Dense public transportation sorta fixes the last mile problem. And buying local fixes the Walmart/carrefour problem. I buy groceries every two or three days, and the grocery shops are always at walking distance from home.
“Sorta fixes” ain’t really a fix. And not everyone has the time or ability to go shopping every two or three days. Nor are grocery stores within walking distance for everyone.
That’s the thing. Car orientation shapes how places look and function, but so does tranist orientation. What you consider a downside is actually driving that. Because transit focuses movement along hubs and spokes, this enables walking oriented infrastructure. And walking oriented stores at transit stops enable fast shopping. You can easily shop even daily when all it takes is maybe 5-10 additional minutes on your way home. In car oriented hypermarkets you can’ even make it to the back of the store in that time.
Thing is, we’ve got cities built for cars. The only thing removing cars does in those cities is make everyone miserable. Fixing that would require tearing those cities down to bedrock and starting over from scratch.
You’re clearly not paying attention. Plenty of cities have successfully switched to more walking-focused infrastructure and it hardly requires tearing them down and starting over from scratch. That’s a bit of an overreaction.
The Netherlands have not torn down their cities to the ground even if their cities were pretty car centric in the late 1960s. Of course If you cry for the failed city highway in Utrecht for example that has been replaced with a gracht and scaled down to a regular street, that transformation is a catastrophe for you.
Cities change over time, if you change them away from being car only, that doesn’t need dramatic sudden changes but can be achieved with gradual changes over time.
Also LA has not torn down or destroyed much of its city, just because it has rebuilt a rail transit backbone again (far from perfect or complete but quite substantial already)
Dense public transportation sorta fixes the last mile problem. And buying local fixes the Walmart/carrefour problem. I buy groceries every two or three days, and the grocery shops are always at walking distance from home.
“Sorta fixes” ain’t really a fix. And not everyone has the time or ability to go shopping every two or three days. Nor are grocery stores within walking distance for everyone.
That’s the thing. Car orientation shapes how places look and function, but so does tranist orientation. What you consider a downside is actually driving that. Because transit focuses movement along hubs and spokes, this enables walking oriented infrastructure. And walking oriented stores at transit stops enable fast shopping. You can easily shop even daily when all it takes is maybe 5-10 additional minutes on your way home. In car oriented hypermarkets you can’ even make it to the back of the store in that time.
There are also people with mobility limitations.
Thing is, we’ve got cities built for cars. The only thing removing cars does in those cities is make everyone miserable. Fixing that would require tearing those cities down to bedrock and starting over from scratch.
You’re clearly not paying attention. Plenty of cities have successfully switched to more walking-focused infrastructure and it hardly requires tearing them down and starting over from scratch. That’s a bit of an overreaction.
The Netherlands have not torn down their cities to the ground even if their cities were pretty car centric in the late 1960s. Of course If you cry for the failed city highway in Utrecht for example that has been replaced with a gracht and scaled down to a regular street, that transformation is a catastrophe for you.
Cities change over time, if you change them away from being car only, that doesn’t need dramatic sudden changes but can be achieved with gradual changes over time.
Also LA has not torn down or destroyed much of its city, just because it has rebuilt a rail transit backbone again (far from perfect or complete but quite substantial already)