• unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d argue that Amsterdam isn’t a great example, as the infrastructure of that city was largely built before the advent of automobiles, then converted to support a more Americanized design that was vehicle-centric, before finally realizing, “Hey, we’re Dutch, not American, we need more space for our bicycles!”

    If we’re discussing American infrastructure designed in the 20th century, it seems to be pretty difficult to convert because the physical structures of both the transportation infrastructure and the destinations people want to visit are not built densely enough to make going without a car a top tier option for most people.

    I mean this broadly, not to say that there aren’t opportunities to start moving this in the other direction, but emphasizing that changing the focus to downplay the importance of vehicles will be neither quick, cheap, or easy.

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

      I mean… I figure nearly half of us cities were designed before 1900, to some extent anyhow.

      Like st Louis was incorporated in 1822. Plenty of cities were clearly designed before the automobile and then gave up the plot for Robert Moses bullshit.

      • Uranium3006@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        city cores and select transit corridors are going to be where the nice stuff’s built, but there are going to be pockets of car hell for decades. these places will probably start losing value and the farthest out ones will start disappearing to abandonment