[so33]

City Observatory is a publication that lobbies for urbanism. So you have to take that into context when considering their argument.

Their argument is not that removing roads doesn't reduce quality of life – their argument is that cities _adapt_ and that tearing away infrastructure for cars in favor of housing and "human-scale" neighborhoods won't necessarily result in doom and gloom.

Of course removing a highway will result in some temporary issues. But cities are living organisms and they can adapt. America is after all a free-market economy. If a road trip to a faraway store becomes inconvenient, a new store will open in due time. If it becomes impractical to drive around, neighborhoods will reconfigure to serve customers within walking distance. And if a hypothetical highway closing permanently were to cause single-car commutes to become impractical, companies will respond by moving offices, encouraging telework, and subsidizing public transit commutes.

We all think we need our cars, but somehow the majority of commuters in cities outside the United States manages to commute via public transit just fine.

[ken]

This is basically the Invisible Hand, and I don't see it. Seattle (at least anywhere within 30 minutes of downtown) is being taken over by tech workers making huge salaries. They're building condos, not stores. The stores that are being built are high-revenue specialty stores, like cannabis.

When transportation becomes impractical, it first becomes impractical from the bottom (like artists and service workers) -- the rich will always find a way, whether it's paying hundreds of dollars a month (no exaggeration) for parking, or using delivery services for every meal.

This isn't causing grocery stores to be built and public transit to be improved. It's pushing everyone making less than $100K to pack up and move 30 miles away. High-paid tech workers often get subsidized transit, but most other jobs do not.

Seattle is turning into Manhattan, only without any of the services (everything shuts down at night!) that allow Manhattan to work. Even apart from the temporary 99 closure, this is not sustainable.

[MrMorden]

It's illegal to build multi-family housing in 95% of Seattle's residential area; that's not a very invisible hand.

[seanmcdirmid]

Having lived American and carless in both a European and Asian city, it really is a trade off.

Public transportation is a nice to have, especially getting to the airport. Inner city transport is still a PITA, I prefered biking (Lausanne) or taxis (Beijing) to maintain my quality of life. “If I had to” it would work for sure, but it will still mean giving something up vs personal transportation.

[closeparen]

The zoning reform that would legalize compact mixed-use neighborhoods could happen right now if people wanted it. One of the main objections is that car infrastructure is already oversaturated. After reducing road capacity, proposals to i.e. legalize shops and offices in currently residential zones would become even less politically viable.