Barcelona's Car-Free Smart City Experiment (bbc.com) 207
An anonymous reader shares a report: In the centre of bustling and busy Barcelona there is unusual quiet: just the babble of children playing in a small playground and the sound of the birds. There is virtually no traffic and the space where cars would have parked is given over to play areas, trees and even a running track. Superblocks is a radical plan to reclaim the streets from the noise and pollution of traffic, one that could save hundreds of lives that might otherwise be lost because of heavily polluted air one that could save hundreds of lives that might otherwise be lost because of heavily polluted air. It also hopes to act as a blueprint for other cities. There are just six superblocks so far, but Barcelona plans hundreds of others. They are made up of nine existing blocks joined together into an area which bans all but essential vehicles - which are limited to 10 kph (6mph). Parking for residents is underground.
Some residents are opposed to the plan, either because they want to have their cars outside their homes or because they run local businesses and feel that trade will be affected by cutting off traffic flow. But the idea is proving popular with other cities such as Seattle, which is considering introducing something similar. "Cars take up 60% of public space across the city," explained Barcelona's deputy mayor for urbanism Janet Sanz in a recent BBC interview. "As soon as you redistribute that space and rebalance the situation, you are supporting groups that until then have had no access to that space."
Some residents are opposed to the plan, either because they want to have their cars outside their homes or because they run local businesses and feel that trade will be affected by cutting off traffic flow. But the idea is proving popular with other cities such as Seattle, which is considering introducing something similar. "Cars take up 60% of public space across the city," explained Barcelona's deputy mayor for urbanism Janet Sanz in a recent BBC interview. "As soon as you redistribute that space and rebalance the situation, you are supporting groups that until then have had no access to that space."
Sounds very pleasant (Score:4, Insightful)
There's really very little need for massive amounts of vehicles once you've increased population density to city levels.
Re:Sounds very pleasant (Score:5, Informative)
There's really very little need for massive amounts of vehicles once you've increased population density to city levels.
It's not the population density that is important but good city-level support for transportation. In many/most cities in the US, cities grew without viable transportation systems other than with cars. Simply increasing population density without adding a viable transportation system makes the problem worse. The real problem is that adding alternate transportation systems to an already exiting city is extremely expensive and very challenging legally due to property rights and laws. This is why urban transportation projects in the US are slow, expensive, and underwhelming, in contrast to Chinese projects where money is plentiful and property rights are not a challenge. For example, the mind-boggling expansion of the subway in Beijing is amazing but would never happen today in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the population density that is important but good city-level support for transportation.
And what do you need for good public transport? Population density. It's possible to have a decent network with lower density too (certainly way better than in the US) but it's going to be more expensive and suck more anyway. E.g. my parents live in a small town 20km outside a major city and they do have a reasonably affordable and reliable bus service, but it's once every 30 minutes, packed at rush hours, and requires at least one or two transfers to get anywhere useful in the city. Most people who can aff
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the population density that is important but good city-level support for transportation.
And what do you need for good public transport? Population density.
Unfortunately in Silicon Valley we are finding out that simply building high density housing and praying for the ensuing improved transportation system is just making a bad problem worse. Subways are impractically expensive. Buses not only take too long, require too many transfers, and require a lot of walking but are money losers without forcing people to only ride the bus. So, we get more more people in the same area with the same transportation availability. It's not more, denser housing that is need
Re: (Score:2)
and (2) a benevolent dictator to squash the omnipresent legal challenges
Eminent Domain works for transportation projects, not just oil pipelines.
Re:Sounds very pleasant (Score:5, Informative)
I don't hear anyone suggesting we should cover the entire planet with cities.
And cities are actually a far more efficient way for people to live - per-capita pollution, CO2 emissions, etc. are substantially lower for city dwellers than rural.
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't hear anyone suggesting we should cover the entire planet with cities."
Cover? We need Caves of Steel.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Depends on the city. Lets take US cities. If you are downtown, you will be yelled at, at every street corner, "Gonna finish that? Got change?", you have to avoid piles of shit on the street, and there is a good chance a local hobo might just want to do some plastic surgery on you with some box cutters.
Would you want to raise a family in that atmosphere or retire in an area that smells like piss, crap, and K2? Nope. Not when you have to have multiple deadbolts on the door, and when you can't even have a
Re: (Score:2)
It's cheaper to live where less people want to live because of the law of supply and demand. You can tell cities are where lots of people want to live because there are lots of people living there, and you can tell people don't like to live in rural places because so few move in even with low prices.
If you prefer places that most people don't prefer, that's a happy bit of luck for you. Not for your carbon footprint, though, which is probably a factor in rural people tending to be denialists.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't care for cities either - but aesthetics have nothing to do with efficiency. And they're also more expensive because price has nothing to do with efficiency.
In a city real estate is at a premium, so you're going to pay far more for the same amount of space. You'll use less fuel for travel though, since you're traveling shorter distances and have better public transportation (*may not apply to U.S.A. cities) Use less energy for heating and cooling since your home likely shares most of its "outer" sur
sounds awesome (Score:4, Insightful)
Cities should be for people, not cars.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You seem to forget what cars are for.
It's not like there are roaming herds of wild Honda Civics roaming the plains.
Re:sounds awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
You seem to forget what cars are for.
It's not like there are roaming herds of wild Honda Civics roaming the plains.
No, large populations have forgotten what cars are for. Cars are for special purpose transport, not for hauling your fat arse across the road to get a packet of cigarettes (which is how many people treat cars this way).
The GP is right, cities are for people, not for smoggy noisy shitty traffic jams.
Let's define cars' purpose (Score:2)
Cars are for special purpose transport
Do the following scenarios count as part of the "special purpose" for personal automobiles? If not, what's their replacement?
A. Hauling your family to the supermarket 4 km away from your home and hauling them back plus a week's worth of food
B. Hauling your body and gear to and from a home nursing client who lives 15 km away from you, especially outside of the city transit system's service area or during hours or days of the week (especially Sundays) when city transit drivers are at home with their families
Re: (Score:2)
A. Hauling your family to the supermarket 4 km away from your home and hauling them back plus a week's worth of food
Nope. Buy the stuff in the store across the street, every other day if necessary.
B. Hauling your body and gear to and from a home nursing client who lives 15 km away from you, especially outside of the city transit system's service area or during hours or days of the week (especially Sundays) when city transit drivers are at home with their families
That would probably get a pass.
That's not my opinion, I drive by myself to a store across the street because I can't be bothered to carry the shopping for one person :D. But that's probably how it'd work (or does work, you know people already do shopping without cars).
Re: (Score:2)
A. Hauling your family to the supermarket 4 km away from your home and hauling them back plus a week's worth of food
Delivery: it's so much better. You don't have to drag your family to and from the supermaket neither do you have to drag them around it. Instead you can get something useful done while waiting for the delivery to arrive in a handy 1 hour window.
Or do smaller amounts more regularly and get a wheelie bag.
B. Hauling your body and gear to and from a home nursing client who lives 15 km away from yo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like there are roaming herds of wild Honda Civics roaming the plains.
There are, however, plenty of wild Mustangs rampaging all over the place. They've been known to kill people too, especially around cars & coffe events for some reason.
Re: (Score:3)
Cities should be for people, not cars.
Except that these changes are not exactly for all people.
https://www.nrpa.org/parks-rec... [nrpa.org] https://www.independent.co.uk/... [independent.co.uk] https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com] There is an increasing movement to ban single adults from parks, so if you turn large swaths of cities to parks, large numbers of people won't be allowed to enjoy them.
And this "wonderful" situation is just going to be another textbook example of the tragedy of the commons after the novelty wears off.
Meanwhile, I have hundreds of square miles
Re: (Score:3)
Not to mention:
I mean... gee... congratulations, you invented a ped mall. ;) That's an awful lot of hype for talking about a 3x3 block area in a city of 5,5 million people.
IMHO: ped malls are great... so long as you actually have proper transport links to / from them and adequate, affordable parking at their perimeter. I'm all for tree-structured city designs that run high capacity arterials to increasingly smaller a
Re: (Score:2)
Also: walkable areas work well on the other end as well, too. A number of apartment and home complexes here use a design where they're built around the edges of a shared park / play / garden / etc area, with no back fences. Not that all construction should be like that, of course - some people simply want some little lot walled off with privacy fencing as their own, and sure, knock yourself out so long as you're willing to pay for it. But I like designs that encourage socialization and integration with la
Re: (Score:2)
What matters most to me however is that no efforts are made to hinder A) fast (average speed, incl. wait times), B) cheap, C) clean D) point-to-point transport which serves everyone (rich or poor, physically fit or mobility disabled). In general, this means a mixed transportation network, with no deliberate efforts to try to "force" people into transportation means that don't suit them.
It is surely difficult. But to my thought process, if people are going to live in high density population areas, they will have to make some choices and sacrifices, as what might serve one group is inconvenient for another. In addition, unless starting from scratch, most cities are just not built for a lot of the utopian concepts.
I've often wondered what the replacement cities for New York City, which will eventually be underwater, or New Orleans, which will go dry when the Mississippi river re-routes t
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention:
I mean... gee... congratulations, you invented a ped mall. ;) That's an awful lot of hype for talking about a 3x3 block area in a city of 5,5 million people.
Merely correcting the statement that astrofurter made that "Cities should be for people, not cars." This will end up being a place for some people. That is all.
Re: (Score:3)
>It's when people want to get rid of arterial flow that I have a problem.
Agreed - however there's no reason that arterial flow needs to involve cars. A vast city-spanning "ped mall" with an efficient, timely mass-transit system for longer distances has a great deal of potential. Especially if you have demand-based mass-transit such as a fleet of autonomous ride-sharing "micro-busses" to augment longer-range high-volume options.
Re:sounds awesome (Score:5, Informative)
One needs to look at why most people choose cars, and are willing to pay so much for them and fight so hard to have them. It's mainly (though not exclusively) a combination of:
* They go point to point, anywhere, any time, with no wait times
* They tend to have much higher average transit speeds than mass transit. Even a typical LA freeway during rush hour will have a significantly higher average speed (mph/kph) than a typical European mass transit system, accounting for average stop delays.
* They carry significant amounts of things, and you can leave things in them.
* For some people, not having to commute with strangers is another bonus
* For the mobility limited, not having to walk to / from / wait at bus / train / etc stops is a huge benefit. In the previous city I lived in, I had a friend who was
People are so into their cars that you have to deliberately punish them to try to get them out of them. I've read through all of the planning docs of our upcoming local bus-tram system (Borgarlína), and they repeatedly stress that in order to achieve their ridership numbers (15% of all trips), they have to try to deliberately punish people for driving cars. They're full of ideas - making roads maze-like, removing lanes, dramatically increasing vehicle registration fees, dramatically increasing parking fees, not building parking at new buildings, removing parking spaces, lowering speed limits, etc etc etc - all with the goal of trying to make driving so miserable that people have to choose the bus-tram system instead.
My take is that if you have to try to deliberately punish people to force them to not commute in a manner that they strongly want to, you need to rethink what you're doing.
It's also one of the main reasons I'm hopeful for Loop (Boring Company) - assuming that they can actually get it to be as cheap as they're trying for. PRT allows you to have the primary benefits of cars - nearly point-to-point service, minimal wait times, minimal capsule sharing requirements, and high transit speeds - with a public transport system (e.g. vehicles not sitting idle in lots/garages all day, access available to everyone without high capital costs, etc). Even where private cars are used in Loop, you have the potential of shuttling empty vehicles out of town until needed (or to non-adjacent self-parking garages), or using them as public transportation vehicles for other people (e.g. earning money) when unoccupied - and of course (like most transportation systems in the world), private cars paying for access to the system can subsidize public transit through it.
But of course, the economics of Loop at this point are totally unproven. Still, I'm sanguine, and would love to see what it could achieve.
Re: (Score:2)
I lived in Barcelona (BCN) for a few years. Maybe around 1/2 the local people I knew there didn't own a car, they just hired one when they needed to (not very often). In BCN driving is slow, parking is expensive, & there's places where you can't go in a car so it's not worth it. At busy times, you can easily spend an hour looking for a car park that isn't full. The public transport, metro, buses, trams, & trains, is cheap, excellent, runs late into the night, & runs all night for free on big fes
Re: (Score:2)
Re: sounds awesome (Score:2)
"There is an increasing movement to ban single adults from parks, so if you turn large swaths of cities to parks, large numbers of people won't be allowed to enjoy them."
That's bat shit insane - but that's not what this article is about.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the UK, which is in a state of total gibbering paranoia about pedophiles.
Re: (Score:2)
"There is an increasing movement to ban single adults from parks, so if you turn large swaths of cities to parks, large numbers of people won't be allowed to enjoy them."
That's bat shit insane - but that's not what this article is about.
Just correcting your statement. If it is built, there will be an increasing number of people not allowed there as the "think of the children" people get single people banned.
Re: (Score:2)
And if next year they want to ban single folks from driving? Or maybe they want to ban married people from going to the grocery store?
Point is, you can't base your actions on trying to predict the kooky behavior of deranged wingbats.
Of course married people shouldn't be allowed in grocery stores! ;^)
I've always tried to analyze for unintended consequences. And hoo boy does it piss some people off. But I have always had to remind them that my goal is to succeed long term, not to agree with other people and be a yes man.
Greenspace - good Someone living there has a heart attack. Maybe not so good.
Parkspace? beware the tragedy of the commons.
It is just the way different people look at things. It is also why I have a reputation of sa
Re: (Score:2)
The first article describes banning adults from children's playgrounds/play areas. A park rarely consists solely of a playground. While I disagree with these laws since they are mostly used as a pretext to arrest inconvenient homeless people and other "undesirables", they hardly exclude adults from parks.
Re: (Score:2)
This problem seems to exist in some very specific countries only. In many European countries there is a right to roam one way or another so banning single adults from parks would be illegal.
By the way, I also have free access to a forest, a couple of parks and several mountains. Within walking distance, even.
Re: (Score:2)
This problem seems to exist in some very specific countries only. In many European countries there is a right to roam one way or another so banning single adults from parks would be illegal.
By the way, I also have free access to a forest, a couple of parks and several mountains. Within walking distance, even.
Is it Switzerland that the right to hike extends over the whole country? That would be cool.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is, cities aren't for people. Cities are for commerce. If you don't want to be surrounded by all that commerce and the vehicles that make it possible, live somewhere else. Somewhere that is "for people
Re: (Score:2)
Cities should be for people, not cars.
Well, in the US a space like this would rapidly fill up as a homeless tent city.
I'm not sure if folks will like their kids playing in human excrement and used needles.
You first (Score:2, Insightful)
As someone who lives in the midwest, I say you big cities should go for it.
It will hasten the collapse of ultra-dense cities, as businesses can't get customers and residents become trapped to walking distance.
People with physical limitations, who can't walk several blocks to just get to a vehicle, will be the first to leave.
People will slowly discover that having a couch delivered is very, very expensive- when you have to hire multiple people to carry it for blocks and blocks.
Even a quick trip to the grocer
Re:You first (Score:5, Insightful)
Public transportation in big cities SHOULD solve those problems. I lived in Germany for 3 years and parking was such a bitch that I took public transportation all the time. In Atlanta, the largest oversize urban zone near me, public transportation is shitty which is why so many people don't use it. The real problem with US cities is the idiots running them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In a large urban area a public transportation system is as vital as the roadway itself. It's insane not to have one. I've lived in big cities although now I live in the country and I always used public transport when possible. Now I'm retired so I stay home for days or weeks at a time and I've debated just getting rid of the car and calling for a ride the 3 or 4 times a month I want to go somewhere. But then I'm a hermit.
Re: (Score:2)
Is your gun range downtown???
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For sure there would have to be a way to move large loads. Not just guns but all kinds of things.
Re:You first (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, if it keeps people from performing legal, constitutionally protected actions I don't like from leaving the house then that's just a bonus.
There, FTFY. Do try to be more careful with your spelling in the future.
Re: (Score:3)
Millions of fully sane people have gone to gun ranges for decades. It's only lately that nutjobs have been making it an issue.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I felt bad enough carrying the thing from my apartment building to the car park every week, though it seems most people thought I had a musical instrument in the case...
I would say that an AR-15 in a violin case just lacks the style of a Tommy gun.
Re: (Score:2)
I make a trip to the grocery store for a big purchase maybe once a week at most. How many major supermarkets are downtown? But yes, there are exceptions.
Re: (Score:2)
I make a trip to the grocery store for a big purchase maybe once a week at most.
Say someone goes to the supermarket once a week or otherwise uses a car one day a week, using a bicycle or public transit for all other trips. This person still needs to own a car, register the car, insure the car, park the car, and maintain the car.
But yes, there are exceptions.
Proponents of keeping things unregulated argue that there are so many exceptions that the administrative overhead to recognize all exceptions would negate the benefit of regulation in the first place.
Re:You first (Score:5, Informative)
If you live in a dense city, you do not carry 6 bags full of groceries around. Grocery stores are within walking distance. You don't need to stock up for a month at a time. You just get what you need when you need it. Delivery is far more viable as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Bodegas are within walking distance.
FTFY.
Where you can pick up malt liquor and chips. New York (for example) has an ongoing problem with 'food deserts'. Where poor local residents can't get access to healthier produce. The bigger supermarkets with better food selection have large underground parking garages. Because while it's possible to economically operate a corner Quickie-Mart for beer and smokes on each block, the better stocked stores aren't viable that close together. Also, bodega prices tend to be much higher since they are guarantee
Re: (Score:2)
As a rather extreme counter-example (from a different county), I've got five supermarkets within walking distance from my flat and according to a sign on the currently being remodeled premises which a giant electronics chain recently vacated, a sixth one i
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Yes, it's much more convenient to shop every day, instead of once a week.
Yes it is. There are three supermarkets I literally walk past the door of twice a day every day on the way to and from work.
I mean, I LOVE standing in line at the grocery store every day!
Good job they don't have long queues then.
Also, supermarket deliveries actually work really well in some countries. I mean it's so much more convenient to drive to the supermarket, wander round trying to find everything, waiting for an incompetent ba
Re: (Score:2)
Or for someone trying to feed a family of 4 without going broke.
Really, your argument is that people should be as inefficient as possible, at least with their food budgets. It's not a very good argument.
Re: (Score:3)
Because when you have six bags (not plastic bags, paper bags) full or groceries, it's so easy and convenient to hop on a bus or get on the subway with your haul.
WTF?
Why would you intentionally use the most perversely unusable type of bag? That's your fault for being a muppet. Either buy some god strong reusable bags (like just about everyone in the UK owns now since they started charging for disposable bags) or get yourself one of those wheelie shopping bags for a tenner. I've fund a big one of those holds
Internet tells me there's a 60 hour wait (Score:2)
buy some god strong reusable bags
Even if you are washing reusable bags every time in order not to spread bacteria to your food, carrying 6+ reusable bags of groceries home on the bus once a week is almost as inconvenient as paper bags. City transit offers inadequate cargo space, and other transit users cast shame on "shebagging" riders.
Also if you needs tons, don't you have grocery deliveries where you live?
At a substantial surcharge.
Are you living in 2000 or 2020 here? There are both websites and apps which work [public transit schedules] out for you.
And at certain parts of the year, these websites and apps display a response to the effect "There is a 60 hour wait for the next bus."[1] The Citilink bus service in Fort Wayne, In
Re: (Score:2)
Even if you are washing reusable bags every time in order not to spread bacteria to your food,
I don't, but I'm not irrationally worried abut germs.
carrying 6+ reusable bags of groceries home on the bus once a week is almost as inconvenient as paper bags.
No it isn't because the handles don't fall and they don't split. Also, get a wheelie bag.
City transit offers inadequate cargo space, and other transit users cast shame on "shebagging" riders.
I love it when people tell me that I can't possibly do something
Re:You first (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds like you've never visited Barcelona or anywhere like it. In central Barcelona (where this experiment is being performed) you're never more than 500 meters away from a subway station. That's a 5 minute walk, worst case. The vast majority of people, therefore, use transit to get to jobs and stores. Barcelona and places like it are among the most desirable places to live and work in the world (as proven by the real estate prices which are higher than practically anywhere else). This plan is just doing
If you read the summary (not even the article!) you would know that this plan allows for vehicles within the "superblock", just limited to speeds of =6mph. So you would indeed get your couch delivered to your door. Similarly, the tiny minority of people who can't walk 5 minutes from transit, due to disability, will be able to take cars or taxis to their door.
Most people, it seems, value the quiet and lack of pollution that comes from not having motor vehicles zooming by all the time. That is in fact one of the main reasons people move out of cities to rural areas (despite the lesser job and social/cultural possibilities there). Even in major cities, property prices are generally higher - not lower - on streets with less traffic. This plan is just extending that desirable quietness and safety to more parts of the city, while keeping the advantages of their central locations.
Re:You first (Score:5, Interesting)
Do they, though? Manufacturers come along and introduce EVs which drive quietly and without exhaust, and what's one of the first things that governments do? Mandate constant noisemakers at low speeds to mimic ICEs (and worse, only apply them to EVs rather than quiet ICEs). It's reminiscent of the old red flag traffic laws [wikipedia.org], also introduced in the name of safety.
(For the record, I have no objection to active pedestrian detection and alert systems, ideally with directional sound. But I have no interest in giving up this hard-won battle against noise pollution so simply as to mandate always-on noise)
Counterpoint: rents tend to be significantly higher at properties that have parking access nearby than ones that don't.
Property prices also tend to be higher at properties that meet counterpurposes goals: being "near everything", but also having lots of open space around them and which give a feeling of being sparsely populated.
Net summary: humans don't like traffic near them, but they also really like being able to get from point to point over long distances easily, quickly (net speed, incl. stops), and cheaply. They want to be in the middle of nowhere, but rapidly be able to get to the middle of everywhere.
Re: (Score:3)
what's one of the first things that governments do? Mandate constant noisemakers at low speeds to mimic ICEs (and worse, only apply them to EVs rather than quiet ICEs)
The point is for EVs to be loud enough for pedestrians to hear, and no louder. ICEs are already at that level of loudness.
Counterpoint: rents tend to be significantly higher at properties that have parking access nearby than ones that don't.
All the properties in this plan have parking access. It's just underground.
Re: (Score:2)
Above 30 km/h I believe, most of the noise comes from tires, so electric cars going at 50 km/h are almost as noisy. Carrer d'Aragó full of EVs or ICE vehicles is going to be almost as noisy. Plus newer EVs in Europe *have* to make noise for safety reasons:
"the sound to be generated by the AVAS should be a continuous sound that provides information to the pedestrians and vulnerable road users of a vehicle in operation. The sound should be easily indicative of vehicle behaviour and should sound s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do they, though? Manufacturers come along and introduce EVs which drive quietly and without exhaust, and what's one of the first things that governments do? Mandate constant noisemakers at low speeds to mimic ICEs (and worse, only apply them to EVs rather than quiet ICEs). It's reminiscent of the old red flag traffic laws [wikipedia.org], also introduced in the name of safety.
There is a lot of difference in safety and noise level from "zooming" and driving at walking speed. The EV noisemakers are only for speeds lower than 20km/h, where ICEs are quiet and EVs are almost silent. Passed that speed there is not much difference between EVs and ICEs as rolling noise dominate.
Subway: Eat fresh (Score:2)
In central Barcelona (where this experiment is being performed) you're never more than 500 meters away from a subway station.
Then this experiment could work for a city of 5 million residents like Barcelona. It wouldn't work nearly as well in cities not quite as big. In my home city of 0.2 million, for example, the subway station only sells sandwiches and doesn't actually have any underground trains that one can board.
Barcelona and places like it are among the most desirable places to live and work in the world (as proven by the real estate prices which are higher than practically anywhere else).
Then the question becomes how to design car-free experiments that work for people who live in a lower cost-of-living city until such time as they have earned enough to afford moving to a city as dense as Barcelona.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As someone who lives in the midwest, I say you big cities should go for it.
It will hasten the collapse of ultra-dense cities, as businesses can't get customers and residents become trapped to walking distance.
I think it is a matter of perspective. Many who are completely urbanized already will probably see this sort of thing as wonderful. They are already in a not terribly mobile situation. Few own cars. Their world is mostly the size of where the bus routes or subways end in total size.
That would be a nightmare to me - As I suspect it would be for you. It's a huge loss of freedom that I certainly won't accept, and making it even more difficult to have personal mobility is a non-starter.
How does a business get deliveries to restock when you have to hand carry every single item for 3 blocks? How does a full semi load of produce move?
Our local campus wen
Re: (Score:2)
I love how people post logical deduction based on the Axiom that, say, London doesn't exist.
It will hasten the collapse of ultra-dense cities,
Like London which is collapsing to the tune of -120,000 per year (yes that's a double negative, it's growing).
as businesses can't get customers and residents become trapped to walking distance.
Slashdot: disproving the existence of buses, trains, undergruond metro systems an trams since 1997. Because logic dictates they cannot exist therefore the don't.
People with phys
Re: (Score:2)
Barcelona has exceptions for delivery vehicles early in the morning, before most people are out of bed.
Or they did on the street we stayed on when we visited a couple of years ago. By the time we were up, it was pedestrian only.
More like "they don't therefore they can't" (Score:2)
Slashdot: disproving the existence of buses, trains, undergruond metro systems an trams since 1997. Because logic dictates they cannot exist therefore the don't.
That or its (English-speaking) users have experience of living in (largely U.S.) cities where "trains, undergruond metro systems an trams" do not exist, and buses have limited coverage and limited hours and days of the week of operation. If it were profitable for the operator of a transit service to expand service, it would have done so. So it's not "they cannot exist therefore they don't" as much as its inverse: "they do not exist therefore they cannot."
Re: (Score:2)
That or its (English-speaking) users have experience of living in (largely U.S.) cities where "trains, undergruond metro systems an trams" do not exist, and buses have limited coverage and limited hours and days of the week of operation.
It's well known that public transportation sucks in the US. On the other hand this is an article about Spain. If people haven't realised that public transport works well elsewhere and yet feel the need to weigh in, then they're being intentionally, loudly ignorant which is
Re: (Score:2)
as businesses can't get customers and residents become trapped to walking distance
I'm not sure what you qualify as walking distance, but as someone who lives at the outskirts of my city and has 10km to get to the city centre I can say with 100% certainty that I have *never* driven a car into the city despite going in on an almost daily basis.
I do often drive to the outskirts of neighboring cities and use their public infrastructure to get in as well.
People with physical limitations, who can't walk several blocks to just get to a vehicle, will be the first to leave.
Most people I know with physical limitations don't use cars at all. They use other forms of transport for the disabled be it scooters, buggi
Handcycle conversion; cycling in rain or snow (Score:2)
[Instead of cars, people with mobility impairments] use other forms of transport for the disabled be it scooters, buggies or a popular one here, attracting a driving wheel to a wheelchair and peddling with their arms.
I'm interested. Do you have a link to articles about or photos of this sort of wheelchair conversion? Or even a name I can search for on DuckDuckGo?
Why do you buy groceries for the week instead of getting them fresh on a daily basis?
Because the bodega within walking distance of home doesn't have fresh fruit. Also because the small supermarket 2 km away has noticeably higher prices for everything than the larger supermarket 4 km away.
I go shopping every day [...] You can easily fit a large family's supply of food, or even a medium sized party's supply on a bicycle
What gear do you use for keeping yourself and your groceries dry during moderate to heavy rain or during snow?
Re: (Score:2)
In Japan, for example, since everyone grew up use to walking to the nearest train/bus stop then having to walk a bit more to get to the final destination; they seemingly stay fit and mobile into their 80s/90s with little issues. You would also be surprised how much can fit inside a 1km diameter region. Most people do not have cars and/
Re: (Score:2)
[...] residents become trapped to walking distance.
I grew up in a rural area and moved to New York City. One thing that surprised me was that everything I needed was in walking distance--I didn't feel "trapped" by not having a car. Between walking and the subway, everything I needed was pretty convenient. And it was certainly more convenient than a car in a big city--paying for parking or parking on the street and having to move it on a regular basis.
You mention having a couch delivered and such and I agree. But, personally, I'm not buying furniture ev
Re: (Score:2)
I'm one block from Main Street in Buffalo as I type this. They have since allowed limited driving on Main street, but it really doesn't matter. Everyone parks in a structure or metered street parking anyways and there are plenty of parking structures that let out on Main Street. There never was a group of people that drive down Main Street, see the businesses, and stop at one. So, the removal of the vehicle traffic really didn't prevent any commerce.
Downtown Buffalo certainly isn't the model of a thriving c
what? (Score:2)
emergency serviced limited to 6mph?
nope.. no thank you.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"Essential" vehicles are limited to 10kmph. Think delivery vans for stocking businesses.
You'll have to excuse him ... (Score:5, Funny)
Why do merchants worry so much? (Score:2)
Re:Why do merchants worry so much? (Score:5, Informative)
Depends how dense your city is. In a city like Barcelona, there are likely 3 or 4 pharmacies within walking distance of you [google.com]. So you have the same variety of options.
Eugene Mall Car Free Zone Failed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Eugene Mall Car Free Zone Failed (Score:4, Insightful)
Possibly because Barcelona has 12 times the population density (and thus more than 12 times the pedestrian traffic and transit service) that Eugene does?
quiet, pollution (Score:2)
One of the big motivation for Barcelona to try the superblock idea is to reduce the level of noise and the level of pollution.
Outlawing internal-combusion-driven buses and trucks will solve much of that.
I used to live on a busy street in a city of 100,000 people. Other than the emergency vehicles -- which need to still be allowed unfettered high-speed access through superblocks -- by FAR the largest polluters by visible emissions and audible noise were the buses and trucks that used our busy street as a th
Re: (Score:2)
This. I live in a city of 400,000, in a busy avenue. The noisiest vehicles are, by far, buses. A few trucks here and there too, and some old cars that shouldn't be allowed to be in streets at this point. Cars, save for the idiot with the loud exhaust, don't make noise. In fact, in the dead of the night, all I can hear is the sound of tires hitting the concrete street. And in summer, the radiator fans.
New buses are significantly quieter, but still make noise. And after a couple of years of fixes that basical
Trying to make cities seem rural? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Obviously you haven't been to Spain?
Even country towns are fairly densely populated, because Spaniards, unlike Americans, etc, like to live near other people. They have a thing called a social and family life.
Social interaction is considered the biggest indicator of longevity, hence why Spaniards live much longer than Americans (and they aren't all fat either like Americans)
Re: (Score:2)
But that's beside the point. Are Spain's small towns as crowded, noisy, polluted and busy as the big cities? Is there as much traffic or less?
Re: (Score:3)
Take a look at Prague with google maps, and zoom in on some of the rectangular looking structures. What you'll see in lots of places looks like a rectangular apartment complex with a forest in the center. It seems that people have figured out a way to wall off a piece of the country for themselves in the middle of a city.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What you are arguing is a societal issue.
Go visit Tokyo if you don't believe me.
Re: (Score:2)
"Superblocks is a radical plan to reclaim the streets from the noise and pollution of traffic..."
Trash is not the issue at hand. I'm sorry if you misunderstood.
I wouldn't use Seattle... (Score:2)
I wouldn't use Seattle as any comparison for how to run a city. Please just look at the city streets and all the garbage, tents, and feces.... Oh I guess they already are on the way to shutting down the city streets!! My bad.
That's not new in EU (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are probably too fat to walk 500 metres anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
>Lost 14 lbs in 5 weeks last summer with Nutrisystem and 90 minutes of elliptical every day for those 5 weeks.
Lost 70 lbs in 3 months by ceasing to eat plants. Just Meat, eggs, fish, dairy. No exercise needed, although I started up once I wasn't fat because it's a lot more fun that way.
Do whatever works for you.
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose there aren't many ham radio operators in BCN, most people there, including the 71 y.olds prefer to walk somewhere and talk to people face to face.
and 14lbs after 5 weeks of 90 mins cardio per day is pretty crap, maybe ditch the fad diet next time and eat some real food.