gerv 

I sometimes get caught in that "bikes would do the trick" mode.

But then I run into some fact that makes me realize how intensely difficult it is to make a city livable and workable.

I found this article on copenhagenize.com (a great blog...)...https://nextcity.org/features/view/c...e-cities-model
So even in a bicycle-oriented paradise like Copenhagen, there are big issues. How do we resolve them?

chewybrian 

It seems next to impossible to 'fix' existing cities, with the possible exception of someplace like Detroit, where you can realistically afford to demolish and rebuild large areas.

If you were making a new city, I would have a few suggestions:

Make more one way streets to save space and costs.

Design smaller yards offset by neighborhood parks. Would you give up 10 feet off your back yard in exchange for a large park nearby? Front yards, in particular, seem like wasted space in many cases--seldom used. Another ten feet there would add up quickly. Common walls between units minimizes building and heating and cooling costs, and saves a lot of space, too. Again, some would consider it a loss, but the room and money saved could easily be used to create more common green spaces and bike and pedestrian trails.

You don't have to make laws controlling people's choices, but some tax incentives could be used to push people in those directions. Larger lots create extra costs for the town or county, so pass on that cost to those who still want the big lots.

Mixing zoning spaces in a checkerboard pattern could help to minimize trip distances, which in turn could mean fewer roads and lower costs to taxpayers.

Cul de sac communities are the norm here, yet few are connected to each other. It's fine to funnel the cars back out to the main streets, but the foot and cycle traffic should be able to cross to the next neighborhood across the drainage ditch or through the wildlife area (kinda Florida specific here). In this way, you could travel across town on foot or by bike with only an occasional crossing of a busy street, ideally by over or under pass.

That's all that jumps to mind. Of course, in my ideal town, the bike paths would go through every park and connect every neighborhood, and allow access to the back side of businesses in the commercial areas. Free underpasses for everyone!

ironwood

Encourage neighborhoods and smaller governments within the city.

Walter S

Scale up by stopping growth? Hmmm...

Rollfast

We have covered this topic many, many times and asking the question again won't change a lot.

The answer is still that you'll have to adapt and see multi-modal solutions in some cases. Perhaps you should find a way to live closer to your job and resources or find a job that support distance work like information technology based work.

Even without that, places like New York City were built of many neighborhoods once before the freeways came in and disassembling that system has been done before within the structures of modern cities. It's not impossible, although it's also not a 'no-brainer'.

I-Like-To-Bike

Anyone think that "advertising" fooled the local inhabitants into giving up such "human-scaled" car free "dense" neighborhoods of NYC; not just for rich folks or upscale college grad singles and childless couples too! Lots of family living. With work and shopping so close, lots of work at home piece-work too.

gerv 

@I-Like-To-Bike, great photos.. reminds me I have to check the washing machine.

I-Like-To-Bike

Hope you weren't tricked by GE or Whirlpool advertising into the purchase of "expensive" unnecessary laundry appliances when there are energy saving substitutes available that our ancestors used back in the good old days.

B. Carfree

In the '70s, as Davis was committing to the bicycle, it approved a development called Village Homes. This development was largely houses with shared walls (unusual at the time in a suburban-style city), extremely small yards with a ban on fencing and tiny, narrow streets that did not connect. However, it had large public parks and other open spaces such that the development had the same number of units per acre as the standard suburban developments. It also had complete connectivity for bikes and pedestrians. It worked so well that there were several poor-man's versions approved in the '80s, one of which my sister in law lives in. Her daughter is just now buying her first house, coincidentally in Village Homes. I remember the Queen of England visiting Village Homes back in the '80s. I guess Tahoe and other nicer nearby places were all full up for the day.

B. Carfree

If one looks at the space given over to cars and car storage, there's a lot of room to add density in American cities if we simply take some of that space away. I was amazed to see developments go in back in the '90s that allotted over half the space to cars. In my opinion, such an allocation is simply insane.

Of course, if we densify without taking steps to reduce car numbers, we are going to see an unrideable environment. I have seen locales that doubled the number of residences and saw an increase of 1.95 in car traffic volume. That's a recipe for zero bikes, which is the opposite of a sustainable built environment.

I-Like-To-Bike

"We simply take it away"; eh" Care to expand on who is "we" and a proposed plan for simply taking away from others whatever "we" want in order to create a lot of room to add density for "us"?

Seattle Forrest

I want to live in a dense environment. There's culture, there are other people, there are more parks than I can count, walking is a great way to get around, etc. I could go on for a long time but I won't bore you.

Anyway until people stop enjoying sex, "stop growing" isn't really an option anyone can plan on.

Ekdog

I agree! And so do millions of people all around the world who live in big cities. Don't be fooled by those who post from the middle of some cornfield and would have you believe that cosmopolitan folks are dying to join them; the fact of the matter is that Millennials Prefer Cities to Suburbs and Subways to Driveways.

Is birth control not an option in your area?

kickstart

What makes you think people who live in the country want those who live in the he city to move out?

Ekdog

What makes you think I think that?

Walter S

There's probably more people in the city thinking the ones in the country should move, instead of consuming more natural resources per capita than the city folk do.

kickstart

Because it makes no more sense than what you stated.

Ekdog

I agree. Your statement makes no sense. As to what I wrote, try rereading it.

kickstart

Maybe, maybe not, but an agrarian society built around small dispersed communities would be more sustainable in the long run. Large, densely populated cities that can't sustain themselves are the root of all the issues.

Darth Lefty 

Can you ride your bike in the arcology?

kickstart

But making claims contrary to the truth make sense to you.

kickstart

Isn't that what fat bikes are for?

Seattle Forrest

The human population just keeps going up, even with birth control!

Mobile 155

It may or may not seem obvious but at some point as population increases you only need have three choices, build up, build down or build out. Humans are not like compressed gas that can be forced into a smaller area with more pressure. As in the OPs example to keep the space between people like it is you have to make a choice when you run out of room. At some point as you add people you go from dense living to prison like living. Some of us simply are not comfortable with living in constant contact with others.

The he extream to dense living is just outside of Nirobi Kenya Kibera. I have been there and touching walls and even common roofs do not make for cultured living.

When I was young my dad moved us to Seattle and I started to warm to a more compact life than we had in Bellview with our large home and big yards. Until I got married and we started thinking about children and healthy babies. My wife and I read just about everything but we knew instinctively urban living was more polluted living. Today we have studies to back up that claim.

Indoor Environmental Differences between Inner City and Suburban Homes of Children with Asthma

B. Carfree

Those streets that are cluttered with private vehicle storage are public property (duh!). There's no right to store things there. It is a privilege granted by our local governing bodies. Since those governing bodies are chosen at elections, the "we" would be those of us who vote, assuming we get someone elected who is willing to make better use of public real estate than simply handing it over for car storage. Similarly, we can take advantage of the proven concept of induced demand, only run it in reverse, and remove extraneous travel lanes.

How many times have people argued that we can't have significant amounts of walking and cycling in our cities like what exists in Europe simply because our cities were largely built out with cars in mind and thus have very wide right-of-ways? This can change. I'm not saying we have anywhere near the political will to do so (yet), just that the space is there when we are ready to use it more productively.