[chroem-]

You can't conduct commerce on a bike. Anti-car policies are also closely coupled with inflated housing prices, since they effectively reduce the available housing supply by requiring employees to commute from within public transit distance of their job.

[narush]

I'd highly recommend reading Confessions of a Recovering Engineer before debating my communication of it. There's a lot more depth to the arguments than the one-sentence summary a novice (me) can give :)

Namely, Strong Towns isn't anti-car! In fact, they explicitly arguing _against_ removing cars from city centers in most cases, for reasons related to those that you mention. If I remember correctly, many towns tried to do this in the 70's or something, and most of them failed; cars are still required in most cases.

That being said, _requiring_ cars and _allowing_ them are very different things. Being anti-bulldozing city blocks to put in 6-lane highways isn't anti-car, it's pro people!

Again, highly recommend engaging with the source material rather than taking my word for it. I've been consuming and parroting (sometimes badly) their content for months - they have been thinking about these questions for literally decades!

[chroem-]

> That being said, _requiring_ cars and _allowing_ them are very different things. Being anti-bulldozing city blocks to put in 6-lane highways isn't anti-car, it's pro people!

That's a semantic argument that doesn't address the real problems that skimping on commuter infrastructure can cause. San Francisco and Seattle have both achieved some of the highest housing prices in the nation thanks to chronic underinvestment in highway infrastructure.

[narush]

Check out the book! You'll get a lot from it I think -- even if it's just a better understand of a different viewpoint :)

[chroem-]

No thank you: I don't care for content that's searching for evidence to support a preconcieved position. There is too much dogma and not enough pragmatism in this space.

I already get enough of their content on HN to recognize dogma when I see it. Quite frankly, it's a circlejerk where everyone else is wrong unless they follow the ST-scene's ideologically-founded prescriptions, and if you post evidence to the contrary you'll often get shouted down.

[multiplegeorges]

> There is too much dogma and not enough pragmatism in this space.

And rejecting other viewpoints out of hand isn't dogmatic?

[cianmm]

Thanks for the book recommendation! I’ve ordered it.

[cianmm]

Anti car policies need to be paired with pro sustainability and livable city policies. You can’t do just one or the other, both need to happen close to simultaneously. We need to strongly discourage car use and encourage sustainable transportation while strongly safeguarding it for those who truly need it, rather than those who just want it.

You can conduct many types of commerce, maybe most types of commerce by bike. You can’t do things like say transporting more than two sofas, or large scale building materials, but if the goal is to reduce car usage as much as possible you’d be surprised how much you can do with a good cargo bike.

With an electric bike most people could easily do a 15km commute within 40 minutes especially where provided safe cycling infrastructure. And with no need to store and transport all of these cars despite them only being used for two hours a day you can use all of that space to build more housing.

People who want to live outside of population centres and thus feel the need to own a car but need to commute into population centres can instead commute to large scale park and ride for public transit. Maybe they can also charge their cars there too, maybe even for free with ownership of a transit pass.

And the best part about strongly discouraging car ownership and usage while strongly encouraging sustainable transport is that it frees up space on the road for busses, emergency services, cyclists, pedestrians, and those who need vehicles for transporting goods or for accessibility reasons.

Finally, consider that housing prices in areas with sustainable transport options might be higher because people want to live where they can safely walk and cycle surrounded by trees and plants. Make that possible for anybody who wants it and we’ll have a cheaper house prices, healthier populations, less climate change, safer societies, and just generally a nicer time.