this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
705 points (97.7% liked)

Fuck Cars

9666 readers
24 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A new housing development outside Phoenix is looking towards European cities for inspiration and shutting out the cars. So far residents love it - The Guardian

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 102 points 1 year ago (14 children)

I really like it, I got excited. But ...can we please build some for sale units in walkable areas and not just rental units? This live-by-subscription bullshit is out of hand

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Sensitivezombie@lemmy.zip 46 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I would love to see more and more car free cities and other urban sprawling, but I have to say, this centralized business model where this developer is providing all the amenities, passes for the near by rail, paying rent to this developer, basically everything goes through them, they even had an app for the community, this is not a viable solution. What happens when this company is not able to sustain the spending or goes bankrupt, or worse sells majority share to an equity company. A decentralized model that goes through local government is a better option and not through for profit company. Even better option is to start from city center not a separate community on the edge of the city. I know what I'm saying sounds impossible in America, and with lobbying buy auto makers and other large corporate overlords, it probably is impossible. Social change can bring about the difference.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why aren’t we building neighborhoods like this in every city in the country?

[–] Cockmaster6000@sh.itjust.works 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Old NIMBYs want barren suburbs and they vote

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One thing I’ve noticed is that most American cities contain huge, populous suburbs that exert strong political control over the urban core. So in my city the actual dense urban neighborhoods only get one of five votes on the city council (let alone the county where we have straight up nazis on board). This results in an inability to implement many of the policies that we here in the city know will be beneficial, solely because residents in the other 4 suburban districts want to maintain their ability to drive through and park at desirable downtown amenities. In my opinion this represents a failure of democracy because our neighborhoods have very little say in rule making or development even in our immediate surroundings.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago (5 children)

where.. where..

where... fuck! Phoenix

[–] floppade@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Technically Tempe, one of the most bicyclist friendly areas of the country.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Orbit79@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Great idea, but they are taking it too far. People should be allowed to have a car, but it should be parked at the edge of the neighborhood and only be allowed to come in for loading and unloading of heavy things.

That way you have all the benefits and almost no inconvenience at all. We have that in many places in Denmark and it works great.

[–] davetapley@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

People should be allowed to have a car, but it should be parked at the edge of the neighborhood and only be allowed to come in for loading and unloading of heavy things

That's exactly what this development is?

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would take it one step further and say there should probably be small (single lane) roads that run through the neighborhood or an underground carpark with a few freight elevators that run directly into the buildings. Why? For a same reason you mentioned that they should allow cars. If you get a new fridge, imagine trying to walk that sucker from the street to your apartment. You probably wouldn't need very many freight elevators or access roads to significantly decrease the amount of effort required to get bulky and/or heavy objects to your apartment while still maintaining the general feel and spirit of a car-less community.

[–] chocoladisco@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)

You really don't need new fridges that often, the couple times you do just put them on boards on casters and shove. If you can't: ask your neighbors, it's a good bonding experience.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] spudwart@spudwart.com 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There's nothing more American than taking ideas to their extreme end.

But, it's also not surprising to see this behavior given that it's a response to the other extreme of cars in every space, in every location.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Great to see, except Phoenix is not going to be livable fairly soon due to climate change. This project needs to be done in the Midwest.

[–] fireweed@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Where in the Midwest? Much of the Mississippi River region is predicted to have some really nasty wet bulb temps. But areas around the Great Lakes (maybe not Chicago) sound like a safe bet. But yeah, when I first heard of this project I was shocked they put it in Tempe of all places.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago (15 children)

Walkable towns are better objectively.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Hello_there@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

Interested in going there to look at it. But I have no reason to go to Phoenix.

[–] scytale@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://culdesac.com/ if you actually want to see pictures of the place. The article just has a bunch of close up photos of walls and people.

[–] lemann@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

Ughh I love it. Can't wait for urbanist youtube to dive into the details, and follow up on how well it works out.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

Yeah, thats why theyre so expensive, lots of people want it and very few places offer it.

[–] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

This sounds quite a bit like what it was like when I lived in New York City- I didn't need a car to live (* couldn't afford to park it), everything I needed was available either by walking or transit (or riding my bike).

With that said, I am suspicious of venture-capital-funded re-inventions of this model- who gets to say what amenities and concessions are available, and who profits from fulfilling the kinds of needs a neighborhood like that has?

NYC has a lot of built-in history (and with it, institutions developed from the lessons learned, like rent control to protect renters and such) and if those kinds of protections aren't included in this model, I would be willing to bet there will be abuses and problems. Building a simulacrum of an established model but where you own all the governing institutions seems... a bit of a red flag, no matter how well-intentioned it might be.

[–] Haywire@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

I would live there if I could afford it.

[–] floppade@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I think it's cool in theory, but the area is having a housing accessibility crisis, and it seems to be part of that problem and uses this format to hide that.

load more comments
view more: next ›