• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    If you’re from America, it feels “normal” here but something is clearly missing, and if you ever spend any length of time overseas you see exactly what it is and how badly wrong things are here, that it is missing.

    What’s missing is walkability and “third-spaces.” Seriously. We are building our cities wrong as a matter of policy and it is absolutely destroying us.

    See also:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHlpmxLTxpw

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/29/extreme-car-dependency-unhappiness-americans

    https://medium.com/illumination/the-death-of-third-places-and-the-evolution-of-communities-5bbffc01c5e

    https://designdash.com/2024/01/29/the-problem-with-car-centric-cities-for-community-public-health-and-more/

    https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/11/2/the-negative-consequences-of-car-dependency

    https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/03/05/all-the-ways-that-cars-harm-our-communities-well-almost-all

    • Serinus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Europe took a long stroll in that direction too, but there are some major differences. First, most of their cities were established before cars. Second, they’re making more of an active attempt (in some areas) to be walkable again.

      In short, in America 75 years is a long time. In Europe, 75 miles (120km) is a long way.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        55
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        First, most of their cities were established before cars.

        That’s true for America too, and isn’t an excuse. American cities were not built for cars; they were demolished for cars!

        For example, downtown Houston, TX in 1957:

        vs downtown Houston, TX in 1978:

        • ThoGot@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          That’s so absurd it almost doesn’t seem real
          (from my european perspective)

        • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          American cities were not built for cars; they were demolished for cars!

          You can actually see this in any small town that hasn’t seen significant redevelopment since they first paved the streets. Old houses are really close together, small lots, fairly dense development and its only a couple of miles from any part of town to any other part of town, so pretty walkable/bikable by nature

          • Arcka@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            There are some blatant disinformation peddlers on Lemmy and it seems like Grue and yimby should have that reputation because the developed area in the second pic barely overlaps that of the first. How could this be anything but intentional?

            Here’s a side-by-side with as close as I could get with current imagery:

            Identified in each is the 1910 Harris County Courthouse which is many blocks away from the are of the second pic.

            Here’s a comparison of the two and an intermediate perspective from modern imagery. The approximate area of the two pics are outlined in different colors, and a few buildings that are common in all three have been lettered. These are now some of the smaller buildings in the downtown area. It makes sense that lower-density / less-efficient buildings would be replaced with more modern structures (though one of them was replaced with a park 💚🌳). The implication from initial juxtaposition of the original pics that a bunch of tall buildings were torn down to make parking lots is a flat out lie.

            • tetris11@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              This is an amazing analysis. I really appreciate how you located where the empty parking lots were, and now I can see them in both images. Yep, it definitely looks like the downtown area has only developed somewhat and that nothing was torn down.

              I still believe somewhat OPs claim that areas were expanded more for cars than for walkability, but yeah a different set of images would be needed to cement that

          • yimby@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Same location, look for the tall white tower with the vertical stripes and balconies, which is in the middle of the bottom photo. Top photo is slightly more zoomed out.

              • AFallingAnvil@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                Center of the picture,the building at the top of the color picture seems to be the same one as is found 5 or six buildings north west of the building in the center of the picture in black and white