drbubb Posted May 19, 2008 Report Share Posted May 19, 2008 ...from the Dubai thread... The UAE has one of the largest carbon footprints per capita in the world ... The opposite of VENICE, a culturally rich, liveable, carfree place: "Public transport is typically a disagreeable and slow substitute for the car. It needs to become a pleasant experience and should attain the average speed of a car in light city traffic. This can be achieved using proven technology, but densely-populated neighborhoods are a prerequisite for rapid mobility and economical public transport. Fortunately, dense cities can also offer a superior quality of life. We should build more carfree cities. Venice, the largest existing example, is loved by almost everyone and is an oasis of peace despite being one of the densest urban areas on earth. We can also convert existing cities to the carfree model over a period of decades." /MORE: http://www.carfree.com/intro_cfc.html Cities which are offer Rich-living for Car-free Residents: + Venice, Sienna ... in Italy + Hong Kong + London - is good, if you can afford to live in a nice neighborhood + New York, and Boston, thanks to their transport systems ... More ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted May 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2008 (here's Harold Bishop's posting in response to mine above): Venice .. What an interesting and contrary comparison with Dubai ! The Dubai Waterfront Project claims to have more miles of canals than Venice. Dubai is building and will commission a railway in 2009. The rapid construction is mostly an overhead type on concrete columns with some underground sections in the city centre. Lots of small stations on the initial 35 km line. The idea is to relieve the terrible traffic congestion in Dubai. Getting poeple out of their cars is a challenge, more so when walking to a station in 45 deg C of humid heat. I believe its more likely win exisiting bus passengers than car drivers. Converting existing cities to car free ? I'm not sure people will dump the car in favour of PT, even if it is a pleasant experience. Only money or severe laws will change habits. Witness the congestion charge in London which has reduced car volume in the city. Car free cities. Are there any other than Venice ? Much of the centre of Amsterdam is walking/bikes/trams/boats and is superb. Birmingham Uk has more canal miles than Venice / http://www.canaljunction.com/canal/birming...navigations.htm ... but is purely a car city ! What an opportunity ! I once wrote to John Prescott when he was in charge of transport and suggested that no new car should be allowed on the roads until another car was removed. In this manner, car population was capped. A sort of contraception for cars. Later, the screw could be turned to 3 new cars for 5 old cars removed, etc. I got a letter back spouting "freedom of choice". Obviously, it was a rubbish idea. I need to read your posts and links on car free living before I write any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member100 Posted May 19, 2008 Report Share Posted May 19, 2008 Maybe the idea is not as mad as it sounds. I did a search on "carfree venice" and found this: http://www.gocarfree.com/whycarfree.htm International Car Free Day: Saturday, Sept. 22, 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------- "What is life like in communities that are not dependent on the automobile, and what are the benefits of such a way of life?" Some of the benefits of reduced auto use to a community? - A More Vibrant Public Realm- Around the world, some of the most beloved places in the world have been Car Free for decades, or even hundreds of years. Venice, Italy, the largest Car Free city on earth, is one of the most popular places in the world to visit - Safer Streets for Children and Public Health- Currently, only 10% of children nationwide regularly walk to school. According to the National Longitudinal Study of Youth, obesity rates among children have doubled in the last 20 years. Additionally, 25% of trips in America are shorter than 1 mile in length, an idea length for walking. Yet nearly three-quarters of those short trips are completed by driving - Improved Air Quality- According to the EPA, the average passenger car driven 12,500 miles annually puts 77 pounds of hydrocarbons, 575 pounds of carbon monoxide, 38 pounds of nitrogen oxides, and 11,450 pounds of carbon dioxide into the air. - Energy Efficiency- Another benefit of having alternatives to auto transportation is energy efficiency. Studies by the American Public Transportation Association estimate that “a bus with as few as seven passengers is more fuel-efficient than the average single-occupant auto used for commuting.” The fuel efficiency of a fully-occupied bus, a common sight in this area, is 6 times greater than that of the average single-occupant auto. +++++++++++++ .... http://venicenotes.blogspot.com/ Venice is the only car-free City left ... there are car-free towns, but any active City on land has been cut up by the automobile. Venice's ocean defenses saved it from a form of transportation whose very infrastructure destroys spaces for people. This is Venice's modern lesson for the world ... after it has taught much else. But how many people, wandering through the City, serene in their safety from the auto, realize that it is possible to reshape Cities in the modern world? How many are inspired to take on the destructive orthodoxy of modern planning, development and architecture? How many are spurred to carve public spaces for people that are protected from the auto, spaces whose very existence will help make cars unecessary ++ ...from almost any viewpoint, Venice is living closer to its 18th-century self, than any other city on the planet. After all, it's the people that matter in a city. In Venice, it's addtionally important that the City is still structured around people's needs. Its leaders, and its particular government, are far less important... if you compare Venice to other cities -- torn apart first by carriages, then trains, then cars -- reducing people to "markets" and "workforces", moving from the community-feeling of a city to a more anonymous "society"-style interaction -- then, I believe, Venice may be the only city still alive. The rest are only neighborhoods straining to stay alive in the midst of economic development that is anti-city, and anti-people. ++ The fabric of ancient civilization ++ Venice is populated entirely by pedestrians and boats ... there are no highways, no skyscrapers, no crosswalks, no streets. And yet, this is a city structure of high civilization Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HollandPark Posted May 19, 2008 Report Share Posted May 19, 2008 Birmingham Uk has more canal miles than Venice / http://www.canaljunction.com/canal/birming...navigations.htm ... but is purely a car city ! What an opportunity ! Stay alert for some Houseboat bargains... (From a new HPC thread ): The Sudden Houseboat Sale Bonanza, Linked to the crash? Anyone else noticed the sudden avalanche of canal and houseboats for sale on Ebay recently? Literally in the space of a month the quantity on sale seems to have multiplied by ten. I'm not imagining this right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knavel Posted May 20, 2008 Report Share Posted May 20, 2008 We should build more carfree cities. Venice, the largest existing example, is loved by almost everyone and is an oasis of peace despite being one of the densest urban areas on earth. We can also convert existing cities to the carfree model over a period of decades." Venice grew up from the time of the Crusades to the Renaissance. Medieval cities are always the best candidates for carfree because they are scaled to man in their proportions and their whimsical layout is so much more organic than the grid system of the USA. Consequently it seems to me impossible to build a carfree city from scratch in this day and age as the scale will be skyscraper not townhouse. This psychologically makes you want to get into your car to go anywhere, whereas in a place like Venice you naturally start walking. A place like St Petersburg illustrates this. Laid out in marshes starting around 1700 if memory serves, I couldn't help get the feeling I was in Chicago and was daunted at the thought of walking to a restaurant near the hotel I was at even though it really wasn't that far, whereas in Venice I'll walk from the train station to St Mark's anytime. Paris is the only city that comes to mind that seems to have kept its sense of medieval proportion despite the massive redo by Hausmann. Perhaps because the quarters like Marais and St Germain are still on the medieval layout? Hence I can only really see carfree in places that were built when owning even a horse was a massive luxury. Prague comes to mind. Central London is definitely do-able. I used to walk 6 miles a day to and from work and it was one of my great pleasures of life. Amsterdam, definitely in the center. Siena must have made your list as it is medieval as well in the center. My only other comment on venice is that many locals have boats and while these can't run you down they pollute a heck of a lot more than cars. And while I am the biggest lover of Venice there is, if you lived there you couldn't help but have to go to Mestre at least regularly if not daily and this experience will do much to destroy the carefree carfree utopia I am afraid. Even if you are Madonna with her palazzo on the Grand Canal you can't avoid but leaving the place regularly because it is the only place in Italy I know of that can get away with terrible restaurants as the norm since none of them need to rely on repeat business from Italian clientele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted May 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2008 Thanks for the posting- many good points here, Knavel. I agree that medievel cities are usually the best Candidates for Carfree, and you've added quite a few cities to our growing list: Venice grew up from the time of the Crusades to the Renaissance. Medieval cities are always the best candidates for carfree because they are scaled to man in their proportions and their whimsical layout is so much more organic than the grid system of the USA. Consequently it seems to me impossible to build a carfree city from scratch in this day and age as the scale will be skyscraper not townhouse. + St Petersburg illustrates this. Laid out in marshes starting around 1700 if memory serves, + Paris is the only city that comes to mind that seems to have kept its sense of medieval proportion despite the massive redo by Hausmann. Perhaps because the quarters like Marais and St Germain are still on the medieval layout? + Prague comes to mind. + Central London is definitely do-able. I used to walk 6 miles a day + Amsterdam, definitely in the center. + Siena must have made your list as it is medieval as well in the center. Most of the above cities. especially the largest ones have retained their walkability thanks to their effective mass transit systems. And that is the same key to three America cities where you can live a pleasant Carfree existence: + New York, Boston, and Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.