As an urban planner working directly on this issue, don't underestimate the immense political pressure that goes into maintaining an inequitable status quo. Even the prospect of legalizing walkable, mixed use development in American cities is so challenging, because there is immense political pushback at the local level. Federal policy is great (though unlikely), but real change will require local implementation. The best thing an individual watching this video can go do is to get involved at the local level - neighborhood organizations, planning commissions, and city council meetings alike are all dominated by folks who would prefer to keep cities encased in amber, which will mean the same car dependent sprawling patterns of development if there isn't meaningful pushback towards a more just future.
@@ProfessordevilL Maybe you Dutch should first decide on whether or not you guys really want to build any kind of new housing. It seems as though a majority of the time, it’s a no. At least we in the states build some houses.
@@HAL-bo5lr So you agree that having cities like mentioned in this video is good and if the Dutch had American style cities, the housing crisis would be much worse?
As an urban planner who deals with this challenge everyday in the face of political pressure and NIMBYism, I appreciate this video. In general there needs to be a cultural shift in the US, but governments at all levels must allocate more resources to other modes of transportation. I can go explain to the public why mixed use, walkability and complete street etc are all great for our cities in the long run, but if our public transportation is completely unreliable and people don’t even feel safe to walk to the station to ride the subway, things would only look good on paper and no actual transformation on the ground.
As a non urban planner there are thousands of more useful things you could do with your time Have you considered a career as an x-ray technician? You could get a degree in two years
@@acacacacacacaccaca7666 Urban planning requires a master and you’re here giving unsolicited advice to become an X-ray technician. Society requires several moving parts… the OP is doing their part.
@@empresssk oh im giving unsolicited advise? im sorry, i ,must have gotten confused. I hought i was talking to a person whose job is giving unsolicited advise on how to change the life of everyone in a way that nobody wants
@@acacacacacacaccaca7666 Yup. You sound like a brilliant mind. My bad. I guess nobody wants functional cities that improve their quality of life anymore… the entire city planning profession boils down to unsolicited advice. Smh. What a bot.
Pretty good video, hope to see one where we go more in-depth, I recommend channels like, not just bikes, City Beautiful and strong towns who make content about sustainability and connectable city planning.
I'm so happy i live in a Swedish town where walking and biking is so safe. Edit: Sadly, Swedens 2 largest cities (Stockholm and Gothenburg) have pretty bad bike infrastructure, although walking in these town do feel very safe though. I would love to hear about how walkable your cities are!
Believe me, they might be bad for certain European standards, but compared to almost all cities in the states, they're dozens of kilometers ahead, it's awful here.
Very simple video, could have gone into more depth, but a great introduction to this topic for people to look up. (And please do people. it is integral to the health of the planet to remove as many cars from the road as possible, among many other drastic changes to how we live our lives)
This is a genuinely good video. Unfortunately, lobbying from Big Oil and Big Auto will make gems like these hard. I sure do hope this happens, but only if we can convince bipartisan support to do so.
Big oil and auto lobbies certainly lobby nationally and even in some states, but they can't lobby every city council and planning commission. An individual can absolutely have massive impact in their community by getting involved in local meetings and policymaking. You'd be surprised how much local discretion goes into things like how roads are designed and used, or what you can build on a parcel of land. All of these are far more impactful than any federal policy.
just fyi, most people with houses align with "big oil and big auto" in this aspect. They want their houses, large or small, with yards and stuff. that's their american dream. they dont want their houses right next to someone else's house. that's why most people prefer a house with yard over a condo. that's precisely why california is having a hard time with housing issues. it's not the big oil or big auto preventing california to build more house. it's the residents who refuse to give up their yards.
I don't understand why so many people are so married to the idea of cars. There is no "freedom" associated with it, it's a 2-ton piece of property that have to store in a specific way, that you have to drive a specific speed range and can really only be driven on government/private built roads to specific destinations. You've reinvented a train but in the most inconvenient and useless way, I used to like cars and I still have appreciation for their design but with Prius's, base Civics/Accords, and Corollas being the most common cars in the US shows how little actual interest people have in driving.
From people I’ve talked to, they literally cannot imagine life without a car. You have to paint a picture for them. How do you grocery shop? How do you visit friends? How do you address their concerns with denser living? Most people just simply have never explored these questions. It was hard for me to switch to biking and get rid of my car and I was eager to do it. There’s a lot to figure out
Even countries that are famously easy to by walking, cycling and public transport like The Netherlands and Japan are "married" to cars, if levels of motor vehicle ownership are any indication. Cars are very useful in certain circumstances. The difference is that they haven't allowed cars to dominate every aspect of urban life.
@@scottfrazer4669 it might be a good idea, especially for people much younger than me to present to city councils and also do an exhibit for just regular people not knowledgeable about a life that is not so car dependent . Such as in Europe. Many people in United States have not seen any different kind of life so a video or diorama or 3-D or virtual reality of how the city would look a bikeable or of walkable city, such as is quite common in The Netherlands and Germany for example
@@pleoryo9405 very good point! Most US cities are just built around the car and it’s not possible to get around any other way or extremely hard. Such as if you wanted to walk to a store nearby even if it was half a mile the way, the roads are arranged it is dangerous to cross, or there’s not even a sidewalk most of the time or even a protected bikeway.
@@scottanos9981 Safety is a super important consideration for sure, I'm glad you bring this up, physical infrastructure is not nearly the only solution to these problems we see. Culture change especially greater empathy and new habits material accurate use of resources for happiness is huge too.
@@scottanos9981 Car-free Chicagoan here. The more people use public transit, the higher demand will be for law and order and thus, social equality. When it comes to social problems, people in their private cars are like ostriches that bury their heads in sand. We need to face the reality first and then we'll demand solutions.
@@scottanos9981 Having walkable cities reduce crime by reducing the cost of living (don't need a car to get anywhere) and reducing pollution. Denser cities are also easier to police because they can more quickly get from A to B too, so your police can walk more, actually get to know the people they're supposed to protect, etc. There are so many benefits to denser, less car-centric cities.
I’m so lucky to live somewhere that enables me to get my groceries by walking 10 minutes, including the choice out of 4 supermarkets and food market once a week, and I have buses on my doorstep and a central train station 10 minutes away.
In most European cities, this so called future of cities is normal. It's not that difficult, apart from the fact that in the US, now that they've done it wrong, it'll cost a lot to basically destroy all the massive car lanes and rebuild half the city from the ground up. That and politics..
Instead of pressuring big companies into making them more sustainable and not sell everything in plastic. Sad thing we as society have to pay for the millionaire's expenses
That's extremely interesting! Our crew explored another idea for a future city related to water-related issues. We showed an innovative concept created by a professor in China called Sponge Cities. The idea is to collect, store, and release rain and wastewater as needed and use this eco-city to help prevent floods, droughts, and water pollution. It's already on trial in 30 locations, and we analysed if this could be the future of urban water management.
In addittion to the points of this video, one of the best things we can do for our cities is referencing indigenous communities. Many of the people who came before us lived on lands we currently occupy for several generations without running into the issues of climate change, resource scarcity and inequity as we experience today. We would be remiss to not recognise the treasure trove of practical knowledge that those who came before us have to share.
Really glad vox has videos on topics like this. .... I but found the production of the video way over the top and borderline nauseating at some points. I'm not 5, you don't need to dangle keys in front of me to keep me interested.
I am excited to see Vox coming back with regular and consistent videos, notably, the content is always great that provide a lot of latest information, innovation, knowledge along with solutions. keep up good work Vox team, from vietnam
Thank you for making this video! For the this topic to reach a channel like yours means that the idea of better designed cities is growing and starting to be important to a wider audience
Better designed? According to who? I believe that better designed cities are built far away from each other with no means to easily travel from one another, are entirely self reliant and have their own laws and government so the federal government can be dissolved
The Green New Deal better include universal implementation of the Land Value Tax alongside repeal of most if not all other taxes or else I'm not supporting it.
Unfortunately I don’t see this reality changing any time soon, as many in the comments have mentioned, political pressure and powerful organizations/carmakers will prevent cities from evolving to bring about their obsolescence, so unless a culture shift occurs we are stuck making tooth and nail changes like freeway cap parks or bike lanes. For example, in Los Angeles in the mid 1920s, Firestone Tires and GM purchased a monopoly share of the streetcar companies in the city, and a few factors considered, the streetcar was essentially killed in the city to make way for cars (made by GM) that needed tires (made by Firestone). As long as a capitalistic society is controlled by companies with lots of capital, the scales will never tip in favor of the people as a whole, it’s simple economics. :(
I can definitely understand the sentiment, and I think this video has a truly realistic approach that it is possible it will just a little push from all of us to make these cultural shifts. Even videos like this are bite size and easy to share and can start opening more minds, and your comment does a great job connecting some of the dots of how we got here and what to look out for. But I think we're seeing a huge shift in collective action across industries, and I can see that translating to social change as well.
@@danielmauleon823 I think you’re right! We are already seeing that as technologies evolve, industries are shifting towards sectors with greater potential for profit, and as oil petroleum phases out and electrification takes hold, I can only imagine that the transportation sector and city design will shift to integrate in a positive way hopefully
@@Itsmarkyoung absolutely! I think part of why the Green New Deal excites me so much is how they are centering those most impacted to be decision/change makers. There will definitely need to be that commercial buy in, and I think were seeing some of that play out with the pushes in electric vehicles etc. (Which certainly aren't perfect but are the compromises we need to start with IMHO)
Nathan Lewis of new world economics has argued for the same basic principals outlined at the beginning of the video and anyone intrested in the subject should read his blog
Trained urban planner here. This video, far too utopian, no concrete bits on how to actually get the ball moving forward. This is the type of stuff that made me stray away from being a 'big letter'. "Urban Planner". For folks in the field who don't like how things are being built your best bet is to become a developer as this is who (after policy makers) controls how developments are being built, and in the larger context cities end up looking. Lastly, the architects 4 criteria for making a project walkable forgot one important part: the walk needs to connect two desirable locations (school, work, amenities, grocery, etc). Nobody will care much (or take that walk) if the walk iisn't going to get them to a place they want to go in a good amount of time.
I think the connection of two desirable location falls under the hood of "utility", the first criteria. Or else I don't understand what this criteria means.
Vox, since you made this it made me recall that one video from Aesthetic City. He always talks about New Traditional, it is like an architectural movement, if I recall correctly. In his latest video, he said this “uprising” is gradually spreading global. Could you, Vox, discuss this with a video?
Marshall J Corbert of Gurman Patent for cold plasma aerial motorways used by Bradford Sorensen patent flying vans similar to film "NeoSeoul 2144 A.D." and patented HOTOL spaceplanes of Xcor, Aerospace and by Hector D' Auvergne improved with fission fragment uranium gas core and cosmic ray muon catalyzed fusion engines are needed.
As someone living in Québec City. I can say that Québec City shouldn't have been in this intro. Yes it is a old city but it except for the old part of town, the rest of the city awful for walking and cycling. Our public transit is awful and for many people, having a car is the only option.
I think the example was mostly about the old part of the city which was built long ago before cars became a thing Québec et Montréal sont quand même mieux conçues que de nombreuses villes américaines où il y a rien d'autre que des parking et des autoroutes
I’m from Indonesia, and the plan to make a new capital doesn’t really suit my taste, especially with the removal of rainforests in Borneo, where the new capital is planned to be built. Nonetheless, the President’s proposal that the city will run on green energy still intrigues me, and I’m looking forward to see how the new capital really runs.
@@tumzi it doesn't. supporters of a movement such as this are often their own worst enemies because they quibble over irrelevant minutia instead of being supportive of the incremental progress needed to change a system. People want things to be flawless and this critique against the messaging is no different. Perfect is the enemy of progress.
I think it would be interesting to see some of the varied renderings a city/urban planner could come up with when political pressures and NIMBY-isms aren't involved...though might be equally disappointing, knowing of what could be, will likely never be, largely for those two basic reasons.
@@Digger-Nick The average American city is similarly sized to the average European city. Virtually nobody is travelling across the entire country for their daily commute, and we can keep our existing infrastructure for doing so (highways, airports, etc.) while making our cities more livable. Also, consider that modern high-speed trains would only take 10 hours or so to cross the entire United States. I have a strange feeling that nearly everyone in this country would prefer to travel long distances via a comfortable overnight train ride than being stuck in a crowded airliner or sitting behind the wheel of a car for days on end...
This is why i find it so odd with the opposition to 15 minute cities. People have watched too much hunger games, no one is locked into their district. You can leave freely, it just means you can get to where you need to be in 15 minutes
My city went from a derelict hood to the most livable city in the region in 3 decades but it took a mayor reelected 3 times to kick start it all and force the next mayors to follow up on that program given its success... One politician isn't gonna do much in terms of urban design over one term even if he was willing it takes the whole of society. No one that wants to put a stop to that program will be elected here.
I agree that most European cities are much more beautiful and tight knit but I would add that A) most of those cities are way older and B) America is just so big and land more available at the time of building these places.
We shouldn't keep using the "America big" line of thinking. It used to be built on rail and walkable communities well before we demolished it for the car.
Ummm what a second. Did I watch a fully sponsored video without one interruption🤯🤯🤯.... Wait it was only 4 mins. Will the same thing happen in a 6 or 10 minute video?🤔
So I'm quite involved in this issue and I'm happy Vox is getting involved. Because I think that American cities most of all, should focus on becoming walkable, bikeable by doing away with these terrible zoning laws and car centered building rules. However, I don't think the strange focus on racism and diversity here is very helpful. America is car centered because of a powerful car lobby, racism has nothing to do with it. Rebuilding cities to be human focused again would be good for everyone in the city and it's in my opinion distracting and needlessly polarising to make that about diversity.
I agree that the movement will be more successful if we don't focus on racism and diversity, but it's completely undeniable that racism played a role in how we got here, with the creation of zoning laws, placement of highways, and the like.
3:13 how about - does the walk increase biodiversity or ecosystem function? we can't survive without functioning ecosystems, how sustainable is that really?
2:23 really hits the nail on why videos like these are overly optimistic. People WANT to escape cities and WANT to get away from people. This is a cultural issue. You are not going to see real change in this topic without changing minds or removing these people's influence in policy.
If true, why do more people move from rural to urban regions for the last two centuries? Maybe they _want_ (in sense of 'prefer') the so called simple life, but their needs point in exactly the opposite direction. Therefore, modern cities have to become more liveable. They'll never become villages again, but they could re-establish some positive qualities of villages.
@@marcromain64 Car culture has changed this, I don't think there's been a ton of migration for families into cities in the US for the past 70 years. Especially since suburbs are an option.
@@darexinfinity True, but that's more of another problem than a solution. Suburbs are in fact part of the urban space. And not exactly 'get away from people', too. I mean, you have literally just people around you and nothing else, separated only by a some square meters of lawn and maybe a picket fence. A modern city which keeps it surroundings free from suburban atrocities and leaves enough actual nature intact and just some minutes by bus or train away - that's refuge.
@@marcromain64 I wouldn't consider suburbs and metros/urbans to be one of the same. Suburbs have a population density of their own. You're right that suburbs aren't completely getting away from people, but it's the most it can be done in a practical manner. If you want to work in a city, don't want to live there and don't want to waste your life with a hellish commute to a rural area. Living in the suburbs with a traffic-orientated city is your best bet. That's the culture that needs to be fought.
@@skygge1006 Sure, but quite old in North America is just not "oldest in the World", also weird they didn't actually show Damascus or Allepo, which are actually the oldest.
Real dystopian issue is rail transit track trains and trolleys were used to herd people into solar agricultural serfdom such as Roosevelt's internment camps, Hitler's concentration camps. and Stalin's Gulags. "Railways & War Before 1918" by Bishop & Davis described Brennan and Schiel portable monorails while "Scientific American 1884" described Decauville portables used by Victorians during Afghanistan wars.
this is only because the pro walkability and transit movement has only began to gain steam in the last 10 years. car dependency has been the status quo for a century. it is inevitable to encounter resistance when going against the status quo
Baby steps are possible, even in suburbs that were designed on the assumption everyone would get everywhere by car. Relax planning / zoning, allow for mixed use and denser development. Add in cut throughs for cyclists / pedestrians so they always have the shortest path, which further disincentivises driving local trips. Admittedly that last part might be tricky because there may be a house exactly where you would want a cut through, this probably requires a local administration with a good long term vision for the area, who will try to look for opportunities to open up new routes for walking and cycling when new developments happen.
They weren't "built for human connection"! They were "built 350 years ago, largely on top of themselves, and the sheer limits of space, coupled with the largest vehicles at the time being either A. The horse, or B. The horse-drawn carriage (ownership of which gave one automatic right of way), meant they didn't NEED broad roads". It's also worth noting that US is 5,000% bigger than the Baltic States COMBINED (making them smaller than Missouri IN AGGREGATE), 4,000% bigger than, say, the totality of the UK (which is smaller than just Michigan), 3,250% bigger than Italy (which is smaller than Arizona), 2,650% bigger than Germany (smaller than Montana), 2,500% bigger than Japan (smaller than California), 2,000% bigger than France (smaller than Texas) and about 900% larger than the Nordic States COMBINED (smaller than Alaska). So, that all said... wanna rethink your premise here a tad?
You're correct that older cities are the way they are because of necessity, not because of any grand ideals of "human connection". That doesn't mean there aren't any lessons that can be learned from them. There were many happy accidents which were abandoned in the name of "progress", and people are quite right to look back at the merits of these supposedly "constrained" older cities, in contrast to car centric suburbia. There are several crises we face (climate change, inactivity / obesity, road danger, the cost of housing) which we will struggle to tackle if we don't face the problems with the way we've been building cities for most of the last century. The US is a very large and sparse country, yes. However it doesn't immediately follow that cars should therefore be the default way to get around. A lot of people's daily journeys, to buy a couple of groceries, or to run the kids to school, these are local trips that could be done by foot or by bike with the right planning reforms and some tweaks to infrastructure. It's about baby steps... what can be done in the short term, at low cost, to make it easier to live without being wholly reliant on cars? In most parts of North America, no-one is going to be doing longer distance trips without a car any time soon. I'm thinking particularly about travelling from one side of a city to the other, or from one city to a different city. But guess what... in Europe people often use their cars for such trips too. They just don't have to hop in their car to buy a carton of eggs.
@@liamness I'm not arguing in favor of cars being the sole means of transport. I'm arguing AGAINST the notion that the US just built population centers this way to be contrary, and that the wisdom of all these ancient cites was so vast and substantial, when, in actuality, it's because they lacked either the need, impetus, space, and/or education to build further apart Wanna know why Europeans weren't equally decimated by plagues from the New World, just as their Old World ones ravaged the North American natives? It's because there WEREN'T ANY. Nobody lived on top of each other, providing incubators for the viruses that would lay them waste. A goodly chunk of humanity's most hideous and virulent diseases - Tuberculosis, Cholera, Bubonic Plague, Smallpox, Leprosy - all sprang forth because of such lack of distance coupled with inadequate sanitation. I wholly agree that there is need to put real consideration into urban planning going forward, and equally concur that the impact combustion engines is having is untenable. But the US has MYRIAD considerations to address beyond "just a quick jaunt to the market", especially considering the EU has TWICE the US population in HALF the land mass. Wanna know why we're so behind in high speed internet (much less high-speed RAIL)? Montana. Oh, not specifically them, they just make an excellent case study: it's a THOUSAND kilometers wide, with a population density of less than 3/km. Not three thousand. Not three hundred. _THREE._ Across a region of 380,000 sq. km, largely covered in mountains. And, instead of having 11 countries' GDP's to cover infrastructure, we have ONE.
Being in a big country is not what determines how much a city sprawls. If we want to use these conditions of geography you've described Japan and the eastern coast of the US are very similar in size and population yet japan has high speed rail and superb public transit and walkability. Free markets love to create dense cities. What creates sprawl is our policies that prevent the free market from creating density.
@@grumblycurmudgeon The Indigenous people of the America's lived in cities just as dense and large as those in Europe. Cahokia is believed to have had a larger population than London at the same. Both were the largest cities on their continent at the time as well. The reason why plagues took out the natives is because they didn't have domesticated draft animals like the Europeans did. Europeans lived in close contact with draft animals that would allow disease to jump more easily.
Modern high-speed trains could travel from San Francisco to New York City (one of the longest trips commonly travelled within the contiguous US) in approximately 10 hours. Modern high-speed trains are quite luxurious and allow you to enjoy a comfortable night's sleep while en route to your destination. Given that an overnight trip on a high-speed train could get you anywhere in the contiguous US, I don't think our nation is "too big for better cities". Also, the size of our country as a whole has nothing to do with the size of our cities, which are similar to those in other parts of the world.
Can we just STOP trying to add NEW IDEAS into EXISTING POLITICS??? Making cities more walkable is something that basically everyone can agree with wether your a Republican or a Democrat, So why do you see the need to also make this about Equity, Climate change, and "social justice", topics that you KNOW are controversial and will only divide people even more?? Here is an opportunity to make every American work together to achieve a common goal, but you INSIST on adding it to a list of things that Democrats and Republicans are just going to argue about Why Vox??? WHY????
Walkable cities is far from something everyone agrees with. A lot of people say that 15 minute cities (cities where everything is a 15 minute walk away) are used to control where people go.
@@MattyAviation I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that Republicans are the ones your talking about, as they usually want less regulation cause they see it is a way of control. The thing is, most Republicans will not agree to that walkable cites are a way of control. There is even a steriotype of Republican voters just being red neck hillbilies that live in the country side, people that are known for avoiding big cities cause they prefer living in smaller communities where everyone knows each other. And walkable cites do exactly that, it reduces these huge mega cities with a million people you've never met in your life, to smaller communities filed with friends and family. That's why we need these videos to be about walkable cities and nothing else. Cause attaching these controversial topics to walkable cities will make EVERY Republican reject them entirely.
a lot of conservative pundits, think tanks and politicians get money from big oil companies and oil billionaires to oppose transit funding and transit projects all the time, this is absolutely a political issue.
@@officialgreendalehumanbeing Making public transits systems before making cities walkable is like putting the cart before the horse. It is going to be easier for lobbied politicians to to dismiss the arguments for making public transits systems because American cities don't have the population density to make them work effectively. When walkable cities are built it will make it impossible for them to argue against public transits systems. So If the idea of walkable cities are joined with all these other controversial topics, they will shift the arguments from "it is less economic" (which is not true) to "it is a way control" (which is also not true)
Okay, hopeful, but Americans are currently flocking to car depended, suburban-sprawl towns in the Sunbelt. Most new McMansion crapvilles ape the development of Southern California from the 1960's to 2010's, but without the benign climate, walk-ability or outdoor recreation. Basically, you're preaching to the choir: people who are already drawn to urban living, but a whole lot of people are joyfully doubling down on the mistakes of the past.
@@darthmaul216 In a lot of suburbs it's illegal to build townhouses or apartments, there may even be a minimum square footage for each lot. Add in parking minimums, and zoning restrictions meaning any non-residential uses (e.g. a corner store, or a cafe) aren't allowed and it's easy to see why people just get in their cars to go everywhere. Issues with the climate, people's health, and the cost of living are all being made worse by restrictive zoning rules.
The experience of moving around an American city like Los Angeles and Houston is completely different, and we have some sad to say, that almost every European city I’ve been to. and yea, we have all the things you have its simplest laid out differently
Hey vox, I have an objection as you have not mentioned about urban heat island effect and greening of cityscapes.Also how will you commute on a rainy day without cars. Also please mention about having trees in cities and how to plant em
"how will you commute on a rainy day without cars?" Cars aren't the only way to move around. We have public transit, buses and trains. They have roofs too, you know? And of course, bikes and raincoatslike @bromo has mentioned. The US is sadly very car-centric as opposed to other developed countries.
It's also not too difficult to make cycling and walking doable, without completely throwing out cars. I live in the Netherlands, and basically every street in a city combines car lanes, bike lanes and sidewalks.
Well for urban heat if you shrink roads you can add more trees and there are some modern inventions that let us deal with rain Ie. The umbrella or a rain coat
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
As an urban planner working directly on this issue, don't underestimate the immense political pressure that goes into maintaining an inequitable status quo. Even the prospect of legalizing walkable, mixed use development in American cities is so challenging, because there is immense political pushback at the local level.
Federal policy is great (though unlikely), but real change will require local implementation. The best thing an individual watching this video can go do is to get involved at the local level - neighborhood organizations, planning commissions, and city council meetings alike are all dominated by folks who would prefer to keep cities encased in amber, which will mean the same car dependent sprawling patterns of development if there isn't meaningful pushback towards a more just future.
thank general motors for car centric infrastructure. single handedly ruined an entire generation
Majoring in sustainability management here, wanted to support your sentiments and agree that local involvement has so much power and potential
Orange pill
@@dkaloger5720, xD
@@critiqueofthegothgf, are you referring to them lobbying for streets only for cars?
Can't wait for the 21st century city DLC to come out!
What is the 21st century city DLC? I search a and could not find anything specific
Cities Skylines 2 will be available on October.
@@logicaldennis1245t is a meme if real life was a game
@@logicaldennis1245 He's probably talking about Cities Skylines
I live in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The future here described is the one I have been living in over the last 20 years. I love it.
Ok NotJustBikes, how’s your city’s housing crisis? Oh and how old are most of your buildings?
@@HAL-bo5lr How do you propose they solve the housing crisis? By building even more dense housing or building American style single family homes?
@@ProfessordevilL Maybe you Dutch should first decide on whether or not you guys really want to build any kind of new housing. It seems as though a majority of the time, it’s a no. At least we in the states build some houses.
@@HAL-bo5lr So you agree that having cities like mentioned in this video is good and if the Dutch had American style cities, the housing crisis would be much worse?
Yeah, is mainly a problem in the US. And most third wold countries problem.
Glad to see Vox using their platform to help push this liveable city movement forward!
As an urban planner who deals with this challenge everyday in the face of political pressure and NIMBYism, I appreciate this video. In general there needs to be a cultural shift in the US, but governments at all levels must allocate more resources to other modes of transportation. I can go explain to the public why mixed use, walkability and complete street etc are all great for our cities in the long run, but if our public transportation is completely unreliable and people don’t even feel safe to walk to the station to ride the subway, things would only look good on paper and no actual transformation on the ground.
Admittedly, yes, changing the public’s perception on public transportation is a hard first step.
As a non urban planner there are thousands of more useful things you could do with your time
Have you considered a career as an x-ray technician? You could get a degree in two years
@@acacacacacacaccaca7666 Urban planning requires a master and you’re here giving unsolicited advice to become an X-ray technician. Society requires several moving parts… the OP is doing their part.
@@empresssk oh im giving unsolicited advise? im sorry, i ,must have gotten confused. I hought i was talking to a person whose job is giving unsolicited advise on how to change the life of everyone in a way that nobody wants
@@acacacacacacaccaca7666 Yup. You sound like a brilliant mind. My bad. I guess nobody wants functional cities that improve their quality of life anymore… the entire city planning profession boils down to unsolicited advice. Smh. What a bot.
Please make more videos of how terrible car dependency is!
Pretty good video, hope to see one where we go more in-depth, I recommend channels like, not just bikes, City Beautiful and strong towns who make content about sustainability and connectable city planning.
Not Just Bikes is a great channel
City Nerd is awesome!
City Nerd and Strong Towns too
both great channels!
@@critiqueofthegothgf Yes!
I'm so happy i live in a Swedish town where walking and biking is so safe.
Edit: Sadly, Swedens 2 largest cities (Stockholm and Gothenburg) have pretty bad bike infrastructure, although walking in these town do feel very safe though. I would love to hear about how walkable your cities are!
Denmark better tho, yall still owe us Skåne
@@deamberzingi1172 move on already
Believe me, they might be bad for certain European standards, but compared to almost all cities in the states, they're dozens of kilometers ahead, it's awful here.
Uppsala ❤
If it’s less than a few million people it’s not.
Very simple video, could have gone into more depth, but a great introduction to this topic for people to look up. (And please do people. it is integral to the health of the planet to remove as many cars from the road as possible, among many other drastic changes to how we live our lives)
This is a genuinely good video. Unfortunately, lobbying from Big Oil and Big Auto will make gems like these hard. I sure do hope this happens, but only if we can convince bipartisan support to do so.
Big oil and auto lobbies certainly lobby nationally and even in some states, but they can't lobby every city council and planning commission. An individual can absolutely have massive impact in their community by getting involved in local meetings and policymaking. You'd be surprised how much local discretion goes into things like how roads are designed and used, or what you can build on a parcel of land. All of these are far more impactful than any federal policy.
Big "Green" and Big Bike want to exert as much influence as they can, but their asks are generally not too reasonable.
@@X2LR8 What are “Big Green” and “Big Bike,” and what about them is unreasonable?
@@X2LR8 you mean reclaim power formerly stripped from people and planet? Yeah. I hope so.
just fyi, most people with houses align with "big oil and big auto" in this aspect. They want their houses, large or small, with yards and stuff. that's their american dream. they dont want their houses right next to someone else's house. that's why most people prefer a house with yard over a condo. that's precisely why california is having a hard time with housing issues. it's not the big oil or big auto preventing california to build more house. it's the residents who refuse to give up their yards.
I don't understand why so many people are so married to the idea of cars. There is no "freedom" associated with it, it's a 2-ton piece of property that have to store in a specific way, that you have to drive a specific speed range and can really only be driven on government/private built roads to specific destinations. You've reinvented a train but in the most inconvenient and useless way, I used to like cars and I still have appreciation for their design but with Prius's, base Civics/Accords, and Corollas being the most common cars in the US shows how little actual interest people have in driving.
From people I’ve talked to, they literally cannot imagine life without a car. You have to paint a picture for them. How do you grocery shop? How do you visit friends? How do you address their concerns with denser living? Most people just simply have never explored these questions.
It was hard for me to switch to biking and get rid of my car and I was eager to do it. There’s a lot to figure out
Even countries that are famously easy to by walking, cycling and public transport like The Netherlands and Japan are "married" to cars, if levels of motor vehicle ownership are any indication. Cars are very useful in certain circumstances. The difference is that they haven't allowed cars to dominate every aspect of urban life.
again, people talk about having the freedom to drive
how about the freedom to not have to drive? we need more walkable cities
@@scottfrazer4669 it might be a good idea, especially for people much younger than me to present to city councils and also do an exhibit for just regular people not knowledgeable about a life that is not so car dependent . Such as in Europe.
Many people in United States have not seen any different kind of life so a video or diorama or 3-D or virtual reality of how the city would look a bikeable or of walkable city, such as is quite common in The Netherlands and Germany for example
@@pleoryo9405 very good point! Most US cities are just built around the car and it’s not possible to get around any other way or extremely hard. Such as if you wanted to walk to a store nearby even if it was half a mile the way, the roads are arranged it is dangerous to cross, or there’s not even a sidewalk most of the time or even a protected bikeway.
The next American renaissance will come about through transportation reform.
*Bikes, Trains and Legs baby!*
Nobody wants to be mugged on a train in downtown Philly or Chicago. Solve that problem first, and then you'll see an increase in ridership.
@@scottanos9981 Safety is a super important consideration for sure, I'm glad you bring this up, physical infrastructure is not nearly the only solution to these problems we see. Culture change especially greater empathy and new habits material accurate use of resources for happiness is huge too.
@@scottanos9981 Car-free Chicagoan here. The more people use public transit, the higher demand will be for law and order and thus, social equality. When it comes to social problems, people in their private cars are like ostriches that bury their heads in sand. We need to face the reality first and then we'll demand solutions.
@@scottanos9981 Having walkable cities reduce crime by reducing the cost of living (don't need a car to get anywhere) and reducing pollution. Denser cities are also easier to police because they can more quickly get from A to B too, so your police can walk more, actually get to know the people they're supposed to protect, etc. There are so many benefits to denser, less car-centric cities.
Harder to steal stuff when there is a lot of people around
I’m so lucky to live somewhere that enables me to get my groceries by walking 10 minutes, including the choice out of 4 supermarkets and food market once a week, and I have buses on my doorstep and a central train station 10 minutes away.
In most European cities, this so called future of cities is normal. It's not that difficult, apart from the fact that in the US, now that they've done it wrong, it'll cost a lot to basically destroy all the massive car lanes and rebuild half the city from the ground up. That and politics..
Unless you live in cities in the Northeastern United States, of course, because they're mostly similar to most European cities in many ways.
Stagnation is also common place for European countries, that and declaring war on each other
Instead of pressuring big companies into making them more sustainable and not sell everything in plastic. Sad thing we as society have to pay for the millionaire's expenses
That's extremely interesting! Our crew explored another idea for a future city related to water-related issues. We showed an innovative concept created by a professor in China called Sponge Cities. The idea is to collect, store, and release rain and wastewater as needed and use this eco-city to help prevent floods, droughts, and water pollution. It's already on trial in 30 locations, and we analysed if this could be the future of urban water management.
Is there any online documentation of this, like research papers or others? I would like to know more about these
Why is china researching ways to handle water demands in a big city when they struggy to get anyone at all to move to the cities they have built?
In addittion to the points of this video, one of the best things we can do for our cities is referencing indigenous communities. Many of the people who came before us lived on lands we currently occupy for several generations without running into the issues of climate change, resource scarcity and inequity as we experience today. We would be remiss to not recognise the treasure trove of practical knowledge that those who came before us have to share.
Okay but no one is taking how aesthetic and beautiful the illustrations is? It just so eye-catching and precisely present the info❤
Really glad vox has videos on topics like this.
.... I but found the production of the video way over the top and borderline nauseating at some points. I'm not 5, you don't need to dangle keys in front of me to keep me interested.
Im very glad vox is covering this
Loved this video, thank you! ❤
I am excited to see Vox coming back with regular and consistent videos, notably, the content is always great that provide a lot of latest information, innovation, knowledge along with solutions. keep up good work Vox team, from vietnam
Why didnt I get this in my subscriptions feed? I'm subscribed to this channel
Thank you for making this video! For the this topic to reach a channel like yours means that the idea of better designed cities is growing and starting to be important to a wider audience
It seems like it has stayed in the growing phase for perpetuity.
Better designed? According to who? I believe that better designed cities are built far away from each other with no means to easily travel from one another, are entirely self reliant and have their own laws and government so the federal government can be dissolved
i love this kind of content. i have been avoiding buying a car for 2 years now and wish america had more walkability
I can't express how happy I am that this movement is taking off, even in the United States.
This is called Euclidean zoning for everyone wondering what they’re talking about . This has been in active use since 1916
Urbanism is growing 😈😈😈 hehe keep up with these kinds of videos!
Videos are great but unless people show up for their local planning and city council meetings the status quo will persist
for some reason this video is not showing in my subscription page. only in recommended.
late night thought, why don’t cities just build little bridges where crosswalks are? that can help a bit
I love these little learning pieces
The Green New Deal better include universal implementation of the Land Value Tax alongside repeal of most if not all other taxes or else I'm not supporting it.
Unfortunately I don’t see this reality changing any time soon, as many in the comments have mentioned, political pressure and powerful organizations/carmakers will prevent cities from evolving to bring about their obsolescence, so unless a culture shift occurs we are stuck making tooth and nail changes like freeway cap parks or bike lanes. For example, in Los Angeles in the mid 1920s, Firestone Tires and GM purchased a monopoly share of the streetcar companies in the city, and a few factors considered, the streetcar was essentially killed in the city to make way for cars (made by GM) that needed tires (made by Firestone). As long as a capitalistic society is controlled by companies with lots of capital, the scales will never tip in favor of the people as a whole, it’s simple economics. :(
I can definitely understand the sentiment, and I think this video has a truly realistic approach that it is possible it will just a little push from all of us to make these cultural shifts.
Even videos like this are bite size and easy to share and can start opening more minds, and your comment does a great job connecting some of the dots of how we got here and what to look out for.
But I think we're seeing a huge shift in collective action across industries, and I can see that translating to social change as well.
@@danielmauleon823 I think you’re right! We are already seeing that as technologies evolve, industries are shifting towards sectors with greater potential for profit, and as oil petroleum phases out and electrification takes hold, I can only imagine that the transportation sector and city design will shift to integrate in a positive way hopefully
@@Itsmarkyoung absolutely! I think
part of why the Green New Deal excites me so much is how they are centering those most impacted to be decision/change makers. There will definitely need to be that commercial buy in, and I think were seeing some of that play out with the pushes in electric vehicles etc. (Which certainly aren't perfect but are the compromises we need to start with IMHO)
Capitalism kills! Destroy what destroys you. Power to the people! (A)
Free markets love dense urban cities.
@@NamelessProducts "Free" markets are only free for the wealthy and powerful
@pongop yeah buddy…. keep living in your delusion…
Nathan Lewis of new world economics has argued for the same basic principals outlined at the beginning of the video and anyone intrested in the subject should read his blog
Trained urban planner here. This video, far too utopian, no concrete bits on how to actually get the ball moving forward. This is the type of stuff that made me stray away from being a 'big letter'. "Urban Planner". For folks in the field who don't like how things are being built your best bet is to become a developer as this is who (after policy makers) controls how developments are being built, and in the larger context cities end up looking.
Lastly, the architects 4 criteria for making a project walkable forgot one important part: the walk needs to connect two desirable locations (school, work, amenities, grocery, etc). Nobody will care much (or take that walk) if the walk iisn't going to get them to a place they want to go in a good amount of time.
I think the connection of two desirable location falls under the hood of "utility", the first criteria. Or else I don't understand what this criteria means.
This is by far the best video Vox has ever made.
It’s almost like our cities had the biggest changes when cars came into the equation, they’re fairly new compared to European cities
Yep. A lot of thriving downtown areas were bulldozed to make way for highways and parking lots
@@ianhomerpura8937 Then they clearly weren't thriving...
Auto industry hates this video
and so does conservative truck nuts
This seems like common sense to me. But alas…
Vox, since you made this it made me recall that one video from Aesthetic City. He always talks about New Traditional, it is like an architectural movement, if I recall correctly. In his latest video, he said this “uprising” is gradually spreading global.
Could you, Vox, discuss this with a video?
Marshall J Corbert of Gurman Patent for cold plasma aerial motorways used by Bradford Sorensen patent flying vans similar to film "NeoSeoul 2144 A.D." and patented HOTOL spaceplanes of Xcor, Aerospace and by Hector D' Auvergne improved with fission fragment uranium gas core and cosmic ray muon catalyzed fusion engines are needed.
As someone living in Québec City. I can say that Québec City shouldn't have been in this intro. Yes it is a old city but it except for the old part of town, the rest of the city awful for walking and cycling. Our public transit is awful and for many people, having a car is the only option.
I think the example was mostly about the old part of the city which was built long ago before cars became a thing
Québec et Montréal sont quand même mieux conçues que de nombreuses villes américaines où il y a rien d'autre que des parking et des autoroutes
I’m from Indonesia, and the plan to make a new capital doesn’t really suit my taste, especially with the removal of rainforests in Borneo, where the new capital is planned to be built. Nonetheless, the President’s proposal that the city will run on green energy still intrigues me, and I’m looking forward to see how the new capital really runs.
Why this video didn't appear on my subscriptions list?
Same
Ugh i wish this wasnt an ad because more ppl need to be aware of the growing new urban planning movement going on
wait how does the fact that its an ad change anything?
@@tumzi it doesn't. supporters of a movement such as this are often their own worst enemies because they quibble over irrelevant minutia instead of being supportive of the incremental progress needed to change a system. People want things to be flawless and this critique against the messaging is no different. Perfect is the enemy of progress.
@@balmian this is so real g
I think it would be interesting to see some of the varied renderings a city/urban planner could come up with when political pressures and NIMBY-isms aren't involved...though might be equally disappointing, knowing of what could be, will likely never be, largely for those two basic reasons.
car dependincy has 100% had a significatnt impact on mental health over the last 50 years.
I thought they were gonna address future proofing from weather extremes, since I doubt the car lobbyists are gonna let people use cars less.
Our suburbs could look amazing if we focused more on walking, biking, reducing car lanes, and eliminate parking minimums and single family zoning.
Do you understand how big america is? What you're saying simply just isn't possible
@@Digger-Nick The average American city is similarly sized to the average European city. Virtually nobody is travelling across the entire country for their daily commute, and we can keep our existing infrastructure for doing so (highways, airports, etc.) while making our cities more livable.
Also, consider that modern high-speed trains would only take 10 hours or so to cross the entire United States. I have a strange feeling that nearly everyone in this country would prefer to travel long distances via a comfortable overnight train ride than being stuck in a crowded airliner or sitting behind the wheel of a car for days on end...
This is why i find it so odd with the opposition to 15 minute cities. People have watched too much hunger games, no one is locked into their district. You can leave freely, it just means you can get to where you need to be in 15 minutes
My city went from a derelict hood to the most livable city in the region in 3 decades but it took a mayor reelected 3 times to kick start it all and force the next mayors to follow up on that program given its success... One politician isn't gonna do much in terms of urban design over one term even if he was willing it takes the whole of society. No one that wants to put a stop to that program will be elected here.
Simply, make the society plan for their properties, instead of passing federal acts every time, and exhauste the economy with over-regulation
What's the difference between an architect and a 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗱 architect?
1:09
A trained architect aka an engineer
Nusantara City is a great example
I agree that most European cities are much more beautiful and tight knit but I would add that A) most of those cities are way older and B) America is just so big and land more available at the time of building these places.
We shouldn't keep using the "America big" line of thinking. It used to be built on rail and walkable communities well before we demolished it for the car.
I hope we really disappear the problems of the "falabella" And we start to think like a really organized town. I think this video tells about it.
Ummm what a second. Did I watch a fully sponsored video without one interruption🤯🤯🤯.... Wait it was only 4 mins. Will the same thing happen in a 6 or 10 minute video?🤔
I think the video itself is the ad: there is not credit at the end of the video.
So I'm quite involved in this issue and I'm happy Vox is getting involved. Because I think that American cities most of all, should focus on becoming walkable, bikeable by doing away with these terrible zoning laws and car centered building rules.
However, I don't think the strange focus on racism and diversity here is very helpful. America is car centered because of a powerful car lobby, racism has nothing to do with it. Rebuilding cities to be human focused again would be good for everyone in the city and it's in my opinion distracting and needlessly polarising to make that about diversity.
I agree that the movement will be more successful if we don't focus on racism and diversity, but it's completely undeniable that racism played a role in how we got here, with the creation of zoning laws, placement of highways, and the like.
@@chasemartin4450 its important to keep away from the most criminal population. i dont want to get murdered or physically insulted
@@mmss3199 Respecting the Second Amendment will have the same effects without all the downsides of zoning laws, building codes, and car-dependency.
Adam something will be pleased
finally !
That "someone" Speck mentions was the automotive industry
Nothing mentions public safety , people will move to suburbs if a city is unlivable.
Short and sweet
3:13 how about - does the walk increase biodiversity or ecosystem function? we can't survive without functioning ecosystems, how sustainable is that really?
Parking lots. Parking lots. Parking lots. Parking lots. Oh, and parking lots!
do one that titled "how can we stop using cars?"
good video, but very vague.
If you want something more in depth I suggest notjustbikes, citynerd, and rm transit
@@darthmaul216i agree, considering im already subbed to all 3. i see u have good taste
This video didn't show up in my subscription box for some reason
Its explicitly sponsored content from a journalism channel which is so weird bc other content creators who get sponsored don’t get affected by it
2:23 really hits the nail on why videos like these are overly optimistic. People WANT to escape cities and WANT to get away from people. This is a cultural issue. You are not going to see real change in this topic without changing minds or removing these people's influence in policy.
If true, why do more people move from rural to urban regions for the last two centuries?
Maybe they _want_ (in sense of 'prefer') the so called simple life, but their needs point in exactly the opposite direction. Therefore, modern cities have to become more liveable. They'll never become villages again, but they could re-establish some positive qualities of villages.
@@marcromain64 Car culture has changed this, I don't think there's been a ton of migration for families into cities in the US for the past 70 years. Especially since suburbs are an option.
@@darexinfinity True, but that's more of another problem than a solution. Suburbs are in fact part of the urban space.
And not exactly 'get away from people', too. I mean, you have literally just people around you and nothing else, separated only by a some square meters of lawn and maybe a picket fence.
A modern city which keeps it surroundings free from suburban atrocities and leaves enough actual nature intact and just some minutes by bus or train away - that's refuge.
@@marcromain64 I wouldn't consider suburbs and metros/urbans to be one of the same. Suburbs have a population density of their own.
You're right that suburbs aren't completely getting away from people, but it's the most it can be done in a practical manner. If you want to work in a city, don't want to live there and don't want to waste your life with a hellish commute to a rural area. Living in the suburbs with a traffic-orientated city is your best bet. That's the culture that needs to be fought.
Good video, but calling Quebec City old is just wrong :D
I was going to say the same. 1608 is 415 years. There are cities that are ten times as old.
Footbridges for walkable cities is probably easier to consider than reducing lanes for cars.
Footbridges should be a last resort. They're car infrastructure because they help maintain the car's dominance of the public realm
Not really because foot bridges make you go up an incline which can be difficult for some people and makes you expend more energy
w vox video
Precisely city design by zoning is what caused these problems in the first place.
In what world is a city from 1608 one of the oldest in the world. Americans perception of time is something else!
It was showing old cities from different continents. By North American standards that’s quite old.
@@skygge1006 Sure, but quite old in North America is just not "oldest in the World", also weird they didn't actually show Damascus or Allepo, which are actually the oldest.
@@mart1jin509 I agree with you, and anyways for the americas I would’ve chosen a city in mexico or Peru that started from the natives.
@@mart1jin509 Quebec is one of the oldest cities in the world. Lol.
It was a native American city before Europeans came.
Why are people so ridiculously pedantic these days? You know what they meant.
What green new deal are they talking about? The Willow project?
Real dystopian issue is rail transit track trains and trolleys were used to herd people into solar agricultural serfdom such as Roosevelt's internment camps, Hitler's concentration camps. and Stalin's Gulags.
"Railways & War Before 1918" by Bishop & Davis described Brennan and Schiel portable monorails while "Scientific American 1884" described Decauville portables used by Victorians during Afghanistan wars.
Walkable city seems to be almost impossible in 🇺🇸.
this is only because the pro walkability and transit movement has only began to gain steam in the last 10 years. car dependency has been the status quo for a century. it is inevitable to encounter resistance when going against the status quo
Baby steps are possible, even in suburbs that were designed on the assumption everyone would get everywhere by car. Relax planning / zoning, allow for mixed use and denser development. Add in cut throughs for cyclists / pedestrians so they always have the shortest path, which further disincentivises driving local trips. Admittedly that last part might be tricky because there may be a house exactly where you would want a cut through, this probably requires a local administration with a good long term vision for the area, who will try to look for opportunities to open up new routes for walking and cycling when new developments happen.
Why would we want to copy when we could build floating cities 🙄
They weren't "built for human connection"! They were "built 350 years ago, largely on top of themselves, and the sheer limits of space, coupled with the largest vehicles at the time being either A. The horse, or B. The horse-drawn carriage (ownership of which gave one automatic right of way), meant they didn't NEED broad roads".
It's also worth noting that US is 5,000% bigger than the Baltic States COMBINED (making them smaller than Missouri IN AGGREGATE), 4,000% bigger than, say, the totality of the UK (which is smaller than just Michigan), 3,250% bigger than Italy (which is smaller than Arizona), 2,650% bigger than Germany (smaller than Montana), 2,500% bigger than Japan (smaller than California), 2,000% bigger than France (smaller than Texas) and about 900% larger than the Nordic States COMBINED (smaller than Alaska).
So, that all said... wanna rethink your premise here a tad?
You're correct that older cities are the way they are because of necessity, not because of any grand ideals of "human connection". That doesn't mean there aren't any lessons that can be learned from them. There were many happy accidents which were abandoned in the name of "progress", and people are quite right to look back at the merits of these supposedly "constrained" older cities, in contrast to car centric suburbia. There are several crises we face (climate change, inactivity / obesity, road danger, the cost of housing) which we will struggle to tackle if we don't face the problems with the way we've been building cities for most of the last century.
The US is a very large and sparse country, yes. However it doesn't immediately follow that cars should therefore be the default way to get around. A lot of people's daily journeys, to buy a couple of groceries, or to run the kids to school, these are local trips that could be done by foot or by bike with the right planning reforms and some tweaks to infrastructure. It's about baby steps... what can be done in the short term, at low cost, to make it easier to live without being wholly reliant on cars? In most parts of North America, no-one is going to be doing longer distance trips without a car any time soon. I'm thinking particularly about travelling from one side of a city to the other, or from one city to a different city. But guess what... in Europe people often use their cars for such trips too. They just don't have to hop in their car to buy a carton of eggs.
@@liamness I'm not arguing in favor of cars being the sole means of transport. I'm arguing AGAINST the notion that the US just built population centers this way to be contrary, and that the wisdom of all these ancient cites was so vast and substantial, when, in actuality, it's because they lacked either the need, impetus, space, and/or education to build further apart
Wanna know why Europeans weren't equally decimated by plagues from the New World, just as their Old World ones ravaged the North American natives? It's because there WEREN'T ANY. Nobody lived on top of each other, providing incubators for the viruses that would lay them waste. A goodly chunk of humanity's most hideous and virulent diseases - Tuberculosis, Cholera, Bubonic Plague, Smallpox, Leprosy - all sprang forth because of such lack of distance coupled with inadequate sanitation.
I wholly agree that there is need to put real consideration into urban planning going forward, and equally concur that the impact combustion engines is having is untenable. But the US has MYRIAD considerations to address beyond "just a quick jaunt to the market", especially considering the EU has TWICE the US population in HALF the land mass.
Wanna know why we're so behind in high speed internet (much less high-speed RAIL)? Montana. Oh, not specifically them, they just make an excellent case study: it's a THOUSAND kilometers wide, with a population density of less than 3/km. Not three thousand. Not three hundred. _THREE._ Across a region of 380,000 sq. km, largely covered in mountains. And, instead of having 11 countries' GDP's to cover infrastructure, we have ONE.
Being in a big country is not what determines how much a city sprawls.
If we want to use these conditions of geography you've described Japan and the eastern coast of the US are very similar in size and population yet japan has high speed rail and superb public transit and walkability.
Free markets love to create dense cities. What creates sprawl is our policies that prevent the free market from creating density.
@@grumblycurmudgeon The Indigenous people of the America's lived in cities just as dense and large as those in Europe. Cahokia is believed to have had a larger population than London at the same. Both were the largest cities on their continent at the time as well.
The reason why plagues took out the natives is because they didn't have domesticated draft animals like the Europeans did. Europeans lived in close contact with draft animals that would allow disease to jump more easily.
Modern high-speed trains could travel from San Francisco to New York City (one of the longest trips commonly travelled within the contiguous US) in approximately 10 hours. Modern high-speed trains are quite luxurious and allow you to enjoy a comfortable night's sleep while en route to your destination. Given that an overnight trip on a high-speed train could get you anywhere in the contiguous US, I don't think our nation is "too big for better cities".
Also, the size of our country as a whole has nothing to do with the size of our cities, which are similar to those in other parts of the world.
good vid
The green new deal is terrible 😂
I once saw Jeff Speck throw a punch at a street sweeper because they were playing rap music too loud. Dude is just too racist for his own good
Why does Adrian sound like a 30 yo white woman?! 😳
Within 4 hours!
Lots of big words but really not anything new. What are they proposing here?
The car is the single most deleterious invention humanity has ever produced.
Can we just STOP trying to add NEW IDEAS into EXISTING POLITICS???
Making cities more walkable is something that basically everyone can agree with wether your a Republican or a Democrat,
So why do you see the need to also make this about Equity, Climate change, and "social justice", topics that you KNOW are controversial and will only divide people even more??
Here is an opportunity to make every American work together to achieve a common goal, but you INSIST on adding it to a list of things that Democrats and Republicans are just going to argue about
Why Vox??? WHY????
Walkable cities is far from something everyone agrees with. A lot of people say that 15 minute cities (cities where everything is a 15 minute walk away) are used to control where people go.
@@MattyAviation
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that Republicans are the ones your talking about, as they usually want less regulation cause they see it is a way of control.
The thing is, most Republicans will not agree to that walkable cites are a way of control. There is even a steriotype of Republican voters just being red neck hillbilies that live in the country side, people that are known for avoiding big cities cause they prefer living in smaller communities where everyone knows each other.
And walkable cites do exactly that, it reduces these huge mega cities with a million people you've never met in your life, to smaller communities filed with friends and family.
That's why we need these videos to be about walkable cities and nothing else. Cause attaching these controversial topics to walkable cities will make EVERY Republican reject them entirely.
a lot of conservative pundits, think tanks and politicians get money from big oil companies and oil billionaires to oppose transit funding and transit projects all the time, this is absolutely a political issue.
@@officialgreendalehumanbeing
Making public transits systems before making cities walkable is like putting the cart before the horse.
It is going to be easier for lobbied politicians to to dismiss the arguments for making public transits systems because American cities don't have the population density to make them work effectively.
When walkable cities are built it will make it impossible for them to argue against public transits systems.
So If the idea of walkable cities are joined with all these other controversial topics, they will shift the arguments from "it is less economic" (which is not true) to "it is a way control" (which is also not true)
15 minutes cities are not for me. I like vast open spaces instead of being cramped.
Conspiracy bingo!! Thank you , just won me a shot 😂
Then... live in a rural area? America is big enough that there will always be plenty of space with minimal population density.
Word.
Why didn't you name this video "next generation of *american* cities" then we'd know not to watch
13,546th viewer of this video!
Eco-life is nothing more than a idealistic dream. The fact is that humanity is near it's high noon.
so, how?
tons of empty rosy words
and visuals
without any specific actionable plan
I'm so sad my country is turning more car centric.
Okay, hopeful, but Americans are currently flocking to car depended, suburban-sprawl towns in the Sunbelt. Most new McMansion crapvilles ape the development of Southern California from the 1960's to 2010's, but without the benign climate, walk-ability or outdoor recreation. Basically, you're preaching to the choir: people who are already drawn to urban living, but a whole lot of people are joyfully doubling down on the mistakes of the past.
The problem with that is, most new houses are McMansions so that ends up where people are being forced to live
@@darthmaul216 In a lot of suburbs it's illegal to build townhouses or apartments, there may even be a minimum square footage for each lot. Add in parking minimums, and zoning restrictions meaning any non-residential uses (e.g. a corner store, or a cafe) aren't allowed and it's easy to see why people just get in their cars to go everywhere. Issues with the climate, people's health, and the cost of living are all being made worse by restrictive zoning rules.
The experience of moving around an American city like Los Angeles and Houston is completely different, and we have some sad to say, that almost every European city I’ve been to. and yea, we have all the things you have its simplest laid out differently
Urbanism dub
Hey vox, I have an objection as you have not mentioned about urban heat island effect and greening of cityscapes.Also how will you commute on a rainy day without cars. Also please mention about having trees in cities and how to plant em
"how will you commute on a rainy day without cars?" Cars aren't the only way to move around. We have public transit, buses and trains. They have roofs too, you know? And of course, bikes and raincoatslike @bromo has mentioned. The US is sadly very car-centric as opposed to other developed countries.
It's also not too difficult to make cycling and walking doable, without completely throwing out cars. I live in the Netherlands, and basically every street in a city combines car lanes, bike lanes and sidewalks.
When it rains I just pick a vest or coat with a hood, or an umbrella, before I go grab the bus/train as usual. Have you ever stepped outside before?
Well for urban heat if you shrink roads you can add more trees and there are some modern inventions that let us deal with rain Ie. The umbrella or a rain coat
And what about when you go to the supermarket to buy wholesale?
1:13 who is that someone?
This one didnt pop up in my subscription box 🤔