8 ms·
As a former Portlandian I’m pretty stoked to imagine where this could take the city! A low altitude densification would beat what’s been done to the inner East
by jackyinger 6y ago
As a former Portlandian I’m pretty stoked to imagine where this could take the city! A low altitude densification would beat what’s been done to the inner East side...
Here’s a fun thought experiment... Imagine if most streets became parks/plazas (aside from a few left for utility reasons) and everyone rode (electric) bikes, or similar relatively light transport options. To me that’s be idyllic. Imagine not being relegated to the sidewalk, not having to worry about being hit by some idiot driving way to fast in a residential area.
Edit: What’s with the downvotes? Geez have some imagination. Bikes don’t need to have right of way everywhere either... I guess vehicle-centrism goes far beyond cars.
- wool_gather 6y ago> Imagine not being relegated to the sidewalk Pedestrians don't mix any better with (electric) bikes that are trying to get places than they do with cars. Reasonably broad and well-maintained sidewalks are essential for everyone's comfort and safety.
- sudosysgen 6y agoIn practice, they do. Bikes are much smaller, much nimbler and much slower than cars. Unless the street is completely packed with pedestrians, fully pedestrian streets work well with ebikes. This is from experience riding bikes and having people ride bikes next to me in fully pedestrian streets as dreamt about by GP.
- wool_gather 6y agoI have a very different experience than you. I ride or walk everywhere I go. Bikes may be slower than cars, but -- when they're being used for commuting, not toodling around on a Sunday afternoon -- they are much, much faster than pedestrians. When I'm walking, I don't want bikes whizzing by me at three times my speed. When I'm biking, I don't want to be constantly worrying about people on foot -- or their kids, or their dogs -- suddenly stopping or changing direction without looking.
- lkbm 6y agoThere's one bike-and-ped bridge I used to cross for work, and as a cyclist I did find pedestrians very annoying--they take 90 degree turns across the trail without looking at all -- but that's only one very crowded section. (and as a pedestrian, the cyclists were never a problem for me there.) But that's one crowded bridge. On most roads, people walking in the roads instead of the sidewalk wouldn't matter to me. You could 10x the number of pedestrians and it'd be fine in most of my city (Austin TX). Maybe that'd change if it were pedestrian-friendly and we ended up with 50x the number of people walking, but this is a problem I dream of.
- egypturnash 6y ago"having a bell, ringing it when you overtake pedestrians, and waving and saying thanks" helps from both sides of this, IMHO. Bonus points if you maybe holler "cute dog!", "great hat!", or some other compliment instead of "thanks!". I, too, ride or walk everywhere I go, and have several shared cyclist/pedestrian paths that I use a lot. My least favorite thing to encounter on the path, walking or riding, is that asshole with the multi-thousand-dollar racing bike and no bell who just blazes past me with no warning. Fuck that guy, "share the road" works both ways.
- wool_gather 6y agoYeah, I will go out of my way to avoid shared paths, so I guess we just have different tolerances for these things. :) I do have a bell and a voice and I'm ready to use them if needed, but I'm happier when they're irrelevant. I take pedestrian priority and safety seriously when I'm riding (as I hope others do for me when I'm walking), so if I can ride in an area where I have less of that worry, I will.
- sudosysgen 6y agoI think you might underestimate how large streets are and overestimate the number of bikes and pedestrians.
- wool_gather 6y ago
- miketery 6y agoPersonal EVs such as scooters, EUCs, bicycles, and non electric options are smaller, have more throughput, and are less dangerous. Imagine a 2 lane road, turned into a park with smaller two lanes for 2 way bike traffic. Just beautiful.
- jeffbee 6y agoIndeed, a two-way bikeway takes up the same space that car drivers consider to be one lane, so you can take a two-lane road and convert it to a bikeway with spacious sidewalks. As a bonus, such a road will have throughput that car drivers cannot even dream of. https://twitter.com/Cycling_Embassy/status/1298153135127646208 https://twitter.com/Cycling_Embassy/status/12981531351276462...
- pkulak 6y agoWhen I'm walking with my 8-year-old, we both scramble right the hell out of the street if there's a car anywhere in our vision. Neither of us could care less about a bike somewhere. It sure doesn't feel like we're being irrational.
- jackyinger 6y agoWell, I think bikers have a lot more incentive not to hit people from a personal damage point of view. I mean they’re about as vulnerable as a pedestrian in a collision. So I think you’re thinking right about the risks.
- estebank 6y agoNot to mention the speeds and mass involved, and visibility that a cyclist has vs a driver (without even starting to consider the vehicles that are popular in the US).
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tesseract 6y agoYes! Sidewalks have existed for literally millennia, for a reason. They are not a newfangled invention that is only necessary because of cars.
- unethical_ban 6y agoYes, they do. Do they mix perfectly? No. But a person + 30 lb bike at 20 mph is safer for pedestrians in a collision than 4000 lbs of rigid steel and plastic at the same speed or faster. Note also that bike paths and rights of way are not designed in mostof the US to prioritize bikes OR walkers. Imagine if roads and roundabouts were designed exclusively for bikes and pedestrians.
- madhadron 6y ago> Imagine if most streets became parks/plazas Before the massive efforts of the auto industry, this is basically what they were. Streets of small European towns still feel this way and the cars feel very much like the interlopers. So, a return to normalcy.
- rayiner 6y agoThat framing as a way to misrepresent the fact auto industry gave people what they wanted. Many newly developed parts of Europe are the same way, because that’s what people want.
- 0xdde 6y agoWhat is this based on? A dogmatic belief that markets perfectly line up with public sentiment and desires?
- andys627 6y agoPeople didn't want cars, they wanted what the gov't subsidized. Here in the US cars are subsidized and transit, biking, walking is penalized. These dials are turned differently in different countries.
- cringepirate 6y agoI don't believe that for a second. In the UK where I live the government subsidise rail. Rail is very expensive, slow and unreliable especially compared to my diesel car. I would rather cycle to the train station, get onto the train with my bike and then cycle the other side to work. However it costs me almost twice as much to do and takes me 3 times as long. Even with all the taxes on fuel, emissions and the price of repairing what is now an old car (my Car is over 15 years old and has done many many miles). Driving is cheaper, generally gets me there quicker even when travelling across the whole country. Rail tickets keep on increasing in price and the service never improves and the whole experience is unpleasant. In the rest of Europe cars are just taxed heavily and people still buy them. This idea that people don't want cars just isn't true.
- eikenberry 6y agoWhat you describe requires the elimination of residential zoning completely to allow for small businesses to mix in with the homes. You can't eliminate cars until you eliminate the need for driving to stores and you can't eliminate that without mixed zoning.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoAnd you can't eliminate zoning as long as entitled busybodies are both complaining about other people's power tool usage and voting.
- bluGill 6y agoI agree with mixed zoning, but you still need to get supplies to the local stores and trash out of the area. Plus you need places for special construction equipment to get in as there is need. Of course all of the above is a fraction of traffic that we have today. However don't pretend it doesn't exist.
- novok 6y agoEliminating cars does not mean eliminating roads.
- jabl 6y agoThe imposition of residential only zoning all over the world is, in retrospect, a huge mistake. This has been posted on HN before, but the Japanese zoning system makes a lot of sense: https://www.andrewalexanderprice.com/blog20191002.php https://www.andrewalexanderprice.com/blog20191002.php
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- egypturnash 6y agoThe big requirement for "more cycling", IMHO, is "more errands being within comfortable cycling distance". Mixed-use zoning makes this a lot easier. (I have never learnt to drive, and rely on cycling, walking, and transit; I find I am generally a lot happier when I live with a lot of errands in cycling distance!)
- stock_toaster 6y agoLike Venice but with park-spaces instead of gondolas. I love it!
- seattle_spring 6y agoWouldn't that turn visiting even close by hiking areas into a multi hour one way trip?
- mleonhard 6y agoI think it will be a long time before any existing cities ban cars. It would be faster to start a new car-less city. I dream of doing that someday.