> You have a VERY rosy eyed view of what cities were like before the car. What they were actually like is rivers of mud mixed with horse manure. There were just as many roads before as now, except they were very dirty.
I was actually worried my point may come across like this and considered clarifying, but I figured it would be obvious with even a moment's thought that I'm not suggesting literally reverting to exactly how roads were before cars. The only point I was making with respect to the way roads were used was that they were closer to public spaces than the situation we have now. Roads today are reserved pretty much exclusively for vehicles: just try dawdling or having a conversation on a major street in any city to see what I mean. If you RTFA, Hamburg is planning to replace the massive amount of space wasted by roads with green spaces. Relying on things like underground subways or elevated monorails or (much much much smaller than roads) bike paths means we can have the best of both worlds: undo the disastrous damage that cars did to city planning and public spaces without giving up the incredible benefits of streamlined transportation that cars enabled.
> Absolute nonsense. Go read some history, or even fictionalized accounts. Roads were never public spaces like you imagine. They were roads, and carts and horses routinely road right over people who didn't get out of the way.
Absolute nonsense. Go read some history, or even fictionalized accounts. Roads were public spaces almost exactly as I described them, since what I said was that vehicle traffic existed alongside people strolling and standing and doing whatever the hell else. As I mentioned above, we'll even be getting rid of the vehicle-induced downsides of these previous spaces (the mess and the danger), since vehicle traffic will be completely excluded from the road-replacements being described in the article.
We're lucky enough to have video from the early 1900s[1], which shows exactly what I mean about roads essentially being extensions of the way sidewalks are today (+ vehicle traffic), as opposed to the "all vehicles except for crosswalks" style we have today.
By the way, I notice that the only thing you addressed in your entire response was nitpicking (an inaccurate interpretation of) my unimportant supporting comment about how roads previously were. As I said before, the only thing I was alluding to was the fact that they were space that you could actually use, spend time on, play on, etc, as opposed to the reserved-for-cars and much-more-dangerous-for-pedestrians streets we have in the modern era. I can only assume you fully agree with the _actual_ point of my comment, which is that talking about giving up the advantages that efficient transit has bought is either disingenuous or idiotic, since that's not what's being discussed.
> I was actually worried my point may come across like this and considered clarifying,
No, I understood, I was trying to tell you that roads are, and were, for travel and that's it. This public space you love never occurred on roads. People have ZERO interest in doing anything on a road except getting to their destination. We have lost nothing whatsoever.
> vehicle traffic existed alongside people strolling and standing and doing whatever the hell else
You can not bring back the halcyon days when people strolled slowly and were not in a rush. Those days are gone and are not coming back. People want to get where they are going without any time waste.
You propose replacing roads with underground subway or monorail, which are entirely unsuitable for 90% of cities. Plus they don't solve the last mile problem, I've actually never heard of any solution for it except self driving cars that don't exist, or expensive taxis. And even then you still need your hated roads!
> As I said before, the only thing I was alluding to was the fact that they were space that you could actually use, spend time on, play on, etc,
No ever actually did that. Your dream world simply never existed.
Go watch that video you posted and tell me how many people you see talking to other people. I spotted exactly ZERO. People were shopping, or going places, sometimes together. But none were using this "public space" you imagine for anything except travel.
Perhaps you are thinking of central markets like a souq? But that's only a tiny portion of the road network.
> which shows exactly what I mean about roads essentially being extensions of the way sidewalks are today (+ vehicle traffic), as opposed to the "all vehicles except for crosswalks" style we have today.
And you'll still have your hated roads even in your scenario! Only instead of carts you'll have slow autos? So in essence you want to drop the speed limit? And that's about it? So why all the text about how much space roads are taking?
Or do you want to get rid of roads to bring back an ideal that never existed and that no one even wants (periodic mini-parks would provide all the advantages and none of the drawbacks), and have no suggestions for what to replace it with?
> You can not bring back the halcyon days when people strolled slowly and were not in a rush. Those days are gone and are not coming back. People want to get where they are going without any time waste.
If you're in a rush then taking cars through a city is a terrible method to get somewhere fast. The root problem is not that people have gotten more efficient.
>the last mile problem
You could have public transport. It wouldn't have to be exotic. It would need one lane and wouldn't fill it.
> And you'll still have your hated roads even in your scenario! Only instead of carts you'll have slow autos? So in essence you want to drop the speed limit? And that's about it? So why all the text about how much space roads are taking?
A few slow cars would not take up nearly as much space, and they would not interfere with people walking.
>This public space you love never occurred on roads.
You are flat out wrong. Markets, bazaars, strip malls, housing; these are all based on road placement. What happens when a city has a huge celebration? Why, they shut down the roads so people can move freely in safety and merriment. What happens when the government pushes its citizenry too far? Why, take to the streets and make yourself heard!
TBH, i cannot think of a thing/facet of infrastructure that is more representative of public space and socializing than a road. True, steel death machines flying about at 70kph+ is not conducive to healthy neighborhoods. really, the personal car is a huge fracking waste of time, material, and currency.
I think you may, as my father does, believe that the car is some magical device that creates freedom and profits out of thin air. Just look at the commercials; each year we are expected to believe that the NEW one is SO MUCH FUCKING BETTER than last years model WHICH IS SHIT COMPARED TO THE NEW AVENTURAMO by NISSOTA NOW FOR JUST 200%+ THE AMOUNT IT COSTS TO MAKE!!! Truly, car culture is what props up the fallacious American Exceptionalism that capitalists purport.
How sad is it that the most patriotic thing i can do, more than military service or medical aid or child rearing, is to own 1+ cars and make all of the requisite repairs and pay for all of the titling, permits, and insurance?
I was actually worried my point may come across like this and considered clarifying, but I figured it would be obvious with even a moment's thought that I'm not suggesting literally reverting to exactly how roads were before cars. The only point I was making with respect to the way roads were used was that they were closer to public spaces than the situation we have now. Roads today are reserved pretty much exclusively for vehicles: just try dawdling or having a conversation on a major street in any city to see what I mean. If you RTFA, Hamburg is planning to replace the massive amount of space wasted by roads with green spaces. Relying on things like underground subways or elevated monorails or (much much much smaller than roads) bike paths means we can have the best of both worlds: undo the disastrous damage that cars did to city planning and public spaces without giving up the incredible benefits of streamlined transportation that cars enabled.
> Absolute nonsense. Go read some history, or even fictionalized accounts. Roads were never public spaces like you imagine. They were roads, and carts and horses routinely road right over people who didn't get out of the way.
Absolute nonsense. Go read some history, or even fictionalized accounts. Roads were public spaces almost exactly as I described them, since what I said was that vehicle traffic existed alongside people strolling and standing and doing whatever the hell else. As I mentioned above, we'll even be getting rid of the vehicle-induced downsides of these previous spaces (the mess and the danger), since vehicle traffic will be completely excluded from the road-replacements being described in the article.
We're lucky enough to have video from the early 1900s[1], which shows exactly what I mean about roads essentially being extensions of the way sidewalks are today (+ vehicle traffic), as opposed to the "all vehicles except for crosswalks" style we have today.
By the way, I notice that the only thing you addressed in your entire response was nitpicking (an inaccurate interpretation of) my unimportant supporting comment about how roads previously were. As I said before, the only thing I was alluding to was the fact that they were space that you could actually use, spend time on, play on, etc, as opposed to the reserved-for-cars and much-more-dangerous-for-pedestrians streets we have in the modern era. I can only assume you fully agree with the _actual_ point of my comment, which is that talking about giving up the advantages that efficient transit has bought is either disingenuous or idiotic, since that's not what's being discussed.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJfTa5SjDCY