5 ms·

Public. Transit. Cars will always be a perpetually morphing problem whose repetitively common theme is "too few people moved per unit area". De-prioritize car

by ttfkam 3y ago

Public. Transit. Cars will always be a perpetually morphing problem whose repetitively common theme is "too few people moved per unit area". De-prioritize cars. Re-prioritize walkable, bikable, and train-accessible cities.

hulitu 3y ago
> De-prioritize cars. Re-prioritize walkable, bikable, and train-accessible cities. You do realize that the traffic will be moving at the speed of walking then, or ? And mixing people with bikes and cars is a bad idea.
- cwillu 3y ago
  A parking lot of a busy supermarket trivially handles the foot traffic, easily funneling all of it through a handful of choke points without any (pedestrian) traffic jams. No, the only time you see a traffic jam in a parking lot is when the cars are moving, because the density is so much worse.
- peoplefromibiza 3y ago
  > You do realize that the traffic will be moving at the speed of walking then, or ? walkable paths do not usually overlap with cars/bicycle lane/bus lanes. but they are very effective to reduce the use of vehicles for routine activities (grocery, schools, catching public transport, meeting friends, going out for a drink, etc.) Also traffic speed is actually not that relevant, in Rome, where I live, most of the time cars move at an average speed lower than 10 km/h, the real issue is avoiding congestions, not making cars move faster. 15-20 km/h is more than enough to do what you have to do in a reasonable time. where I live in Rome to reach the station I can either take the subway (5 stops, 11 minutes), the bus (~20-25 minutes), a cab (~15-20 minutes) or my car ~30-35 minutes and forget about parking it. fast tracks for cars can be moved outside of the city, like the great ring around Rome. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Raccordo_Anulare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Raccordo_Anulare
- pipodeclown 3y ago
  You clearly haven't been watching the notjustbikes YouTube channel..
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  You do realize that the traffic will be moving at the speed of walking then, or ? You don't understand. They see this as a feature. They will not be happy until everyone (except them) is living in Kowloon and eating bugs. Individual mobility and autonomy is a problem to be solved, not a solution to be sought.
  - ttfkam 3y ago
    How exactly is individual mobility and autonomy enhanced on a weekday at 5pm on the 405 stuck in traffic for an hour or more? And then you have to park at either end of that commute. You can get from The Battery to Inwood Hill Park (opposite ends of Manhattan) in an hour or less without a car. After you exit the terminal, no extra parking step needed. No car insurance. No gas. Just individuals mobilizing to their destinations with greater autonomy. A car definitely takes longer and leaves you fixated on driving rather than reading a book, browsing the news, or streaming a TV show, especially at 5pm.
c7DJTLrn 3y ago
I use public transport almost exclusively but I can see why it wouldn't work for everyone. Juggling two kids and bags of shopping while hopping on and off packed busses/trains sounds like a nightmare. Not to mention delayed services. Hours of my week are wasted and London's is considered one of the best public transport systems in the world...
- atoav 3y ago
  Car centric design is why you have to juggle the kids in the first place. I went to school on foot since my first day in school, later by bicycle — and this was (and still is) normal where I grew up. Most kids in european cities go to school themselves from a certain age onwards, in my case that was after kindergarden, elswhere it might be a few years later, depending on the regional culture.
- floomk 3y ago
  Just pack your kids a lunch and send them off on their bicycles.
HPsquared 3y ago
(I've been playing a lot of Factorio lately) Current public transport is like transport belts in Factorio. Fixed routes. This works ok in a simple old-fashioned economy (a few large employers, large hubs where everyone goes to the same place). What we need is a more flexible, on-demand model of public transport. Something like logistic bots in Factorio. Lots of small people-movers which go direct from point to point, on demand. Buses and trains were already obsoleted by cars and can only survive by targeted anti-car policy. Some kind of taxi (which would need to be automated to be at all economical for regular use) or electric scooter hire is the next stage of evolution. Logistic bots do require a lot of energy, but that's the nature of progress.
- fathyb 3y ago
  > Buses and trains were already obsoleted by cars and can only survive by targeted anti-car policy Where? In France most people would take the train to travel a long distance (2h+ drive). I can be in Paris in 2 hours at 320km/h using the high-speed train whereas it would take me 6 hours at 130km/h using a car. Not counting the nightmare of going through the Parisian périphérique.
  - ohgodplsno 3y ago
    To be completely fair, Paris is an exception. France is an unbelievably centralised country, and everything goes to Paris. Bordeaux is similarly well served, but past that... Good luck in the southeast and its broken 80km/h lines, good luck in the southwest and its complete lack of lines... Hell, even Lyon takes a very long time to get to if you're not coming from Paris.
    - fathyb 3y ago
      I don't agree, let's take 5 big cities spread around the country to Lyon: - Toulouse: 4h by train, 5h30 by car - Nice: 5h30 by train, 5h by car - Strasbourg: 4h15 by train, 5h15 by car - Le Havre: 5h05 by train, 7h by car - Nantes: 4h50 by train, 6h45 by car
throw0101a 3y ago
> Public. Transit. Non-car centric development. The Oh the Urbanity channel has a video on the (misguided) idea that "urban living" = Manhattan / Hong Kong apartment blocks: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E Want a front yard, back yard, and garage (attached to a laneway)? Plenty of that was built pre-WW2: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s Examples (Streetview): * https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+O... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON See also: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s Fifteen minutes pedalling in one direction is downtown, fifteen minutes in the other is farm land.
voidfunc 3y ago
Not a viable solution in America. Americans are allergic to public transportation and density. Even in places where public transportation is relatively good by American standards it's seen as a money pit.
- daddylonglegs 3y ago
  IIRC very few public transport systems make a profit on running costs - never mind capital costs. The rest operate as money pits. Useful systems have huge positive externalities that can't be captured by charging passengers at a rate that reflects those benefits (I'm not sure if this is due to a free-loader effect, irrationality on the passengers part or something else). I think the only systems that have profited on scale commensurate with their benefits are those that were a real estate play, eg.: the Metropolitan Line[1] in London, Los Angeles trams, Hong Kong subways. I might be wrong about these examples, either due to misremembering or to falling to a just-so story. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-land https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-land Edit: formatting. Edit 2: The point, I think, is that if you rely on direct profits for the transport system you give up on huge benefits and accept huge costs across society.

by ttfkam 3y ago

hulitu 3y ago

> De-prioritize cars. Re-prioritize walkable, bikable, and train-accessible cities. You do realize that the traffic will be moving at the speed of walking then, or ? And mixing people with bikes and cars is a bad idea.

cwillu 3y ago
A parking lot of a busy supermarket trivially handles the foot traffic, easily funneling all of it through a handful of choke points without any (pedestrian) traffic jams. No, the only time you see a traffic jam in a parking lot is when the cars are moving, because the density is so much worse.
peoplefromibiza 3y ago
> You do realize that the traffic will be moving at the speed of walking then, or ? walkable paths do not usually overlap with cars/bicycle lane/bus lanes. but they are very effective to reduce the use of vehicles for routine activities (grocery, schools, catching public transport, meeting friends, going out for a drink, etc.) Also traffic speed is actually not that relevant, in Rome, where I live, most of the time cars move at an average speed lower than 10 km/h, the real issue is avoiding congestions, not making cars move faster. 15-20 km/h is more than enough to do what you have to do in a reasonable time. where I live in Rome to reach the station I can either take the subway (5 stops, 11 minutes), the bus (~20-25 minutes), a cab (~15-20 minutes) or my car ~30-35 minutes and forget about parking it. fast tracks for cars can be moved outside of the city, like the great ring around Rome. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Raccordo_Anulare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Raccordo_Anulare
pipodeclown 3y ago
You clearly haven't been watching the notjustbikes YouTube channel..
CamperBob2 3y ago
You do realize that the traffic will be moving at the speed of walking then, or ? You don't understand. They see this as a feature. They will not be happy until everyone (except them) is living in Kowloon and eating bugs. Individual mobility and autonomy is a problem to be solved, not a solution to be sought.
- ttfkam 3y ago
  How exactly is individual mobility and autonomy enhanced on a weekday at 5pm on the 405 stuck in traffic for an hour or more? And then you have to park at either end of that commute. You can get from The Battery to Inwood Hill Park (opposite ends of Manhattan) in an hour or less without a car. After you exit the terminal, no extra parking step needed. No car insurance. No gas. Just individuals mobilizing to their destinations with greater autonomy. A car definitely takes longer and leaves you fixated on driving rather than reading a book, browsing the news, or streaming a TV show, especially at 5pm.

c7DJTLrn 3y ago

I use public transport almost exclusively but I can see why it wouldn't work for everyone. Juggling two kids and bags of shopping while hopping on and off packed busses/trains sounds like a nightmare. Not to mention delayed services. Hours of my week are wasted and London's is considered one of the best public transport systems in the world...

atoav 3y ago
Car centric design is why you have to juggle the kids in the first place. I went to school on foot since my first day in school, later by bicycle — and this was (and still is) normal where I grew up. Most kids in european cities go to school themselves from a certain age onwards, in my case that was after kindergarden, elswhere it might be a few years later, depending on the regional culture.
floomk 3y ago
Just pack your kids a lunch and send them off on their bicycles.

HPsquared 3y ago

(I've been playing a lot of Factorio lately) Current public transport is like transport belts in Factorio. Fixed routes. This works ok in a simple old-fashioned economy (a few large employers, large hubs where everyone goes to the same place). What we need is a more flexible, on-demand model of public transport. Something like logistic bots in Factorio. Lots of small people-movers which go direct from point to point, on demand. Buses and trains were already obsoleted by cars and can only survive by targeted anti-car policy. Some kind of taxi (which would need to be automated to be at all economical for regular use) or electric scooter hire is the next stage of evolution. Logistic bots do require a lot of energy, but that's the nature of progress.

fathyb 3y ago
> Buses and trains were already obsoleted by cars and can only survive by targeted anti-car policy Where? In France most people would take the train to travel a long distance (2h+ drive). I can be in Paris in 2 hours at 320km/h using the high-speed train whereas it would take me 6 hours at 130km/h using a car. Not counting the nightmare of going through the Parisian périphérique.
- ohgodplsno 3y ago
  To be completely fair, Paris is an exception. France is an unbelievably centralised country, and everything goes to Paris. Bordeaux is similarly well served, but past that... Good luck in the southeast and its broken 80km/h lines, good luck in the southwest and its complete lack of lines... Hell, even Lyon takes a very long time to get to if you're not coming from Paris.
  - fathyb 3y ago
    I don't agree, let's take 5 big cities spread around the country to Lyon: - Toulouse: 4h by train, 5h30 by car - Nice: 5h30 by train, 5h by car - Strasbourg: 4h15 by train, 5h15 by car - Le Havre: 5h05 by train, 7h by car - Nantes: 4h50 by train, 6h45 by car

throw0101a 3y ago

> Public. Transit. Non-car centric development. The Oh the Urbanity channel has a video on the (misguided) idea that "urban living" = Manhattan / Hong Kong apartment blocks: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E Want a front yard, back yard, and garage (attached to a laneway)? Plenty of that was built pre-WW2: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s Examples (Streetview): * https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+O... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON See also: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s Fifteen minutes pedalling in one direction is downtown, fifteen minutes in the other is farm land.

voidfunc 3y ago

Not a viable solution in America. Americans are allergic to public transportation and density. Even in places where public transportation is relatively good by American standards it's seen as a money pit.

daddylonglegs 3y ago
IIRC very few public transport systems make a profit on running costs - never mind capital costs. The rest operate as money pits. Useful systems have huge positive externalities that can't be captured by charging passengers at a rate that reflects those benefits (I'm not sure if this is due to a free-loader effect, irrationality on the passengers part or something else). I think the only systems that have profited on scale commensurate with their benefits are those that were a real estate play, eg.: the Metropolitan Line[1] in London, Los Angeles trams, Hong Kong subways. I might be wrong about these examples, either due to misremembering or to falling to a just-so story. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-land https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-land Edit: formatting. Edit 2: The point, I think, is that if you rely on direct profits for the transport system you give up on huge benefits and accept huge costs across society.