3 ms·
>Their bizarre strategy: making those neighborhood streets worse to drive on. What is bizarre about this? This is the empirical approved solution for this: Mor
by 1ris 8y ago
>Their bizarre strategy: making those neighborhood streets worse to drive on.
What is bizarre about this? This is the empirical approved solution for this: More and better streets have cause more traffic, fewer and worse have less. If you want less trafic this strategy is as good as it gets. And if people want few trafic that what politics should do. I'd guess a website called "reason.com" would like empirical data, and science, but they seem to care about some anecdotes.
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/06/21/the-science-is-clear-more-highways-equals-more-traffic-why-are-dots-still-ignoring-it/ https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/06/21/the-science-is-clear-...
- BlackFly 8y agoYeah, the article claims that everything backfires but it seems to me the issue is that they are not using the strategies in tandem. Look at the Netherlands: residential areas are designed so that it is not possible for through traffic to have a shorter route (or a route at all) through them. You may be 100 meters from your school if you walk your kids there, but 3 km if you drive. Then they make a plethora of bike and bus lanes to entice people to drive less and reward people who do not. These strategies work: neighbourhoods are safe, the roads are congested (they always will be) but people have viable alternatives.