5 ms·

There are times I've literally taken half an afternoon off to go somewhere, knowing that when I arrive I'll be sitting around for an hour and a half, because th

There are times I've literally taken half an afternoon off to go somewhere, knowing that when I arrive I'll be sitting around for an hour and a half, because this seems better than traffic. And 99% of people never have that option. It's just gotta be a massive factor in daily stress. As a society we need to get over the ass-in-chair-9-5 mindset and allow remote work and weird hours to combat rush hour.

PhasmaFelis 9y ago
Seriously improving public transit and reducing car dependency would also help a lot. (How bad is rush hour traffic in major European cities? I'm not sure.)
- s0rce 9y ago
  I'm guessing if you travel by car in major european (and most major cities of the world) rush hour will be similiarly bad. The main difference in European cities is that you often have better options, including better public transit or bike infrastructure, also more housing in the inner city and less endless suburbia. I don't have sources for this but my thoughts are that if traffic was much less more people would elect to use the roads and drive private cars and it would end up as congested as here, as it does when more road infrastructure is built.
  - Symbiote 9y ago
    Not necessarily, since there might not be anywhere to park (or the cost might be too high).
    - s0rce 9y ago
      Good point, parking in American cities is way too cheap (often free).
- closeparen 9y ago
  Rush hour seems just as bad on public transit: incredibly crowded trains, have to wait several trains to cram onto one, trains are stop-and-go through the tunnels because they're running too close together, etc. We need to actually reduce our transit needs (build taller buildings closer together) and spread out our commute times.
DINKDINK 9y ago
And also allow more flexible commercial real estate to be built. For example, in 1985 San Francisco passed Prop M which caps the limit of area of office space to ~1e6 square feet (think roughly 1,000 2-BR or 4,000 desk spaces) apartments that can be built -- disregarding any population changes or even if space is torn down. Meaning if the entire city was razed (say due to an earthquake) that amount per year. Iatrogenics abound

PhasmaFelis 9y ago

Seriously improving public transit and reducing car dependency would also help a lot. (How bad is rush hour traffic in major European cities? I'm not sure.)

s0rce 9y ago
I'm guessing if you travel by car in major european (and most major cities of the world) rush hour will be similiarly bad. The main difference in European cities is that you often have better options, including better public transit or bike infrastructure, also more housing in the inner city and less endless suburbia. I don't have sources for this but my thoughts are that if traffic was much less more people would elect to use the roads and drive private cars and it would end up as congested as here, as it does when more road infrastructure is built.
- Symbiote 9y ago
  Not necessarily, since there might not be anywhere to park (or the cost might be too high).
  - s0rce 9y ago
    Good point, parking in American cities is way too cheap (often free).
closeparen 9y ago
Rush hour seems just as bad on public transit: incredibly crowded trains, have to wait several trains to cram onto one, trains are stop-and-go through the tunnels because they're running too close together, etc. We need to actually reduce our transit needs (build taller buildings closer together) and spread out our commute times.

DINKDINK 9y ago

And also allow more flexible commercial real estate to be built. For example, in 1985 San Francisco passed Prop M which caps the limit of area of office space to ~1e6 square feet (think roughly 1,000 2-BR or 4,000 desk spaces) apartments that can be built -- disregarding any population changes or even if space is torn down. Meaning if the entire city was razed (say due to an earthquake) that amount per year. Iatrogenics abound