755
submitted 1 year ago by sexy_peach@feddit.de to c/fuck_cars@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 113 points 1 year ago

Let me guess what kind of people predominantly lived in the neighborhoods that were bulldozed.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 21 points 1 year ago
[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

So you have a before version?

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago

No, that's from 2000 I think.

Atlanta is still apparently the USA's second most segregated city, so I can't imagine it was a multicultural wonderland in the 1950s.

The article those pictures appear to be from says it was mostly black neighbourhoods demolished.

https://daringivens.medium.com/atlantas-interstates-destruction-of-city-fabric-in-the-1950s-mobility-woes-today-4882b4ec6830

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Sadly, I don't think there's enough uncertainty to consider it a guess.

[-] squaresinger@feddit.de 81 points 1 year ago

Sure the designers of this monstrosity thought, "There are only black people living there, so it's a win-win" -.-

[-] playereightyone@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

You can thank Robert Moses for that.

The expressway must expand in order to acommodate the increasing needs of the expressway

[-] biofaust@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Am I the only one who finds the 1950s version also not nice from an urban planning perspective? I mean, it is a car-centered design anyway.

[-] Atemu@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Still, do you see how many trees there are? That place must've still looked nice and was certainly transformable into a really nice place without unreasonable effort.

Now, it's basically a wasteland.

[-] biofaust@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Nah not really, such low population density requires cars to be used. If you think tearing that down would be simple, then yes. But I think that even in Atlanta that would be difficult. The reason why those highways are there is that more people wanted to live in that kind of neighborhood.

[-] Atemu@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago

such low population density requires cars to be used

As someone living in a much less dense area, I wholeheartedly disagree. Even just a single tram stop with >=bi-hourly frequency near the center could make that entire area car-free if the people weren't car-brained. That area looks like it'd be bikable in <10min side-to-side, so most people could probably even walk to such a tram stop.

(That tram would actually need to go somewhere but that's part of a larger system's problem, not of this hypothetical neighbourhood.)

[-] biofaust@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

There are a lot of assumptions there.

First of all, I am sure that is part of something much larger and it is a real neighborhood, not something hypothetical.

Second, I don't see people giving up their car brains just because you put a tram. I myself would still be using a car if it wasn't made completely superfluous and fatiguing where I live and work.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] WetBeardHairs@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

The reason why those highways are there is that more people wanted to live in that kind of neighborhood.

No, those highways are there because white men got together and intentionally chose to put the highway there with complete disregard (or quite possibly, with malice) for the people who lived there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] grue@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

No, the 1950s version (actually more like 1900s; those houses were already decades old at the time they were photographed) was good. It was a traditional street grid with small blocks, and there were streetcars going all over the place. Sure it was mostly single-family (probably with more than a few duplexes sprinkled in), but it had great bones for densifying later when demand justified it.

I live only a few miles from the area pictured, in a neighborhood with the same development pattern. Even though it's been damaged by the removal of the old streetcars and having zoning superimposed upon it after the fact (which causes problems by mandating things like too-large setbacks and minimum parking requirements, as well as outlawing corner stores within residential areas), it's still mostly fine.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Smk@lemmy.ca 35 points 1 year ago

JUST ONE MORE LAME,I SWEAR TO GOD, JUST ONE MORE LANE AND WE'RE DONE. ONE MOAR LANE. MOAAAAR

[-] uis@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

A little lane of asphalt please,

More pollution if I freeze,

Running over children these,

A fresh bouquet of cancers.

(Parody of Glass of Water)

[-] EthicalAI@beehaw.org 30 points 1 year ago

“Trains Are Too Expensive And Would Take Years To Build“ - guy who remembers the interstate being built.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SecretPancake@feddit.de 27 points 1 year ago

Looks like what happens with headphone cables in the pocket.

[-] Zellith@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago

I've been playing cities skyline and I'll be honest, when my city gets like that I just restart.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] clearedtoland@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Nice little neighborhood you got there. Would be a shame if someone needed a new highway, wouldn’t it?

[-] meowMix2525@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You can take this picture in just about any city in the US too. NYT did a pretty good piece about it, gifted so y'all can read it: Can Removing Highways Fix America’s Cities? https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/05/27/climate/us-cities-highway-removal.html?unlocked_article_code=1.60w.uuX5.Oo4CsHZXGv8Q&amp;smid=nytcore-android-share

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] arc@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

Cities should be built around people, not motor vehicles.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Grass@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

How do roads even end up like this? The cloverleaf is as extreme as I'm willing to drive through. If anything like this came up in Google maps for my drive I would just nope on home.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Engineer answer: being a stack interchange, it's actually easier to navigate than a cloverleaf because there's only one exit in each direction instead of separate "A" and "B" exits with an entrance ramp and weaving in between. The complexity in this case simply comes from the fact that it's superimposed on top of what used to be a street grid, so they added a bunch of exits to local streets.

Big-picture answer: the desire to put freeways there in the first place is the product of mental illness.

[-] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago
[-] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah they only seem complicated from the air, on the ground you just read the signs and it's always clear, or if you're using your phone - just go in the lane it tells you

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] notannpc@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

It’s a good thing removing all those homes definitely didn’t cause or contribute to any way more serious problems in society. Right?

/s

[-] Hedup@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] squaresinger@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Any block is a swastika block if you ignore the right set of roads.

But that's not the block's fault ;)

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Waker@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not American so I might not fully understand the repercussions of this. (houses being demolished and stuff)

But I honestly prefer the current version. It seems to have more green spaces. The highways could be shit, but if it meant better public transportation them I'm all for it (buses for instance). Maybe kill a few lanes and get a train going there or something...

I don't know, the old layout seems very claustrophobic to me. The newer one seems to have more potential.

Edit: Upon reviewing the picture again, I think the previous version had a lot of parks that seemed "claustrophobic" but it's just because it's a B&W picture... So maybe I'd change my mind and go with the older one.

[-] adrian783@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

they demolished a medium density neighborhood for highways so suburbs can commute in and out of inner city. when you destroy neighborhoods and create "green space", people don't just stop existing. they either get pushed to the suburbs if they can afford it, or (most likely) the ghettos.

and how does highway create public transit?

highway is a mechanism to separate the undesired that cannot afford cars. kill a few lanes and build trains would mean "those people" can reach "our neighborhoods".

[-] araozu@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

I really like donoteat's video for why this is a problem

https://piped.araozu.dev/watch?v=rseaKBPkRPU

It's not about the 'feeling' claustrophobic or not having green areas, it's about the US's obsession with cars and it's consequences in the people

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] uis@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I'm not American so I will say that this is still terrible.

If you want to live in green space, move to soviet-era district:

[-] grue@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But I honestly prefer the current version. It seems to have more green spaces.

Those "green spaces" are worthless freeway medians that do nothing but attract homeless camps. Here's a street view of some of it -- complete with panhandlers and tents in the background -- so you can see what I'm talking about.

Edit: LOL, nothing like downvoting a local for telling you the truth.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] Pixelphoria@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

“What do you mean, why's it got to be built?” he said. “It's a bypass. You've got to build bypasses.” Bypasses are devices that allow some people to dash from point A to point B very fast while other people dash from point B to point A very fast.

[-] geogle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

FYI, unless I'm mistaken, that is spaghetti junction and it's not actually in Atlanta, but just northeast of it in Doraville

Edit: I was severely mistaken...

[-] arditty@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

Sadly, that’s the intersection of I-75/85 and I-20, right in the middle of downtown ATL. Here’s a more recent picture showing some more context.

Also, here’s an article talking about the history of I-20 being built through Atlanta: https://smartgrowthamerica.org/program/divided-by-design/atlanta-ga/

[-] grue@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Also, here’s an article talking about the history of I-20 being built through Atlanta: https://smartgrowthamerica.org/program/divided-by-design/atlanta-ga/

There are still some chucklefucks who want to build I-485 (tunneling under the rich white neighborhoods north of I-20 and bulldozing straight through the poorer and blacker ones south of it, of course).

[-] doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago

As another said, that's not spaghetti junction (Tom Moreland interchange), but frankly people get pretty fast and loose with how much of the surrounding area they'll call 'Atlanta' anyway. The actual city of Atlanta proper is much smaller than most people would think by just looking at a satellite photo, and the distinction between the many cities usually doesn't matter much unless you live there.

[-] adrian783@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

when people say Atlanta to people that don't live in the surrounding area they really mean the greater metro Atlanta area.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
755 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

9809 readers
1 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS