Drivers wanting autonomy isn't the only uncontrollable variable. Property owners along the streets have ideas, too. Optimising their street for the ability of drivers to drive quickly through it on their way from elsewhere to elsewhere typically isn't high on their list. Adds noise, depresses property prices.
The whole thing reminds me of some modernist architecture dreams. One of the great architects had an idea of cities as... let me be pointed and unfriendly. Of magnificently designed apartment blocks connected to magnificently designed workplaces by wide fast roads, and nothing else. Fantastic looks, very clean, very elegant in a way, but nothing else. Corporatist, not far from fascist, very far from humane.
Or you end up with fist fights and road rage over limited resources. And it's very easy to say "limit access to cars", but it absolutely requires a build-up of public transit to make up for it, which usually goes beyond local zoning practice
Public traffic space is limited (and in major cities exhausted) supply. Being "pro something else" is automatically anti-something. If do not make the latter part explicit it will just hurt the weakest group (typically reducing space for pedestrians).
I think it's not in the public interest to allow cars on crowded city streets. After all, sometimes there isn't room on the sidewalk and cars send people to the hospital.
There's much more to most countries than just cities, and completely changing traffic rules entirely when going into car-hostile territory will continue to cause suburbia and CBD's to exit city cores.
I will also propose separating transport planes.
There is no excuse for mixing cars and pedestrians in an inner city. I see no viable excuse for traffic lights and forcing petrol-burning vehicles to idle.
All car traffic that crosses with living spaces should be in tunnels etc, and all flow controlled as in highway entrance/exits and roundabouts, etc.
> The larger long range vehicles will be encouraged not to be in the city centers and this will physically open up more space downtown.
This wouldn't be a technology driven development though but rather a political one. There's nothing preventing us from limiting cars in our downtowns today. (Seen by the fact that many european cities already do this)
The roadblocks in the 15 minute cities have been imposed to control the residents, to reduce their freedom and autonomy, to satisfy environmental goals. That is the difference.
Instead of being a left vs. right issue, instead I think it's an authoritarian vs. libertarian issue. On one side we have those advocating for more state control, in the name of the greater good. And on the other side we have those for personal freedom.
The problem with many town centres though is that they were never designed to accommodate a large volume of cars. Placating car drivers has the effect of alienating pedestrians so you lose either way.
Absolutely, the idea of having everything within 15 minutes walking distance is great. But actively restricting people's movements in this way is not, at least to me.
Public highways are really the people's property. In a democratic society if the majority of the public dislike the roadblocks, the local government should remove them.
I think it's valid for the public to get upset about attempts by the government to micromanage their lives in this way.
It's not just this particular issue, it's many other things which are restricting our freedoms in general, all together. Which are increasing the level of outrage against the state.
That's good because at least the public is pushing back against these things, it may get to the point where people can't take it anymore, and might start protesting en masse.
I'm really waiting for that to happen, we might find ourselves getting our civil liberties back eventually.
>- No highways in the city (loud, dangerous, take up lots of space)
Why doesn't this result in cars simply traveling on regular streets and creating noise and danger in the exact same space as pedestrians, cyclists, and residents?
Look at SF. They are looking to ban cars from the city center but not drug dealers who deal right in front of govt buildings and mere feet from police offers.
But banning cars gets a lot more airspace for some reason. Totally dysfunctional clown city.
Most of the road is only there because people use cars instead of public transport. Keep 2 lanes as necessary,the remaining lanes should be divided among the cars as wasted space caused by them.
This isn't a fair read on the situation, the tension isn't between my streets and your streets, it's between major arterials and light residential streets.
In many cases the arterials don't have anyone directly on them (or only commercial/industrial property)... specifically as part of their intended purpose.
In fact, if the situation isn't addressed in a fair and intentional manner a my vs your issue will be created: wealthier residents will erect gates, block traffic, privatize roads, or move to other locations ... and leave everyone else to contend with the mess on their own access roads, without the political air cover of wealthier people also suffering the same roadway misuse problem.
Get cars out of all city centers, not just the big ones. I live in a small town pop. 15,000. Our little main street is clogged with parking spaces and cars. For 15,000 people! Instead they could rip out the asphalt and make it a pedestrian zone with lots of green space...and the downtown business owners would probably reap the benefits. But nobody is willing to do anything drastic.
It's not a matter of one side being authoritarian, there's conflicting interests.
reply