• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

The Cost of Car Dependency and the Push for Urban Density

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,051
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
Revisiting the American Dream: The Cost of Car Dependency and the Push for Urban Density

The American landscape has undergone a dramatic transformation since the 1940s, a change driven largely by zoning laws that have favored a car-centric way of life. This shift has led to widespread urban sprawl, creating cities that resemble massive parking lots more than cohesive communities. The dream of open roads and spacious suburban living, once a symbol of American prosperity, is now facing critical scrutiny as the country grapples with the environmental, economic, and social costs of its deep-rooted car dependency.

In places like Cobb County, Georgia, road infrastructure is predominantly built to support automobile use, a practice entrenched by zoning requirements. These regulations often mandate the widening of streets in tandem with new development, inadvertently leading to overbuilt and inefficient road networks. Moreover, the requirement for substantial off-street parking with each new development has created a geometry problem. Large areas dedicated to parking have made walkable, dense urban development nearly impossible, resulting in environments where the automobile is the only feasible mode of transportation. This self-perpetuating cycle of car dependency is further evidenced in the sprawling suburbs characterized by single-use zoning and low-density development, a trend that has significantly increased carbon emissions and environmental footprints across the nation.

The judicial system has begun to acknowledge the impacts of these zoning practices. Since the 1960s, American state courts have required municipalities to tangibly justify how zoning regulations, including those dictating minimum lot sizes, align with state zoning enabling acts. Environmental protection and exclusionary effects are increasingly considered in the constitutionality of zoning ordinances, reflecting a growing awareness of the broader implications of such policies.

Urban sprawl and car dependency have not gone unchallenged. Cities like New York and San Francisco have implemented bans on private vehicle use on their most congested roads, leading to increased public transportation usage, faster commute times, and a reduction in pedestrian accidents. Boston has embraced a similar approach, creating more bike lanes and pedestrian-friendly streets in response to the car-centric urban design.

However, regulatory environments still have significant room for improvement, especially in terms of pedestrian safety and environmental sustainability. The prevalence of SUVs, for example, poses a higher risk to pedestrian safety. Vehicle safety regulations often neglect the protection of pedestrians and cyclists, focusing instead on the occupants of the vehicles. The environmental costs of road building are substantial, yet these are largely overlooked by regulatory agencies like the EPA. The construction of highways and the resulting carbon emissions contribute significantly to the nation's environmental footprint, yet there is little in the way of policy to mitigate these impacts.

The future of urban development in the United States hinges on a critical reassessment of our dependence on automobiles. The solution lies in a multifaceted approach that includes policy reforms, urban planning reimaginations, and a cultural shift in transportation preferences. Embracing increased urban density and expanded public transportation could mark a significant step towards a more sustainable, economically viable, and socially equitable urban future.
 
I see a lot of shopping districts with no sidewalks with people waking in the busy highways. It's not safe without a car. I don't understand why zoning is so against pedestrians.
 
The chicken or the egg?

Cart before the horse?

What's the answer? Some people say let them build without parking.


Then they build it (different project then referenced there) and the streets are all crammed with tenants cars. We get complaints from the businesses, "nowhere for the customers to park." "We get complaints from the tenants, "where am I supposed to park?"

What's your solution?
 
The prevalence of SUVs, for example, poses a higher risk to pedestrian safety.
SUV's can weigh 2 or 3 times more than a car, so common sense would say any large vehicle will pose a higher risk to pedestrian safety.
How many pedestrians in urban areas are walking around with their face buried in a Smart Phone or with ear bud in where they can't hear things.

Jar546 where are you getting some of these articles from?

I see a lot of shopping districts with no sidewalks with people waking in the busy highways. It's not safe without a car. I don't understand why zoning is so against pedestrians.
Older developments that is typical. Today all development has sidewalks in our town, including infill development of one lot with no sidewalks. Developers always refer to them as sidewalks to nowhere. In twenty years here I have seen many of them will eventually connect to another.
 
Btw, if you take the time to check out that article I posted the link to, take a second to scroll to the end and read some of the comments. Very entertaining. There's a whole political thing going on in this "old town" area all centered around parking and development.
 
Older developments that is typical. Today all development has sidewalks in our town, including infill development of one lot with no sidewalks. Developers always refer to them as sidewalks to nowhere. In twenty years here I have seen many of them will eventually connect to another.

Still no local requirements for sidewalks here. But the state is building a lot of accessible curb ramps where they are improving intersections where there are no sidewalks, only corn fields.
 
Then they build it (different project then referenced there) and the streets are all crammed with tenants cars. We get complaints from the businesses, "nowhere for the customers to park." "We get complaints from the tenants, "where am I supposed to park?"

What's your solution?

Almost all of the apartment building projects in our office have on-site parking. Most of the time parking lots are provided at ground level and the apartments are constructed above the parking lots.

Still no local requirements for sidewalks here. But the state is building a lot of accessible curb ramps where they are improving intersections where there are no sidewalks, only corn fields.
Sounds like our state officials watched Field of Dreams one too many times.
 
Top