This video outlines some of the relationships between US commuting culture and the perspectives that it’s engendered about the role of the city. The, when compared and contrasted to other nations’ approach to city design and perspectives shows that it’s possible to have a city core that’s more than just a workplace.

My city is currently clinging to a small area of interesting downtown core. Everything else has either been bulldozed for parking lots, turned into office buildings with no store fronts, or plowed into wider roads. Every time I show the maps of the city with how car-focused we’ve made downtown to a city council member they recoil at the desolation, but it’s so hard to get change happening.

We need fewer roads, cars, and non-human spaces in our city core areas. Making wider walking paths, biking roads, mass transit (not just busses!), and planting trees to make spaces more attractive will all continue to invite people to come downtown, not just someone desperate enough to drive there, park, hit one store and drive away.

  • P1r4nha@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Culture” is probably an overstatement. Isn’t it just horrifying zoning laws that lead to sprawl and people didn’t have a choice as there is a lack of public transportation?

    • Dmian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      For all I’ve read, the lack of public transportation in US cities (or the badly managed ones) is by design, influenced on politicians by the car industry lobby.

      I guess it’s the same for zoning laws? I’ve no idea, and I’m probably not exactly true, as I’m stating a huge generalization. The US is so big and diverse that there may be places with good public infrastructure.

      But in a broader sense, it seems that the car lobby played a big role in how cities were designed and run.

      • timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Somehow there’s always a “death spiral” for public transit, especially now as people commute less. But somehow… There never is for roads. We never seem to have enough roads. Funny that.

        • Dmian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          “I swear, it’s just one more road. One more and that’s it. Promise!” XDDDD

      • P1r4nha@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The car lobby thing is true for LA, but I’m not sure you can apply this to every city. What is evident, is that cities that existed before cars were invented or introduced are still more pedestrian friendly (see east coast cities or European ones for example) and the ones founded after are more grid like and car friendly.

        Public transportation is only worth it if there is a high enough density of people (yeah, this sub may not like to hear it), so if you have huge sprawling suburbs it’s not obvious where to even put your bus/train stations. Usually it’s great to connect centers of some sort.

        So yeah, if there had been more incentive to connect centers and dense clusters of population with each other, they may have planned according to that.

        • Nathan@montevista.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          @P1r4nha @Dmian

          “… cities that existed before cars were invented or introduced are still more pedestrian friendly”

          Every city in #PuertoRico is older than the car. Here we suffer a 66:100 car:people ratio. There are no walk-able cities, no public transportation, sidewalks are only parking spaces cars, car dealers own the banks and the politicians.

          #fuckcars, they are killing us.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        In Canada the resistance to change is fueled by “this is how we’ve always done it” which is false as Canada was founded before the car was made. There is also a conflict of interest to reduce dependance on roads as we have a decent auto manufacturing sector and many people rely on jobs related to roads and cars. With zoning there is hesitancy to change because many of our politicians are land lords using single family homes as rentable apartments and they know that their property values will drop if we start building real multi unit residences and affordable housing.

        Our cities have been caught in this style of development for decades and to try to change it really goes against the current political grain. It takes a brave and determined politician to try for change and they will meet resistance from their colleagues and parts of their voter base the entire way.

    • biddy@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s certainly one cause, but culture is as well. The American dream of a quarter acre in the quiet leafy suburbs, easy commute to work by car on the freeway, has been a pervasive part of culture for a long time. It’s only recently that we’ve started appreciating the unsustainable reality of that idea.