where the bus stop could sensibly be. A history of car-centric design often eliminates those opportunities.
      - alamortsubite 6mo ago
        I see. I think you're talking about stop placement on a higher level? Removing street parking can free up room for lots of extra stops, which can help with bus bunching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_bunching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_bunching
        zahlman 6mo ago
        I'm talking about what you physically see, or even step over, at the actual physical location where you're contemplating putting the bus stop; which is there because people were only thinking about cars when doing the zoning and construction.
    - bluGill 6mo ago
stalfie 6mo ago
Alternatives naturally become more viable over time as more and more people find car use impossible, but its kind of hard to tell in advance which lanes of public transport are most necessary to improve. So imo the best solution is just to do it, and then see what happens and adapt. It's too hard to plan out everything in advance, and if you try you get deadlocked politically and nothing ends up happening. So you just find the best lever you can to reduce traffic immediately, and just start pressing it. But you warn everyone that you're pressing it, and when you do so you do it slowly. The reality is that a lot of traffic is simply unnecessary, and dissipates once you add some friction. The most extreme example of that is the rise of remote work during and after Covid. As it turns out, none of these people actually needed to go anywhere. And more generally, cars induce their own demand simply by virtue of being the fastest and most comfortable option, and they shape the environment around them to depend on them. Small local shops get outcompeted by distant behemoths due it being more convenient to drive. People move to a large house in a distant suburb rather than a small apartment because they know it's just thirty minutes away from work by car anyways. The easier it is to drive, the more entrenched driving becomes. And any way you slice it, undoing that process will cause pain, so you might as well go ahead and start, because you're never going to find a way to prevent the consequences anyway.

jstummbillig 6mo ago

Honest question: What is the hard part? If you took all of that stuff and did it as quickly as you could somewhere else, what's would be the biggest issue? People + resistance to change of any kind? The outcome seems so obviously good. I have never heard of anyone complaining about a city becoming less car centric, but maybe somehow it's an under-represented story?

alistairSH 6mo ago
Effectively NIMBYism, but for cars. The political backlash would stop all progress. People don’t like change, even for the better.
gotwaz 6mo ago
Well I sold off my car after realizing I enjoyed the bike ride to work. Then a year later an older family member had a health crisis requiring hospital visits at all possible times of the day and night for many months. Couldnt always rely on cabs and that was the only time I regretted selling the car. But we got through it with friends and fam sharing transport duties. Quite a crazy period so I could imagine it becoming real complicated for certain issues.
pizza234 6mo ago
There are places where car is simply the mean of transport - to the point where using the car is preferred to literally a five minutes walk. In contexts like this, using a car is perceived as a right - restricting usage doesn't make people think "I'll take the chance to use the bike", rather "How the f*ck do I get there now?".
- apothegm 6mo ago
  The trouble is that the backlash occurs even in places that are pedestrian and transit dominated.
pandaman 6mo ago
You have not heard people complaining about cities impeding traffic, likely, because of the bubble you live in. That is the thing that makes regular people to run for the city offices. A whole lot of recent "urbanization" is not going to survive for long because of this IMHO.

jfengel 6mo ago

It's a good illustration of why solving climate change isn't just a matter of individual actions. We need to reconsider the whole infrastructure, and you can't do that from the bottom up.

Gud 6mo ago

The cities were recently reformed to be car-centric(1960s) and can be easily reverted. All it takes is an understanding how fucked up it is to operate a 2 tonne personal vehicle everywhere you go(if you are able, which most people aren't, legally or mentally), spread the general knowledge and make a long term commitment to public transport, walking and bicycling. :-)

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]