Hacker News Reader

Comment by didibus | Hacker News Reader

I just hope they make the area dense in population, and design it for the pedestrian and not the car.

I've only visited a few times, and someone local could probably give a better idea of how the area is, but my impression of downtown Toronto was that while it is car-accessible it is also very pedestrian friendly. Lots of sidewalk and mass transit options and a downtown that has locals walking around at night (versus emptying out when everybody goes home at the end of the office day).

You mean like all cities were built 100 years ago?

We already know how to build great cities.

No tech or vision is needed.

Just some basic insight.

The 'urban planners' of the 1950s-1970s really created the monster of the suburbs, now they're going to mess with the city?

No thanks. Vienna is a great, clean, walkable, functional city.

Want a hyperloop? Put it underground.

Want wifi? Make it so it's not physically obtuse.

There. Modern city.

See?

Yup, I pretty much mean like good old european cities.

I want cities of the future to be an evolution over cities of the past instead of an evolution over cities of the present.

That's why many European cities are trying to go back where they came from. London changed many roads in the 60s-80s, introducing one-way roads to improve traffic flow. This is now reversed to slow down traffic and improve life for pedestrians & cyclists. In other areas (bank junction, oxford street), cars are banned completely.

Big cities with good public transport have no real need for any private traffic at daytime. Deliveries are mostly done overnight anyway and taxis are only tolerated because they create a lot of jobs.

I have no real bearing on it yet, but if their former projects are any tell, it's likely they will want a mix. They do a lot of traffic optimization research. Maybe this is their chance to implement some of it. It will be interesting should this go forward.

There's a town hall on November 1. If I can make it work I'm going to go.

They set goals of 20% car ownership rate, 15% of trips made by private vehicles, and less than half the parking spaces of comparable areas.

Is density really a good thing in any capacity beyond the single point of enabling more specialized jobs to exist there?

In my perspective density creates community and culture. Its much easier for people to walk around, explore and meet each other when things are designed for human scale.

Do people just strike up random conversations on the street like that? I've heard that's not appreciated in NYC in particular.

Not randomly on the street. But in the bars, and with neighbors, at shows, in the parcs, yes. Also roommates is probably one of the best ways to meet people as an adult.

Eh, I'm really glad I ended up getting a job with a salary that didn't necessitate a roommate. Had those in college, didn't like it.

In dense areas you usually don't need a car. All shops are close enough to walk as there are enough customers around. Dense mixed areas can also lead to short commute times.

And walkability is not just about traffic jams, it's about health. Walking to work is likely to improve health vs. driving.

Some downsides for me are long waits/required reservations at establishments, general crowdedness (in itself and how it enables pickpocketing etc), higher background noise, and more. Having experience with some different density levels throughout my life I'll probably always prefer some approximation to the "small town" style I grew up with.

I've lived in two cities in the UK in my life, Nottingham and London. I have never once felt the desire to learn how to drive. I can get public transport anywhere I want, and most of the time I can walk.

It's crazy to me how spread out some US cities are, I don't see any benefit to it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com