Many cities in America made the dubious decision during the 20th century of erecting freeways that bisect cities, further reducing space designed for pedestrians.

By contrast, the majority of European cities were not only built long before the automobile but additionally, their central business districts didn’t change as much – or at all – to accommodate freeways.

In Europe, gasoline prices are much higher because, unlike in the United States, many countries there don’t subsidize fuel. Hence transit remains an attractive option, with rail stations and trams situated in central business districts and linked to public squares.

The primacy of a central meeting space can be traced to the Greek Empire with the agora, among other forerunners. That concept endured, and during the Roman Empire, for example, officials required that the military lay out a new town or city around a central rectangular space, Dunham-Jones said.

“Italy and Spain really reflect that history of the Roman Empire,” Dunham-Jones said.

And it’s why Santa Fe and St. Augustine – two cities in states not known for walkable urbanism – retain focal public squares. They were built by Europeans – the Spanish colonizers.

But it’s not all ancient history that explains the piazza discrepancy. After World War II, America set out to chart its own future, without relying on Europe as the example, and be a beacon for modern life. The future didn’t look like old, cramped industrial cities. Indeed, a signature look emerged amid postwar prosperity.

“Having a yard and a car became the epitome of the good life, of modern living,” Dunham-Jones said.

In the postwar period, the United States spent billions of dollars on roads while other countries spent billions on high-speed rail to link big cities. Even though Amtrak’s high-speed line Acela recently introduced a new train with a maximum speed of 160 mph, the outdated rail infrastructure in the US means those speeds will rarely be reached, as CNN reported recently. High-speed rail in Asia and Europe can average up to 197 mph and 169 mph, respectively.

What followed World War II was a long slide toward suburban sprawl. Municipal requirements emerged in many places that forced developers to incorporate parking into all new projects.

American cities are full of parking lots and garages, which Atlanta web developer Darin Givens calls “dead space.” Four years ago, he visited Brussels where the Grand Place made a huge impression. Givens said he didn’t know “just how magical it was going to feel” to be there in person, surrounded by other pedestrians.

“We walked into it in the evening, and it felt like Christmas even though it wasn’t – just how beautiful the lighting was” from the illuminated buildings and outdoor tables spilling into the square, said Givens.

Givens lives in the city of Atlanta, which affords him a taste of the urban bustle he found in Brussels. But it’s also a city bisected by highways and streets designed mainly for car traffic.

“There’s nothing like the Grand Place anywhere within walking distance of where I live,” he said. “We live on a pretty busy road and people drive very fast.”

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 天前

    Car propaganda and lobbying

    They don’t build towns/cities like the rest of the world, they build roads and try to fit shit around them (then knock stuff down again to widen the road). If you approach urban planning like that, the closest to a town square you’re getting is a car park

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 天前

      You do not necessarily end up with good squares by not doing that either. Just look at modern Chinese planning. A grid of large roads, but with large blocks, which then are filled with rows of high rises. The blocks are quite walkable and large enough to offer basic services to its residents, but you just do not end up with nice public squares that way.