this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2026
54 points (98.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

15399 readers
194 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I often hear that mixed-use zoning (i.e. Euro-style walkable urban planning) is illegal in the US. Zoning laws will always prioritize auto-centric and oil-friendly infrastructure. But which laws specifically prohibit human scale development and how can we get them repealed? What laws can we enact in their place?

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tons of them. Besides mixed-use zoning bans, there’s a widespread problem of regulation on everything from road widths to sidewalks to house and lot dimensions, setback requirements, lawn sizes, fencing, 2-way street requirements. All this stuff combines to reduce density and make older style high density single-family and multi-family mixed neighbourhoods impossible.

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago

The ONE mixed-use zoning ban I'd uphold is the one of large polluting factories and data centres near residential neighbourhoods.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Remove mixed use restrictions. So store fronts can have residential above. Remove medium density restrictions. Tax credits should for new housing should include, if not favor, condos over rentals and single family homes.

Schools until at least highschool should have to be within a 15 minute bike ride/walk for students homes of a district.

Street parking should have to be heavily justified, and assumed no. That space would be better served with green spacers and bike/side walks. For areas with high density parking garages that are linked to their public transport would go a long way. Intercity rail makes a lot of sense in the midwest, so much sense that used to be the norm!

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Also abolish requirements for developers to build parking spaces along with housing. Let the market decide.

[–] GutterRat42@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Mandatory parking minimums

[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 4 points 1 day ago

There's no silver bullet, but this is one of the higher priorities. It doesn't really work if there's still no alternative to driving however...

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

One of the most impactful thing you can do is vote locally for candidates that support transit and density.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

It's not just lack of mixed-use zoning; it's lack of dense zoning. On average, something like 75% of the residential land area in US cities are zoned for single-family houses only. Moreover, not all single-family zoning is created equal: for example, in my city most of the neighborhoods are "R4," which means minimum lot sizes of 9000 sq. ft. (roughly 0.2 acres), but the category with the largest lots, "R1," requires a minimum of 2 acres. Even just rezoning the mansions in the fancy neighborhoods from R1 to R4 would basically 10x the density, let alone developing them to their highest and best use (i.e., multifamily, which would easily 10x it again, if not more).

Every urban single-family house on a modest lot physically displaces 10 families further out into the suburbs. Every urban mansion on a large lot physically displaces 100 families further out into the suburbs.

And you know what adds insult to injury? The owners of these properties are not paying 10x or 100x what people who own units of dense housing are paying -- not even close. Because the zoning prohibits developing to the highest and best use, it devalues urban lots compared to what they should be worth, and thus gives those homeowners a massive subsidy on their taxes! [Insert rant about how Georgism is better here] Urban homeowners are generally likely to be wealthier than renters, and the larger the lot they own, the more wealthy they're likely to be. So now our subsidy that's already unjust is regressive on top of everything else, subsidizing more the wealthier the homeowner is!

Frankly, people need to understand this and get fucking mad about it, because it's a goddamn unjust outrage just on grounds of equity, even before you get to the urbanism/walkability part!

[–] No_Maines_Land@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

Land Value Tax / Georgism.

[–] mjr 11 points 2 days ago

Repeal Jaywalking laws.

[–] brownsugga@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

The laws will differ from state to state and even between cities within the same state. The fundamental change has to be concentrating population in a given metro area, which will increase business opportunity in the area where population increases.

[–] No_Maines_Land@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Henry George's heart was in the right place, but land value tax is arbitrary and easily gamed.

[–] No_Maines_Land@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

And property tax isn't?

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It’s not. Zoning is the problem but also the solution. Definitely mixed use, definitely high density.

I like the variation “transit oriented development “. Build a train system as your focus. Actively guide development around each station. Zone for mixed use and higher density, but needs active encouragement, needs to smooth out the requirements. In the Boston area, one of the keys is higher density “by right”. Typically bigger buildings are treated case by case by zoning boards but that’s paperwork, delay, discouragement. “By right” says those are approved by default in that zone, just like a single family home in a zoned residential: less bureaucracy less paperwork, less delay

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I call it "the cartwheel test".

Basically if you can do 50 cartwheels, and haven't passed anything useful yet, it's not a walkable city.

Maybe a school. Maybe a CVS/Walgreens. Maybe a laundromat. Maybe a movie theater. Maybe a tax place. Maybe a seniors center. Maybe a daycare.

Just anything that SOMEONE is going to find useful.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So that's an urban density test, with added cartwheel fun.

When selecting a place to live last time I moved, I set up a balanced scorecard (as one does). One of the highly-weighted criteria was "how many places can I sit down and have a beer within a 20-minute walk of my house?" The answer for the place I moved to was 34. Other places I considered scored even higher than that, but lost out on other criteria. For the previous place I'd lived: 3, though if you expanded to 30 minutes, it was 8. Still not bad if you have a bicycle. English (and many other European) cities are far more concentrated than those in the US. In the US, the closest you'd get are San Francisco, New York, Boston and a few other eastern cities.

The ironic thing is that I quit drinking beer a couple years ago. Luckily, other services like cafes, restaurants and coffee houses follow a similar pattern.

[–] felixwhynot@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

You must do a lot of cartwheels!