Even people in NYC own cars, especially those outside of Manhattan. I am not going to forgo having a car in Miami-Dade because even if we do adopt good public transit, it cannot possibly service every area to the extent that it is reasonable to not own a car. I’m not going to avoid driving to the Redlands for Knaus Berry cinnamon rolls, or avoid driving to the Chinese hot pot place in Broward because I want to be a soyboi cuck that wants to take an incredibly long bus ride because I want to LARP as a New Yorker.
Stuff that is a 20 minute drive which are not little treats like I mentioned, but are necessary, would be annoying to use for public transit. It’s a pain in the ass to do grocery shopping without your car, etc.
There’s A LOT of good reasons to own a car, and places with great transit know this, they know people want their own cars, and that is why they do all kinds of taxation, registration, tolls, etc to keep you from owning one.
Face it, cars are amazing. Not amazing enough to stifle good public transportation, but even people in Tokyo want and own cars.
Did you not read my post ya goober? I'm not saying ban cars and make everyone walk everywhere, just that we need things like congestion pricing and public transit to deal with the problem of traffic in the metro area. In fact I specifically said many households will still want to own cars even as they replace some trips with walking or public transit. Some households might not downsize their cars at all but save on gas over time by replacing some car trips here and there.
Yes cars are cool, they are the most expensive and arguably most sophisticated consumer good most Americans will own with the possible exception of smartphones. In fact I actually have to haul stuff for work and given you haven't mentioned anything like that I almost certainly need a car more than you do so yes I still want high quality public roads and I'll happily pay a reasonable set congestion pricing to get more office drones out of the way during rush hour if I need to haul something somewhere.
You talk about taxation and tolls but if anything cars are heavily subsidized in the US as tolls and taxes associated with cars don't cover the maintenance of roads but are politically radioactive to raise or implement. Just leaning a bit more into things like congestion pricing, tolls, and parking fees would have some effect on driver behavior. No one is saying you have to be a soyboi cuck or whatever nonsense you're worried about there. If you insist on driving your car and paying congestion pricing, tolls, and parking then yeah drive your two ton car to carry half a dozen cinnamon rolls or Chinese take out if you want. But other people should be able to take the bus and walk to these places without worry of being run over.
Pedestrian deaths are on the rise and we know cars have other externalities like pollution compared to more efficient modes of transportation like busses and trains. Not to mention suburban sprawl does not generate enough tax revenue to pay for its own infrastructure so in the end it ends up being subsidized by the dense part so the cities that generate more tax revenue. So its more dangerous both immediately(MVCs) and in the long run(air pollution) in addition to being most costly. Cities should not be neutral on this question, we need quality roads and mass transit so that those who need or want the roads can use them
As far as personal vehicles go, we should be building infrastructure for e-bikes and golf carts so young people and the elderly can still move around the city without endangering others or themselves. I am certain most cyclists would rather get hit by a 1,000lb golf cart going 20mph than a 2,000lb car going 40mph. This is not exactly just theory, I'm sure you know of the suburb in Georgia that does this. Its a great solution for places that aren't dense enough for high frequency mass transit and you can still go "wherever you want whenever you want"
It is not impossible in a theoretical level, obviously, but you have to ask yourself, if the benefits are so obvious, but Americans aren’t interested, what are the obstacles?
I mentioned some. Yes culture is one but part of it is the deliberate policy choice to subsidize cars. The other is that the whole public system for building large infrastructure projects has decayed due to a combination of laws making it easy to sue and drag out projects by citizens and unions that make the building and maintenance of these projects inefficient. For example unions in the Northeast will resist automation technology that is standard practice in Europe because it means less manpower and thus less union guys sucking on the public teat. Note the dockworkers union strike insisted on delaying or preventing the adoption of automation tech because it would mean fewer workers are needed. Lots of that type of fuckery is afoot in transit projects as well. If these projects were completed on time and within the budget I think Americans would feel differently about them.
What would you do? Tear down your cities and rebuild them so that everything is within a 30 min walk?
We have exactly the same issue with traffic and congestion here as your big cities, all caused by the fact 90% of our towns and cities evolved from hamlets 1000 years old.
In London parking space are sold for as much as a house would cost in Liverpool or Sheffield.
You don't need to tear anything down, invest in the proper infrastructure and let the free market take care of the rest. In general there will be two ends of the spetrum when it comes to projects that shift our metro areas from car dependent to pedestrian friendly. There's big projects by big developers who might buy up a dying mall and tear it down for a large mixed use, car-lite development where apartments are located near shops and the buildings are connected by smaller paths meant for golf carts and bikes.
Then there's the small developer hired by a homeowner to renovate their own house into a multifamily and/or mixed use dwelling. Being able to operate your business out of your home is a great convenience but as of now its illegal to do so in most of the US if you want to open up a service oriented business like an eatery or grocer. Allow that kind of thing and people will invest in those kinds of ventures.
Yeah, I think a good idea would be to expand the metro rail, and make the city of Miami itself a more dense, transit friendly place.
There’s no point trying it out in the suburbs west of Miami. Certainly I think we need to plant the seeds of better housing plans for all of Miami-Dade, but I know the municipalities full of Karen’s wouldn’t want it.
Why not though? You mention the Redlands, part of the charm of things like Knausberry Farm is that a family can buy a large property, grow their own produce, and then open up an eatery to sell it directly to consumers. If you allow that at a small scale so that folks can operate grocers and cafes from their suburban homes it would mean more such amenities within walking distance for more residents. Replace sidewalks with multi-use paths allowing for bikes and golf carts for shorter distances and you could create the incentives for local small pedestrian oriented businesses to survive if not thrive.