Hacker News Reader

Comment by RobertoG | Hacker News Reader

The description in the article about what "superblocks" are, is, I think, wrong.

It's not a binary thing "cars" vs. "not cars at all". Inside the "superblocks" is possible to use the car. Is just that you can't go anywhere except around the super-block and you have to drive in a slow pace.

Parking is also restricted to neighbors and short times for loading and unloading goods or people.

All that, disincentive cars going there except for specific needs. Also a lot of space is take away from cars for common pedestrian spaces and cycling.

View on HN

It's essentially a car free zone but residents can own a car and get out of the area. As an outsider the space is not accessible by car. Which is really how it should be. We might not have the whole country hooked up to amazing public transport, but we don't need to provide car access to every single space.

I think that, as an outsider, you can access by car.

Is just that, if you have to drive slowly, you can't park and you have to exit in the same place you entered, what's the point?

I assume dropping someone off or picking someone up to go to/from somewhere outside wouldn't count as parking.

Yeah, the most clear example of that is taxis. Also less traffic makes easy for drivers that bring goods to the shops.

what about visitors?

Is it similar to a cul de sac, then?

Yeah (but as another commenter says, a cul de sac only for cars, not for bicycles or walking).

It's not designed for stop traffic totally, just to disincentivize some (most maybe?) kind of traffic. The idea is also make those areas kind of "independent". In the sense that they should have most of all necessary services. Places for buying your groceries, medical services, small business..

Of course, in practice it's not ideal, they are still learning.

Cul de sacs are for street hockey.

Cul-de-sacs block all through traffic, not just through traffic by cars. This typically makes getting around impractical without a car.

Superblocks to my knowledge do not, you can exit anywhere on foot or by bike. Basically it makes getting around outside a car the more convenient option.

Not always. I've seen neighborhoods where the end of the Cul de sac connects out to walking/bike paths and green space behind the houses. So bikes and pedestrians can cut through at those points but through traffic for cars is killed, meaning only people actually going to the homes on the street actually drive there.

I do agree this is far from the norm though.

Yes and no. It's sort of a cul de sac for cars, but it's permeable to walking and biking.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com