Paris' Green Revolution: Cars Out, Bikes In?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 มิ.ย. 2024
- Paris, the City of Love, is reclaiming its streets from cars to create a more livable, eco-friendly environment. With the world watching during the Olympic Games, Mayor Anne Hidalgo is driving radical changes, reducing air pollution, and giving more space to people and nature. But not everyone agrees. Can Paris become a model for sustainable urban living, or will the resistance be too strong?
00:00 Paris: A ban on cars?
06:00 Place de la Bastille
09:00 Cycling in Paris
11.30 Driving in Paris
13:00 Major Anne Hidalgo
15:00 15 minute city
18:00 Paris Olympics 2024
21:00 Paris a role model city?
Report: Gerhard Sonnleitner
Camera: Mael Fuentes
Editing: Manu Reuss
► Liked the video? Let us know by giving us a thumbs up!
► Want to see more? Make sure to subscribe
► Check our website: dw.com/REV
REV - The Global Auto and Mobility Show from Deutsche Welle
#DW #DWREV #greencity - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
When people are used to cars being privileged, equality feels like oppression.
When you don't live in Paris, but you think cars are a bad thing for Paris. That's what you are.
@@stephenziga2319How would being car centric being a good thing for Paris (or any other city)?
@@stephenziga2319 what right do you have to clog up and pollute someones neighborhood you do not live in
Mass transit gives equal opportunity of mobility. They carry people, but not fragile egos and entitlement.
@@selflesssamaritan6417 Mass transit is a tool used to print money with property value rising.
just a reminder: cities aren't loud, cars are loud
That is not true. I talk from experience
@@shrgn Well experience shows that cars are loud, not cities.
@@shrgn engine is engine
it's going to be out loud than crowds (except protests/riots of course)
like just one honk or one acceleration and become a stand-alone sound you would hear
Yes. Despite they're quieter, the mass adoption of electric cars won't simply solve all the problem with automobile dominance.
@@shrgn I also speak from experience, and it is true, cities are loud because of vehicular traffic. this is an undeniable fact.
Think about how much more crowded those streets would be if every one of those bicycles was a car instead. If you're a car driver then you should be glad that all these people are riding bicycles and that the city is making it easy for them.
Every time I'm waiting at a pedestrian crossing with other people until four cars have passed I have to think about the absurdity that those four drivers make 12 pedestrians stop when all 16 people could have easily shared the space without obstructing one another.
Well, that used to be the case. Still, doesn't seem to be very popular with the parisians
Indeed. The car drivers who complain about traffic always forget that _they_are_ traffic.
and how much? cyclist need 7 times less space than cars and pedestrian need 14 less space than cars, so any of these transportation ways would be less in size than cars
@@riddele9904 feels like it mostly is with Parisians (from personal experience), but not that much with suburbanites
Car people that claim, pedestrians have never been that unsafe than now because of all the bicycles are funny to me. It is like a real time satire.
Car people are also pedestrians too! Cars don't run red lights frequently or drive on the pavement. If they obeyed the traffic rules, then there wouldn't be an issue.
@@mike-A299except they do do that, anyone who says the opposite is silly. And they have 1.5 tons of metal and plastic to crush you with as well.
@@damianoandreaarrigoni4401 erm no!
Cycling is for the poor and eight year olds. Either walk or use grown up transport in a city.
@@mike-A299 sure, sure, say that to anyone in the Netherlands and get laughed out of the room
@@damianoandreaarrigoni4401 say it anywhere else and they'll agree.
I’m a car enthusiast. But I’m loving how European cities are making walking and public transportation much easier. Bravo Paris!
Glad that you can be a car enthusiast without being a car addict! If only more people who like cars could be like you...
To me, cars are for sport and leisure in suburbs and country. Cities are for people.
I love driving my car or renting one in holidays but in large cities it makes no sense, each time I go to Paris using my car would be hell and crazy expensive and I think this is the way to go, no one ever said that large cities should accommodate everyone's car even more for free. I don't like some of leftist Hidalgo policies but her work to make Paris more pedestrian and bike friendly is just brilliant, it literally placed Paris as a reference in western Europe for fast bike and pedestrian infrastructure development, within few in Europe...
@@katjerouac 100% And I live in Edmonton which is like Canada's Houston.
Cycleways, road cones, planter pots, and Islam are the way forward for Parisians. Period.
Googled Eric du Camont. Turns out that he is the French equivalent of Nick Freeman. A person whose income literally depends upon people having car crashes and needing representation. Fewer cars, fewer jobs for criminal defence lawyers who specialise in traffic law. He's not biased at all, I'm sure...
He should be imprisoned by not denouncing the statistics of car killings and accidents to society and his role on it
*Eric de Caumont
I figured as much. His arguments were scattershot and bitter conservative tear-filled at best...
With this one I just needed 7.3 seconds to conclude he's a nasty human being.
@@slasherfun *Eric de Car-mont
I’m a Parisian and I’m not a fanatic; and I don’t have a car because i don’t need one. Suburbans can drive their vehicles to the closest metro station then use public transports just like us.
Delivery vehicles, taxis and emergency vehicles should be the only ones in our streets
I agree
Like Paris suburbs are well served by RER
I love the idea of driving to the nearest metro/bus station to wean people off of cars. My city has several under-used FREE park&rides. They’re lacking secure bicycle storage and restrooms, but could be great 15minute centers. The fares aren’t free yet, but if the fares became free first and the parking was charged after a while I’d be quite pleased! Imagine people slowly withdrawing from car travel: first driving to the park&ride, then cycling to it, and if it became a mini city center maybe they would get what they need right there. Society would be so much happier and healthier.
Will grand Paris express help people in the suburbs in getting into the city? Like will it have stations that are not connected to lines already going into Paris?
To achieve this well cheap parking fees as well as subsidies to public transit are needed, which is opposite to what is happening in Paris’s Metro unfortunately
So basically a bunch of people who don't live in a city want to dictate what people who do live in the city are allowed to do?
Yup. It's a common theme among suburbanites around the world.
Kind of reminds you of what its like when someone else’s emissions destroys your climate
Their argument is that the suburbanites work in the city, so they should at least have some say in what happens to the transportation system in that city. Which is a fair argument, but it doesn’t change the fact that those suburb dwellers can simply drive their cars to the nearest pubic transit hub and then take transit the rest of the way into the city.
@@murdelabop and to add insult to injury, city dwellers end up subsidizing suburbia
@techcafe0 Worse still, suburbanites always think it's the other way around, and have this illusion that the suburbs fund the cities, and you can't dissuade them with evidence.
It's simple geometry for me. Cars are spatially inefficient for dense urban environments.
Bingo! Does everyone in the world need that train vs bus vs bike vs car vs pedestrian space visualization graph? Apparently yes! That taxi driver should be happy with less cars on the road because that means more space for her!
@@stickynorth I’m sure that the taxi driver wouldn’t mind personal vehicles being banned. But what she is opposing is the proposal from a group of extremists in Paris who want to ban all motorized vehicles (including work vehicles) which is just not possible because delivery trucks, emergency service vehicles, and buses are still needed forms of transport, there is no replacement for them.
I live in the suburbs of Paris, the arguments opposed to Paris' policy are completely overblown. There are 13 RER lines and commuter train lines that extend more than 50km from the center of the city, allowing many workers to get inside Paris much quicker than by car. Some people are even able to commute by train, daily, from outside the Paris region. You don't need a car to work or shop in Paris, there are jobs and shops outside of Paris too, and Paris can't be blamed for the region's conservative government's lack of political will to offer car-free mobility outside of Paris. I've been living 50km away from Paris, I didn't have a bus to take me to the RER on Sundays, and that was the region's fault, not Paris'.
I'm sorry, but most of the RERs are already overcrowded, so imagine if you move people from the car to the RER ?
I am not against removing cars from the city, but this has to be done in agreement with the suburb, not against. I think the restructuration of Paris should be done by Ile de France Mobilité which sees bigger pictures than the city of Paris
Actually only few portions of RER lines have capacity issues, most of them run just fine even during rush hour.
Why would the suburbs have to decide how people live in Paris? Should people living in Paris also have their word at how people in the suburbs are living as well?
Île-de-France Mobilités is already doing a bad enough job at taking care of the transit system, I wouldn't trust them at urban planning, especially after the disinformation campaign they did in late 2020 against Paris' wish to create carpool and bus lanes on the périphérique, telling instead in that campaign that Paris wanted to remove lanes...
in America most drivers only drive around 5 miles a day why spend $50,000 U.S. to go that far
In my six months of living and working in Paris (most of it living in 16e and working in Saint-Denis), I was in overcrowded metro, RER, Transilien, tram or bus exactly once, and that was when I went to see Paris Motor Show down near Porte de Versailles.
Thats just wrong, people work with their cars lol. And RERs are overcrowded we would have to build more lines.
How dare anyone propose a non-fossil-fuel-reliant mode of transport that doesn't clog up streets and pollute the air.
Driving through central Paris is nuts. It's stressful and inconvenient. Why anybody would insist on keeping car traffic in central Paris is beyond me. Metro and buses take you everywhere and I refuse to believe that all these drivers are disabled or old people who have no other choice.
Public transport simply doesn't keep up with demand
@@akfsx Then build more transit, rather than devoting money and space to vehicular infrastructure.
@@Zedprice but bullying cars is much easier than extending public transport, which became more crowded and less comfortable. Cycling in bad weather is for masochists.
@@akfsx Then let them use cars, who needs more cyclists?
@@dallysinghson5569 build public transport infrastructure first
Paris has changed so much over the decades for the better. It used to be a bleak city with no greenery, car exhaust and trash filling the air. It is far more greener and cleaner than I have ever seen. Not everything is perfect, but it has improved weather those who drive around by car like it or not.
5:10 No you don't. Drive your motorcycle to a suburbian transit hub and take the metro to the center.
Hear hear!
Like in Paris, you can park it at RER(suburban train) station and take it into the city
Around 70% of the commutes between paris and its suburb are made using public transit (approximately 20% by car)! The public transportation network between paris and its suburb is already pretty good, and DW is clearly lying on this point. The real problem is commuting between suburbs, which is currently difficult to do without a car (and the main goal of the new public transit project was to adress this issue).
Someone really needs to tell this to those complainers…
The problem is that people will always use the travel option that is either cheaper, or faster, or more comfortable, or more reliable (depending on person's preferences and conditions). For many places in Paris's suburbs, motorcycles and scooters are faster than public transport (although probably not cheaper), which makes people mechanically use these more.
You cannot just ask people to use transit based on their good will.
Either the alternative (public transit/ cycling) needs to be made more convenient (that's the "carrot" strategy, e.g. new metros in the suburbs, more protected bike lanes etc) or the less preferable options (cars/motorcycles) have to be made less convenient (that's the "stick" strategy, e.g. taxes for driving big vehicles, fares for parking your motorcycles, making streets one-way etc...).
Cities don't hate cars, cyclists don't hate cars. Geometry hates cars.
As a mode of transportation, it is the most inefficient one spatially as it takes up too much space per person. No amount of street space can fix that
Why are people outside of Paris so entitled by how Paris govern themselves.. they blamed parisian when they do not have access to public transport while they are the one voting for wrong politicians
Parisians have been telling the rest of France how it should be governed for decades, why shouldn't the rest of France have the right to tell Paris how it should be?
@@robinhood4640 Parisians have never told the rest of France how it should be goverened, Parisians can only vote for Paris mayor (and only since 1977, they couldn't even vote for one before that!), not for other cities' mayor.
Because the suburb is intimately connected to Paris, everything that is done in Paris will have a far-reaching impact that goes well outside of Paris. Paris is not an island in France. For example, some restructuration did not remove traffic jams but moved them elsewhere. That is why these kind of policies should be managed at the regional level.
To take an example, it is like if the City of London decides to manage its road disregarding of the Greater London.
For me, this highlights a problem in the way the city and the regions are governed.
Well except car traffic and congestion did indeed decrease. That's logical, as the excess use of cars is the main cause of congestion: if you enable people to use a more efficient mode of transportation, you'll have less cars, therefore less congestion.
@slasherfun decrease IN Paris, but has increased outside
This is great! Montreal is doing something similar too! We don't need all these cars in the city!
exactly! people are always against change cause this would take away their ability to comfortably drive and park in the city. ignorant people.
Everybody wants to be able to drive their car. And everybody hates trafficjams.
Apparently people fail to connect these two dots, when sitting in a car.
Paris is way in advance though
@@Zelda-sr6ro depends, Paris has a lot of fast and cheap infrastructure for cyclists (don’t get me wrong, they also have some expensive infrastructure) while montreal has been installing protected infrastructure for a longer time that also got the time to develop, now montreal has Dutch traffic controlled intersections that’re very similar to the Dutch ones, Paris has yet to do this.
@@miles5600 It's true, but mainly concentrated in some neibourghoods, like the Plateau or only on some major streets. Also, Montréal is improving for bike infrastructures, but Paris has always been better for pedestrians.
NYC needs to take notes and copy this.
No way!
Don’t even dream about asking we Americans to ditch the Automobile.
It is our 3rd amendment..
We are free unlike socialist Europe
@@bwillwin1505 freedom, my ass. car dependency is antithetical to freedom.
Well i mean in a car you decide when to go somewhere instead of public transportation controlling your use of time
@@billyfink1234 Because designing everything so that your mobility is dependent on owning and maintaining a private vehicle is the opposite of freedom. Freedom is the option to choose which mode of transport you want to take - not defaulting to driving a car because the built environment requires you to.
@@billyfink1234this is a lame argument. With high quality public transportation you don’t need to look at a schedule, the service might come every 10, 5 or even 2 minutes, meaning you arrive at the station and probably won’t have to wait much for a vehicle.
8:10 Sarah: Traffic in paris is getting worse. there are too many cars.
8:20 also Sarah: banning vehicles from the city is not a solution.
8:44 also Sarah: Bikes are the problem.
Sarah is the problem
Sarah: They (the bikes) come by at warp speed.
More probably 15-25km/h, while the speed-limit is 30km/h and I would not be surprised in the slightest if she wants to go back to a speed limit of 50km/h.
@@kai_v_k Problem is that a lot of bicyclists don't know or care about riding responsibly. I've never been hit by a car, but plenty of bikes. Of course, that is preferrable to the former, but I'd rather have none, which is possible if people would just start acting responsibly.
@@FantasticOtto Several times (almost several times a day) I avoided being hit by cars and cyclists by braking and swerving, same with pedestrians. However I got hit twice by a car, once by a pedestrian and never by a bike. In general I would call the annecdotal evidence.
If you look at fatalities cars vs. cyclist/pedestrians is several times higher than cyclist vs. cyclist/pedestrian or pedestrian vs. cyclist.
You are right about people of any mode of transport being a menace and having seemingly never heard of responsibility.
@@kai_v_k It's a question of parameters really. When asking what is worse, there could be a case made for both bicycles and cars.
If we're talking number of incidents, I would venture a guess that far more bicycles hit people than cars, but in most cases a bicycle making contact with pedestrian results in a "hey, watch where you're going" and both move on. So the numbers are probably far greater than we realize.
Getting struck by a car however means probable injury or worse, and a report to the authorities. So in that sense cars are the bigger threat.
It's a matter of perspective. Personally, when moving about a large metropolis, my issue with cars is that they are loud, smelly and obtrusive. My issue with bicycles is that I don't feel safe around them, since many riders have no consideration for pedestrians and close to zero situational awareness. They approach large groups of people and don't even slow down. And since people can't hear them coming, there's bound to be a crash now and then.
Car drivers, who have for most of the past century been the recipients of ridiculous levels of subsidy to support their driving habit, see it as tyranny to lose even a fraction of that subsidy, and face the need to actually pay for the infrastructure and the space they use.
I'm facing the same tension in my own city, and car drivers here don't like it one bit either.
You are joking, right? Fuel and vehicle taxes are a main income source for governments all over the world . In Germany gas and vehicle taxes generated over 47 billion € in 2022. On the other hand, trains are highly subsidized and couldn't survive without government support. Your comment as well as the documentary are highly biased.
@m.3257 In the US, the amount of subsidy varies depending on the segment. The interstate highway system gets 50% of its funding from fuel taxes and road use fees. For secondary highways that drops to about 30%. For arterial roads it's about 20%. All the rest of their funding comes from subsidy. By the time you get down to residential streets the funding comes almost entirely from property taxes. If drivers had to pay the actual unsubsidized costs for their driving habit then they'd do it a lot less.
Don't just look at the raw amount of the funding raised by fuel taxes and road use fees, look at the percentage of total funding they generate, and where the difference comes from.
As for trains, yes they're subsidized. All forms of transit, without exception, are subsidized. Train tickets are also heavily taxed, though the total varies from country to country. Air travel is also very heavily subsidized, some say even more than trains.
@@m.3257 OP is spot on in his original comment and his response. There are some many costs to support road infrastructure that are hidden from drivers and government don't even bat an eye spending billions on road infrastructure through general tax revenue that is paid partially by people who don't even own cars. How is this fair?? Every time you get on the train, you need to pay. The same is not true for roads.
Drivers should need to pay road tolls and parking fees everywhere thier vehicles exist. The economic data does not back up offering free roads and parking spaces to car drivers to boost economic activity; it kills downtowns and makes us reliant on sprawling, money burning suburban development that needs to get further propped up by tax payers. Yes, there is some revenue generated by fuel taxes etc, but it doesn't come remotely close to covering the true costs of maintaining car dependent infrastructure. As soon as public transit has a bad month, governments talk about cutting service. On an under utilized road though, they just spend more tax dollars trying to keep that infrastructure intact, with no plan to pay for it except to continue to dip into general tax revenue.
The facts do not care about your feelings.
A highly biased report. They give 80% of interview time to detractors of the city's plans. None of the detractors have any solutions to present in regards to massive traffic jams and deadly air quality which were rampant in Paris long before the bike and pedestrian infrastructure were introduced. The only advocate given screen time is the deputy mayor. Very disappointing reportage by DW.
Conservatives never have solutions. They seem to think that either the situation is fine just as it is or there is no solution. At least no solution that directly benefits them.
Thanks for your feedback. I'm surprised to hear that you found the report biased against the changes happening in Paris. Did you watch the whole report? There are quite a few voices in favor of the changes: the mayor, the deputy mayor, the APUR representative, the city planner, the architect. Of course there are also voices taking the opposite position, but that's because our aim is to produce a balanced report that gives space to all sides of the debate.
@@DWREV I agree! This video came across as very targeted and anti-bike. It's not that pro active transportation weren't given screen time but that they were only given snippets while bad actors were given MUCH more screen time. Pretty disappointed in this coverage
Maybe the shots of people enjoying and moving about the city by foot and bike sufficiently represents the advocates of the city's plans? Maybe not all communication is verbal?
@@edb3255some people have a hard time with subtlety (hence the side of the ones yapping the most)
As an American watching this, this is awesome, I hope they continue. When Americans started building suburbs and driving into cites it ruined our cities, they bulldozed buildings for parking lots and our streets got very wide, that is why you don't see many people walking in America. We are completely dependent on our cars.The average U.S. driver spends 97 hours in traffic a year, this is why I am moving to Europe, I don't want to spend my life in traffic.
and most drivers only commute around 5 miles a day
You should move to Paris.
@@m.3257Matt has the right mindset, so would likely be welcomed in Paris, but I'm sure he would rather see some of the better ideas from Europe copied and adapted into American cities.
Paris is building the biggest expansion of public transit for suburbs on the continent in decades. And all this one sided reportage talks about it is that it won't be finished in time for the olympics..
It's geometrically impossible to let everyone from the suburbs go to work in the city center with a car. Cars just need way too much space. If you want to go to work in the center of a major city by car, go and move one of those socially isolated and segregated suburbs in the united states and be "happy"
The biggest expansion in decades ? The Moscow metro was expanded with something close to 200km over the past decade. Including a new Moscow Central Circular Line of 54km. They are similar projects as GPE, but with less tantrum ..
@@lws7394 I think he meant in a non totalitarian regime, of course China also built a crazy number of metro and high speed train lines but totalitarian regimes have a cheat code for easy planning and decision making....
@lws7394 Yes is the biggest in decades and in Europe. Plus this new mega infrastructure project is going to add four new lines which are totalling 200km of tracks.
Yes ok !!! My problem the handicap , its same politic . No car , bycicle impossible transport the morning 4 am no transport ??? SOLUTION PLEASE
@@user-hb9jh6it1j Extreme case here but maybe you can find more convenient hours? If the job is so inappropriate for your handicap maybe you should talk to the HR/managers to get something more adapted to you. I'm fairly sure solutions exist...
I take a train into Paris center and bike to my office 3 times a week. It is great. I save thousands of dollars on a car and gas. I save years of my life by avoiding the stress and lethargy of driving everywhere.
There’s plenty of room in thousands of cities for those who want to lives their lives sitting in 6 lane traffic.
Paris is leading the way in human progress, like it always has.
How are you bringing your kid to school!?
How do you take your grandparents to hospital!?
Do you go on a date or romantic dinner with your wife on a bike!?
@@borisstefanov2983 kids can often take the city bus, walk or bike (if they're super young you can do with them). Cars are not illegal and there can be exceptions for older folks, two people can go to the same place on a bike, train, bus or by walking I dont see why you'd need a car for that.
@@borisstefanov2983Kids ride public transportation themselves, like kids did 50-70 years ago.
@@borisstefanov2983 Integrated public transport..
@@borisstefanov2983 kids can commute on their own, mainly by bike, bus, or train.
Ambulances are cheap in most places outside the US.
Dating while riding a bike is actually very romantic, ESPECIALLY when you're in Paris.
I'm a car enthusiast originally from the US and I now live in Amsterdam. I love cars and driving but dense city centers are not ideal for cars. It's usually not even enjoyable to drive in these cities. I do like to drive to and park in Paris (I've made a video about this on my channel) but I am not against the idea of making more Parisian streets pedestrian only zones.
Cars have become bigger and heavier (large SUVs, EVs, etc.) and I don't think these ancient city streets can handle this anymore.
they should bring back the original fiat 500.
@@fehmanahsrafi7143 it wouldnt pass safety tests
There are too many people buying SUVs and those people who buying it for status, they are a problem. Those who buy it for lots of luggage, people carrying including children and of course living in the countryside where there is no road then that's a valid excuse. But in England so many people including the rich people who live in London buying SUVs for status are being wasteful.
The problem is the noise from Didier's motorbike. This guy is a psychopath to feel entitled to make such an awful noise and disturb thousands of people.
Bingo! South Park has that episode on the subject that even my Baby Boomer mom shouts at them now if you know what I mean...
@@stickynorth I see exactly which episode you mean 😅
Especially considering how ridiculously expensive one of those harleys is, he could easily sell it and get a nice electric motorcycle instead. Save on gas, save on noise, save on parking. Win all around.
I started driving in 1970, gave it up 2015. Last 8 years have been the best. Try it.
*Bizarrement, y a que des vieux qui se plaignent.* 👀
Ouais et combien d'entre eux penses-tu etaient contre le port du masque y a qlq années de cela 🤔
Biberonnés à la voiture
100%
Dans 20, 30 ans on en parlera plus alors 😄
The car drivers are like the sibling that's had the playstation controller for 4 hours and then starts to cry about how important it is to 'share' when the younger sibling gets the controller for five minutes.
12:16 "People living in Paris voted for this decision. They didn't ask people from outside Paris to vote"
"Anne Hidalgo is just the mayor of Paris, which is only 2 million inhabitants in an agglomeration of 11 or 12. So there's the first problem which is the governance of this agglomeration."
Looks like the government is working as intended. If you wanted Anne to care about what the suburbs want, then those suburbs should be part of Paris proper. If not, then the mayor has no legal obligation to pander to them. They can't even vote her out!
Plus Paris is building metros serving the suburbs too, so stop moaning.
Less car is better for everyone.
More space for the people and greenery!
Commuters that bring their car to a city are really destroying the city for its inhabitants. Paris must improve its access to the suburbs by public transport and create parkings there for people to leave their cars there. They must solve the commuting issue first and foremost. But yeah, commuters out.
It is coming. The 'problem' is that the old road and rail routes converge on Central Paris. Everybody trying to travel between outer areas must interchange centrally at Chatelet-Les Halles for Metro/regional rail, or the Périphérique inner ring road. Even the A86 outer ring road is not far enough away from the city centre. Hopefully the Grand Paris Express Métro routes will do much to connect the suburbs and bring relief to the centre. My opinion - Route Nationale N104 should be completed to become a true orbital Autoroute for Grande Paris, much like the M25 motorway which encircles London.
@@bartwood7058 in Berlin the S-Bahn Ring was a real game changer.
While the report is good, I have a strong impression that it is slightly biased towards car owners and their struggle in adapting to change. I am from Rome and personally I would give an arm and a leg for even half of the positive changes towards bike and pedestrian infrastructure in my city, which instead is made deadly, noisy and polluted by an absolute infestation of ugly car infrastructure and massive traffic jams, which makes turns the beautiful city centre into a stressful nightmare. We really need less cars on the street and that is achieved only by good alternatives to driving, so bravo Paris.
Very much so. Look out for content on channels such as Not Just Bikes, Oh the Urbanity! and CityNerd. Also, just search on 'urbanism'. Much better info, zero pandering to petrol heads.
Yeah and the cherry on top all cars manufacturers get rid of their small cars and replace them with SUVs like wtf
Exactly.
I wonder why Eric de Caumont and others talk about banning all cars. This is not the target. Did they know what they are suppossed to talk about? Why was this wrong fact not corrected. This leaves a wrong impression. There was also spoken about traffic jams once, was it any better in the past? I have not heard about that. So this is also misleading.
That's their argument style... You talk about A, they rant about B... It's never fair or targeted. They are what people in the biz call "bad faith debaters"...
Building a cycling infrastructure in a car Centric city is always difficult.
Some oppositions would create bogus excuses along the way, that's natural.
But in the long term, even they will see how beneficial it is to have clean air, better cycling infra and public transportation systems in a city over cars.
Cars can still drive around, but not as the main transport.
You still need logistical purposed vehicles for deliveries and businesses.
The 15 minute city conspiracies are by the way funny and ignorant, as we have those already in The Netherlands.
Yeah the bikes are killing people. Like so many. Like so scary. These bikes are so much more dangerous then the 3 ton vehicles. Of course lets ignore fact completely.
They even pollute the air with ... Air, it's so horrific 😱😱😱😱
Facts speaks plently and they accuse cars by soooo far 😆
'Bedfellow' cyclists are every pedestrians nightmare. And a motorist is required by law to keep a certain distance from a cyclist but a cyclist is not required by law to keep a certain distance from a pedestrian.
@@philfluther2713 in my country cyclist and pedestrian don't usually share lanes. And way they do they must adjust their pace to the pedestrian so they don't become a danger. So it's exactly the same. On the other end the risk is far greater when being in an accident with a car due to obvious reasons. Those are the facts
Bikes are not in the taxis' lane. Taxis are "allowed" to use the dedicated Bike and Bus lane. This taxi driver is living in a state of confusion. Taxi drivers have no respect for the privilege they are granted to use our Bike and Bus lanes. Send them back to the car lane if they don't appreciate their exemption.
With cities keeping on growing the ONLY solution is to focus on less cars, since there is no space for more cars, where would they make extra roads and parking spaces in historical centres?
The same is happening in Amsterdam, loving it with less cars, more green, bigger bike roads ans more pedestrians.
And scaled down GVB and NS services. Leuk 🤣
The Paris metro system is the worst in Europe for accessibility. The vast majority of its stations lack escalators or lifts, and unfortunately, the situation isn’t improving. Surprisingly, this issue doesn’t receive much attention.
young socialists don't care
@@akfsx Like all public transportation in Paris région, the métro is under the Île-de-France région full responsibility, its elected officials being neither young nor socialists.
@@slasherfun Paris mayor is a member of socialistic party and your SUV referendum is a quite typical thing when a decent cabrio or 4x4 Subaru is counted like a SUV. Envy.
It is one of the oldest metro system in the world and the oldest if you take the average aged of all the lines. Why? Because most if the lines were built at the beginning of the 20th century, when these questions of accessibility were not an issue. Now, the city cannot do a lot about it.
@@akfsx Paris mayor is a member of the socialist party, but Paris mayor is not in charge of Paris métro system: the Île-de-France president is in charge of it, and she's definitely not socialist at all.
A decent cabrio is not a SUV, but a "4x4 Subaru" is an SUV... by definition!
Very proud of Paris making this change! it is necessary
Change THEN adapt. The status quo is not an answer. Getting from the regions into Paris does suck, but more cars is definitely not the answer.
I can bet that all those people who complain that there is too many bikes would swear up and down if they were to be stuck for hours in a massive car traffic that would happen with more cars then bicycles,
Thank you Paris for leading the way. Public transportation plus bikes and scooters is the future. But they should give priority to pedestrians and to public transport, not to elecric bikes that are as fast, as heavy and thus as dangerous as traditional cars and motorcycles. Pedestrians should feel safer and freer, not more endangered.
Well, it's not just Paris, Marseille, Lyon and Toulouse, major cities in France have also made this choice and many other cities are following this trend.
Everyone faces the problem, people in city centers vs. people in the outskirts and suburbs.
Although urban transport is excellent in France, many suburban residents have no choice but to drive their car to work.
Park and Ride, Chicago has it and so does every major French city.
it is just a matter of space. people on a bike occupies less space than a person in his suv.
The space, the obnoxious rumble, the farting of horrid fumes in our faces, and of course, the safety, the safety, the safety.
@@marcosfraguela honestly, I feel mopeds are more of a nuisance in those regards. Moped emissions are so much worse than any 4-wheeled vehicle nowadays.
@@ThePilotGear Apparently, you're right-some mopeds are less efficient than cars.
@@marcosfraguela It has more to do with exhaust treatment. Small gas engined-powered 2-wheel vehicles aren't held to the same standards as passenger cars, so no catalytic converter, no particulate filters, no combustion control or gas recirculation.
this german journalist is absolutely diletant , on what evidence he saying that made pedestrian and public transportation is technicaly problematic? its absolutely false , car infrastructure much more expensive and inneffective than public transport _ cycling and walking, maybe he need some education and reframe his car-depended mind
whatever we can do to make cities more walkable & liveable, with as few cars as possible, or even car-free, I'm all for it.
I'm addicted to gasoline fumes ; please don't deprive me of my fix !
Just banning cars without developing viable alternatives or public transits, is not very constructive way to solve this issue.
I like this idea: designing cities like lifestyle centers, which are walkable while easy to access by cars, with the assists of public transits or park-and-ride.
The concept of good and evil doesn't bring us anywhere, it is on the border of contradicting ideas the true solution lies.
Yes, Paris probably has the best alternatives to cars already. They said at the beginning: 9% of trips are made by cars, meaning all others means of mobility are working great!
Go to Paris then and try taking unsecure, inefficient (strikes, incidents, frequencies), dirty, inaccessible (also knowing there’s almost no free parking to park in suburbs) transportation system. Even though there’s some better, it’s not enough at all. It’s really like the whole city and state: big projects and amibitions, but nothing happening to fix some big already existing issues. Why do they try to remove alternatives as long as the others aren’t working properly? I’m 100% sure that if that happened, most people would leave their car behind
@@chainedej No alternative are being removed. Alternatives are being *added* actually.
It is not the first time that DW throws shade at Germany's Western neighbors under the guise of fair reporting. I can't help but feel that if those policies at work in Paris were in place in Munich, Hamburg, or Berlin, DW would call them revolutionary and laud them as the way to go. Germany is turning into an old person watching itself decay but taking pleasure in criticizing more dynamic people.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I'm surprised to hear you found the report biased against the changes in Paris. Did you watch the whole report? We presented several proponents of the changes, including the mayor, the deputy mayor, the APUR representative, the city planner, and the architect. Of course we also included critics to ensure a balanced view, aiming to represent all sides of the debate fairly.
I have cycled in Munich as a tourist and Munich has many separated bike paths. In 90 % of the streets I was separated from cars, cycling in safety. And in those 10 % I had to share the road with cars, that was fine too. German drivers are very nice considerate people. Saying Hi from the Netherlands.
Easy fix. Give them 100% tax credit refund on the purchase of any electric bicycle, electric micro cars and delivery vans.
No driver's license or insurance mandatory, but recommended if you don't wanna be sued after an accident.
Charge cars a hefty toll to use the city streets. This move will also convert people from gas to electric.
Two birds, one stone. Sorry for the analogy birds.
That's basically already the case. You don't have a 100% refund on an electric bike but you can get subsidies for it, depending on your income [1]. Regarding the toll, it is kind of applied through parking fees. It is EXTREMELY expensive to park in Paris and actually the marginal price (price of an extra hour) increases as you park longer [2].
You are right, E-bikes have a maximum range back and forth of 25 km/ 15 miles (range for convenience of commuting, not the maximum range). So for more people living in Paris' suburbs can use an e-bike.
Cities are for people. If you need to get into a city, you can park your car outside and take transit in. Taxis, logistical vehicles, and emergency vehicles are the exception, of course.
In the Netherlands we had this proces of banning the cars in city center about 30 years ago. Car minded people where against plans but they didn't succeed. It turns out that the cities became more liveable and healthy. Now nobody wants to turn the clock back. I will say proceed Paris with your good plans!!
I love how the lawyer boomer is all up in arms about how bad banning motorized vehicles would be but fails to mention why other than "there will be no life" even though the opposite is pretty much always true. I have only one response to give that guy: ok boomer.
Our daughter lives in Paris with her boyfriend. Sound engineer and teacher. They don’t have a car and life is great. Public transport is amazing. The guy on motorcycle can just ride to his local train, rer or metro station…
Completely agree with idea that you charge extra for SUV. You use those cars for mountain and muddy roads. City roads has been asphalted.
If you like them pay extra charge. They take so much extra space and clearance.
Cars don't belong in cities
Imagine living in the most beautiful city that is what it is because of walkability and transit and instead only wanting to drive everywhere and park your car in the midst of it?!?? Mind boggling!!!!
Im from NYC and wish we would implement the same policies here! Its happening but at super slow speed...
Boston and New York need to AGGRESSIVELY ban cars.
It has proven all over the world that taking people out of their cars makes for better living environment. It creates more social interactions, it reduces stress, and it helps the small businesses. Good on Paris. And I'm saying this as a car enthusiast.
The most arrogant demographic (the petite bourgeousie) needs more help right? Lets let small cookie store owners clutter our sidewalks with signs and spill their merchandise out into the streets. Encourage more social interactions? Nah, jsut turn every developed area into one massive shopping mall for tourists.
I like cars, but not for commuting in the city. It's time people start to think why do they need a 1.5 ton machine to carry a 70kg person around.
When I spent six months in Paris consulting for SNCF, I went around exclusively by public transport (which has been improved even further since then.) I didn't even use taxi, even once, not even from and to the CDG airport.
A colleague from SNCF picked me up once at my flat in 16th arrondissement and we drove to the project office in Saint-Denis, near Stade de France. It took us 15 minutes longer than my usual commute by metro.
But can you imagine Monsieur De Caumont in metro or RER, with unwashed masses? He certainly can't.
Cities should only allow city/kei cars if at all... Public transit should be the priority way everyone gets around. Full-sized vehicles have no place in cities themselves. Those are for highway/out of town trips and you can rent those!
I am a car enthusiast but I have to recognize that cars and motorcycles as useful and enjoyable as they can be are in the end a nuisance at many levels.
Cars are fantastic when you are the only one driving.
I’ve been living in Paris area for 15 years now. When I moved in, I was scared to death by the car traffic, the continuous congestions, the poor quality of the air (I remember traffic restrictions on certain days in summer when the alert threshold was reached). Nowadays, I’m scared to death by the way all these former bad drivers have turned into really bad bikers… Imagine a boulevard full of bycicles (the de Rivoli is now forbidden to private cars). As a pedestrian, you are NEVER sure you are in the good moment to cross the street. Even at 10 km/h, being hit by an errant bike may hurt you really seriously! And on top of that, public transportation is always congested, dirt, rotten to the core! There are absolutely NO HUBS like in other towns to park your car and take the metro/RER. The Paris Portes are the most tragic and unsafe place to wander around when you come back from a dinner or theatre. And last, RER service has progressively decreased in quality and timelines: for instance, RER E is now closed after 10 pm and not sure it will reopen to 1 am as it used to be after the extension to the west is completed… Let’s see, but as of now, it is a total nightmare!
The areas around Paris need to improve their public transit for this to work, Grand Paris Express is a good example of something that will take people commuting outside of the center city off their cars
Stop the car snowball system!!!
Revolution!!!
Hell yeah! Less cars = more LIFE in a city.
There was a war on pedestrians and cyclists that lasted through decades and the car owners did not even notice, because they have been so accustomed to being pandered to. Anyway the younger generations will be a lot harder to convince when it comes to buying cars they mostly don't need.
I found Passalacqua’s points (or at least the ones reported by DW) a little strange. It looks like he says no for the sake of it.
He claims that mobility is not necessarily the issue, the way we build cities is. Then when confronted with 15 minute cities he says that that also doesn’t work.
Also his point regarding le Champs Élysées is not very clear. The mayor wants to improve the area and he claims that by making it better it will attract more tourists which is a problem because they fly to Paris.
But that is silly. Of course if you make the city better more people will visit, so what? Should we make our cities worse so that tourists don’t bother flying in?
How is the suburbs not doing enough for their citizens in terms of transportation and quality of life Paris's responsibility or problem to resolve?
Maybe they should have asked these questions to those mayors??
Because the suburb is composed of multiple cities and because trains are not managed by these cities but by the region. Things are on their ways with the Grand Paris Express, scheduled to be mostly completed in 2030. But the city of Paris is anticipating things by almost 10 years and letting people in the suburb pay the consequences whilst they wait for these new trains.
Paris has exactly zero responsibility in the suburbs still having car centric streets.
I lived in Paris for 12 months in 1985 and 1986 as a North American exchange student. During this time, I used my bicycle for the vast majority of my trips within the city (and for many of my trips outside the city, as well). While I was by no means a pioneer (since, after all, France is the birthplace of cycling), using a bike for getting around in Paris was much less common in the 1980s than it is now. As a North American cyclist, I was accustomed to cycling in harsh and intimidating streetscapes, so Paris did not seem that bad to me at the time. But it certainly presented challenges. It's vastly better now - 40 years later - and I applaud the hard and at times thankless work of the current mayor Paris and her predecessors in transforming the roadway transportation landscape in that most amazing city.
You want one of your most valued landmarks as a traffic circle?
Amsterdam should be a role model for not just Paris but any city on this planet.
Whats scandalous is the way the suburbs were built isolated from the city.
I'm really surprised to appear in the subject but I completely support this transformation!
Ton omniprésence dans les reportages sur la mobilité à vélo dans Paris est très ludique. Je cherche ton cameo à chaque fois que j'en regarde un.
Bikes and pedestrians don't create traffic, drivers and cars do.
It's very nice to have clean air in the city. In the past it was horse manure. Now it's polluted air.
Car advocate: "What we need is to teach everyone how to live together."
We've tried doing that for about a hundred years now. Cars and bikes sharing the same road space is not working so well.
I mean, it's very telling that Paris electorate has voted in the current government that is making these changes, and one of their core platforms that they were elected on was pedestrianisation. So, obviously the majority of Parisians want these changes.
Almost all of the complaints from the detractors could be solved with a greater push for public transport increases, which is also part of the plans in Paris.
I don't have much sympathy for people who can afford to drive cars in the cities and get upset when they can't do it anymore due to urbanism. I've lived in a city my whole life and had to suffer terrible public transport because people refuse to give up their cars and so the local government does not implement good public transport. My commute to work can be 30 minutes or an hour, depending on the car traffic, because everyone else insists on driving to work and my bus gets stuck in that traffic.
It's always a case of "now I can't drive my car/ride my motorcycle to work? i'll have to take the bus like a poor person or ride a bike for a long exhausting time" like every person who can't afford a car has been doing this whole time. It's ridiculous. Where is the sympathy, equality or ambition to change things for the better for everyone?
Driving to work perpetuates the cycle of there being no public transit development, because we can't build it effectively in suburbs or other areas because of all the bloody cars!
I think Amsterdam is a good example of how to make a walkable city work. We were there a few years ago and were amazed at how they managed so much mobility without cars.
The dutch are also the most right wing politically in the EU.
Paris looks beautiful. From a large distance.
I'm in two minds about this. I lived in Paris (or rather, an affluent nearby suburb) for four years. Certainly, many areas in the centre have been greatly improved through pedestrianisation and my own neighbourhood had superb public transport options, but the governance issue mentioned and problem of punitive ecology are very real - boxing out those in distant, poorer neighbourhoods, who are obliged to use their car because of poor or over-saturated mass transit is something that needs to be addressed, perhaps by making allowances for those living further afield. Otherwise, the effect can be deeply classist and limiting for people already struggling. On the other hand, taxing SUVs does seem to make a lot of sense, as it's a safety and spatial issue, as well as an environmental one. Large SUVs and trucks are significantly more dangerous to pedestrians and they occupy much-needed space in the centre, at a time when families are statistically much smaller than before. It's illogical.
People in poorer neighborhoods can't afford the cost of car trips to dense cities, people using a car in Paris today are mostly wealthy people whose trip doesn't actually require a car.
In most of the suburbs, streets are built so that cars are often the only safe option to move around: it makes everyday trips way more expensive than they could/should be, cities much more dangerous and polluted than they could/should be, and basically prevents anyone who can't drive a car, whether too young, too poor, too old, or with an important health issue, to freely move around on their own.
Bingo.
Go green go Life.
We have to save Nature. If we don't care for nature, Nature wouldn't care for us. It is as simple as that.❤️❤️🌎
To say that public transportation is not developed in Paris extra muros is false, the regional metro system is extensive and gets you to the city centre quite easily. You could park your car close to the station and continue on train
The issue of the government of the city centre being seperate to the outer city is interesting. It does seem reasonable that people who live in the outer part but work in the centre should have input into decisions that affect them. In the UK the London mayor is elected by the whole of greater London, not only the city centre. He has brought in many restrictions on cars both on traffic and emissions and introduced a city wide speed limit of 20mph, the same as Paris. He just got relected with a comfortable majority. The majority of people want this, even though some may complain loudly.
I have never understood why so many people have to live in the same place?... Having lived in Amsterdam, Brussels, Istanbul, Antalya, Jeddah, Helsinki... I've never been more happy and healthy now that I live in a town of only 20'000...
Jobs mostly.
I hear you loud and clear. I've lived both in cities and in rural areas, and I've found that I like the extremes. I like living in places that are either densely urban, or out in the sticks rural. What I hate are car dependent suburbs, which have the drawbacks of both and the advantages of neither. Unfortunately, being American, almost all of the places developed in the past century are car dependent hellscapes, and most Americans seem to like it that way.
Jobs.
Always jobs.
That's why.
No one can live in the rural areas with cheap properties because they are NO JOBS.
Cars! But cars have got too big! We need compact city cars, slimmer designs etc.
The world's not transitioning away from cars, it's transitioning to electric cars, where everyone will have 3 or 4.
Prior to the 20th century all cities were 15 minute cities, so reverting to these formats should be relatively easy in historical places. For me the more interesting and difficult question is how to apply sustainability to motor car orientated suburbs built in the last 120 years?
Anyone complaining about traffic IS part of the problem because they ARE part if the traffic. Imagine how congested Paris would be if all those cyclists had their own cars.
I visited Paris with my family before this happened. We used the Metro to get around and walked everywhere. The idea of renting a car never occurred to us. Reducing traffic seems like Nirvana to me.
Thanks for sharing your experience, so you only see this as a benefit for the city?
I recently was in Paris for a few days and it was great to walk there. Only problem is during rush hours the subways are too full!
Good for Anne Hidalgo for listening to the Parisians who elected her rather than the suburbanites who didn't.
That said, if she doesn't want those suburbanites driving into Paris proper then the system should be set up to give them credible alternatives, such as good transit in the suburbs as well as park-and-ride stations so that they don't need to drive all the way into the city.
That's where you find the incoherences of the governance in Paris : the mayor of Paris is reponsible for the street layout inside of Paris, not for the public transit, be it inside or outside of Paris. That's the Region president. So she does what she was elected for : adapt the city center layout to the parisian's needs.
The vast majority of suburbanites who drive to Paris chose to drive, they do not have to, they have plenty of public transport options.
The vast public transport projects which are alluded to in the report aim to link suburbs so that suburbanites need not travel thru Paris in order to reach an other suburb. These projects are not aimed at linking the suburbs to Paris. Those links already exist.
“We’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas!”
The center of Paris has reeked of diesel exhaust for years.
Who gives a shit what a lawyer thinks when it comes to urban planning and transit? What would they know about it? Good on Paris for listening to urban planners, urbanists, and transit activists,
I just come back from a short trip to Paris, and in studying before, I brought my little city bike with me. Paris is a dream for cyclists but it became a nightmare for car drivers. I enjoyed it so much, and although it was my fourth or so visit, it’s the first one where I can say I really have seen and got to know the city….it was great. Hope German cities will follow up the same path soon.
22:24 I think it is important to say that in the 20th century most cities were less car infested then now.