8 ms·

We could start be simply encouraging it less — spending less public money on roads, having more pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly laws (and enforcement), and cre

We could start be simply encouraging it less — spending less public money on roads, having more pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly laws (and enforcement), and creating zoning codes that require less parking for development projects would all go a long way.

VLM 13y ago
If you've heard the overused phrase "the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it" the obvious analogy is intentional destruction of infrastructure results in lower population, lower population density, lower property values... I don't know the specifics of the linked article, but stereotypically some outsider comes in, says "you have some nice profitable land here, and I have a plan to fix that...". If you'd like to experience anti-car infrastructure, we have plenty of semi-abandoned residential in the poorest parts of the inner city, and some vacant abandoned commercial space in the bad parts of town with limited parking. Of course the restaurant right off the interstate is doing booming business although there's always someone with a plan to "fix" that for them. "We need more customers... I know, we'll make it impossible for anyone outside walking distance to get here, that'll fix everything..." What we need is more money spent on roads and parking. Done the right way, of course. Nothing wrong with wide roads, wide sidewalks, strips of parks and trees and green spaces. Just remember where the bread is buttered, pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer.
- pyre 13y ago
  > pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer. This isn't inflammatory at all... not at all...
  - VLM 13y ago
    Google claims "intended to arouse angry ... feelings." I'm trying to be informative. May not like the way things are, but pretending "most people" don't look at the world that way isn't going to produce anything useful. I also have the defense of truth. Other than downtown Manhattan or downtown Chicago, this is how it is. You make money off someone who drives to your business, not some homeless dude who needs to use your bathroom. Customers come in cars. That's just how it is.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      Customers come in cars because there's no other way to get there. Cars, being hugely inefficient uses of space, actually decreases the number of customers who can get to your store. You can take a fully-packed car and compare the space used to people on a sidewalk: that's the difference in customers you're losing out on.
      - VLM 13y ago
        Seriously? So the best way to get more people in a sports stadium would be to get rid of the parking lot, or walmart's sales would go up if they got rid of their parking lots? Or on a small scale, I'd be more likely to go to a restaurant or small retailer if I knew for certain I couldn't get there on foot and if I drove there, I wouldn't be able to park? Now I do see your point for a stereotypical neighborhood local bar where they shouldn't be driving drunk anyway, or even a small local pharmacy or convenience store/gas station. I've seen poor parts of downtown with empty sidewalks and boarded up storefronts. Must be the parking lots?
        thrownaway2424 13y ago
        The principle of charity has long since expired and now we are left to ponder whether you've ever even been to a city. To answer your question, yes, the best way to get people to a stadium is, by far, to remove the parking lot. Here's one of the most well-attended MLB stadiums in the country. It's served by two streetcar lines and a mainline railroad. https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@37.779165,-122.390703,3a,75y,79.92h,94.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sgOor2VIW6zcDwyQCEsYTfA!2e0 https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@37.779165,-122.390703,3... Here's Wrigley Field: https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@41.949016,-87.655596,3a,75y,101.36h,79.79t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZG47gz5jCGeHFtqN6Y4NAA!2e0 https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@41.949016,-87.655596,3a... At Yankee stadium they built a parking garage and so few people use it that the garage operator is bankrupt. They are tearing them down. The stadium is served by a subway line and Metro North even has a station literally called "Yankees". I suggest you get out of Mom's basement and see the country before holding forth on its infrastructure.
- jessaustin 13y ago
  What we need is more money spent on roads and parking. Done the right way, of course. Nothing wrong with wide roads, wide sidewalks, strips of parks and trees and green spaces. Have you ever visited an urban area? Where on earth would this "infrastructure" be placed? Next to the Best Buy and the Outback Steakhouse?
- jchrisa 13y ago
  Principle of charity requires me to imagine that you just have had the bad luck to be only exposed to outdated ideas... Plenty of places to start, maybe here: http://m.fastcoexist.com/3021074/making-the-economic-case-for-cycling-friendly-cities-with-bikeonomics http://m.fastcoexist.com/3021074/making-the-economic-case-fo...
- gburt 13y ago
  > Just remember where the bread is buttered, pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer. Hah. What? Driving consumes a tremendous amount of most people's disposable income. I know people who spend $5-10k a year on transportation.
  - briandon 13y ago
    If someone is living in an urban area without a vehicle, they are likely to be paying more for housing and living in a significantly smaller space than someone living in a lower-density setting (e.g. suburbs) who owns and uses a vehicle of their own and may have a lawn, swimming pool, tool shed, little machine shop or sewing/crafts room, etc. Can you sell more gardening products (seeds, soil, tools, fertilizer, etc.) to someone who has a yard or someone who has a balcony that could potentially accommodate a planter or two? Will you sell more pool toys and equipment to someone who has a pool in their yard or to someone who may periodically use their building's clubhouse's pool or walk to the local municipal pool? How much less furniture or art or carpeting or pretty much anything can you sell to someone who has 500 square feet to live in versus someone who has 1000 to 2000 square feet of space in their home? Smaller kitchens translates into less counter space, so less space for kitchen appliances or even fancy pasta storage containers. The knock-on effects of your customers living in smaller, urban spaces vs. larger suburban-type homes are huge.
    - cylinder 13y ago
      So the downside to beautifying and reclaiming our cities by discouraging the automobile is that ... we buy less useless crap and live more efficiently? Shudder.
- nhaehnle 13y ago
  Just remember where the bread is buttered, pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer. I'm not sure if you're trolling or just a bit tone-deaf, but this is an incredibly US-centric way to see things. Seriously, it makes you seem a bit clueless. Clearly, the mindset you voice here is something that city planners in the US need to take into account. The question is, where does this difference come from, and can something be done about it? After all, cars and all the infrastructure surrounding them take up an enormous amount of space, which seems wasteful in the design of efficient and compact cities. How can those inner cities be "revived" in a way that makes them livable?
chrismcb 13y ago
I live 30 miles from work, having more pedestrian and cycle friendly laws won't do one bit of good.
- maxerickson 13y ago
  You would likely take them into account if you happened to move.
- jonemo 13y ago
  A few more bike lanes and bike storage space on the commuter train goes a long way. I live 20 miles from work and prefer to leave the car at home.
- cylinder 13y ago
  The problem is that you live 30 miles from work, a fact you find acceptable only because you know cars can get you there. Before the automobile era this was unheard of.
  - MrZongle2 13y ago
    How are you privy to the reason the OP lives 30 miles from work? Perhaps he has other obligations, such as family, that require him to live where he does. Or perhaps the cost of living near OP's workplace is beyond his means. You assume too much.
Tiktaalik 13y ago
Some cities are doing this. Vancouver BC has a policy of not expanding its road network whatsoever, and is actively decreasing by reserving portions of it to exclusive bike and pedestrian use. The city has also engaged with communities to find portions of road that are unused enough that they could be converted to parklets.
- katbyte 13y ago
  I think that only applies to the DT core not the GVRD / lower mainland as a whole. In the last 5 or so years we have built a new bridge to replace the albion ferry (golden ears), replaced & widened the pitt river bridge and interchange, construction of a new 10-lane Port Mann Bridge, 37 kilometres of highway widening from Vancouver to Langley & the replacement of nine highway interchanges, widened/improved 176th to the blaine truck crossing & fraser highway, construction of the south fraser perimeter road, and iirc some improvements around white rock and the airport. Translink is also considering replacing/widening the pattullo and george massy tunnels. And this is just what i know about and can remember. However we have also increased bus service in general, built a new rapid transit line from DT to the airport (canada line), are now extending the skytrain to the tri cities and hopefully soon after down the broadway corridor to UBC. DT Vancouver isn't building more roads, but theres not exactly room for any new ones. It has also converted some road space to bike lanes and is now considering removing the viaducts, but it only covers a small part of the region's transportation infrastructure.
  - Tiktaalik 13y ago
    You're right I'm only talking about Vancouver City proper. The provincial government, which controls the highway system, does not have the right approach and has been dramatically over building with the new bridges.

VLM 13y ago

If you've heard the overused phrase "the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it" the obvious analogy is intentional destruction of infrastructure results in lower population, lower population density, lower property values... I don't know the specifics of the linked article, but stereotypically some outsider comes in, says "you have some nice profitable land here, and I have a plan to fix that...". If you'd like to experience anti-car infrastructure, we have plenty of semi-abandoned residential in the poorest parts of the inner city, and some vacant abandoned commercial space in the bad parts of town with limited parking. Of course the restaurant right off the interstate is doing booming business although there's always someone with a plan to "fix" that for them. "We need more customers... I know, we'll make it impossible for anyone outside walking distance to get here, that'll fix everything..." What we need is more money spent on roads and parking. Done the right way, of course. Nothing wrong with wide roads, wide sidewalks, strips of parks and trees and green spaces. Just remember where the bread is buttered, pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer.

pyre 13y ago
> pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer. This isn't inflammatory at all... not at all...
- VLM 13y ago
  Google claims "intended to arouse angry ... feelings." I'm trying to be informative. May not like the way things are, but pretending "most people" don't look at the world that way isn't going to produce anything useful. I also have the defense of truth. Other than downtown Manhattan or downtown Chicago, this is how it is. You make money off someone who drives to your business, not some homeless dude who needs to use your bathroom. Customers come in cars. That's just how it is.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    Customers come in cars because there's no other way to get there. Cars, being hugely inefficient uses of space, actually decreases the number of customers who can get to your store. You can take a fully-packed car and compare the space used to people on a sidewalk: that's the difference in customers you're losing out on.
    - VLM 13y ago
      Seriously? So the best way to get more people in a sports stadium would be to get rid of the parking lot, or walmart's sales would go up if they got rid of their parking lots? Or on a small scale, I'd be more likely to go to a restaurant or small retailer if I knew for certain I couldn't get there on foot and if I drove there, I wouldn't be able to park? Now I do see your point for a stereotypical neighborhood local bar where they shouldn't be driving drunk anyway, or even a small local pharmacy or convenience store/gas station. I've seen poor parts of downtown with empty sidewalks and boarded up storefronts. Must be the parking lots?
      - thrownaway2424 13y ago
        The principle of charity has long since expired and now we are left to ponder whether you've ever even been to a city. To answer your question, yes, the best way to get people to a stadium is, by far, to remove the parking lot. Here's one of the most well-attended MLB stadiums in the country. It's served by two streetcar lines and a mainline railroad. https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@37.779165,-122.390703,3a,75y,79.92h,94.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sgOor2VIW6zcDwyQCEsYTfA!2e0 https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@37.779165,-122.390703,3... Here's Wrigley Field: https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@41.949016,-87.655596,3a,75y,101.36h,79.79t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZG47gz5jCGeHFtqN6Y4NAA!2e0 https://www.google.com/maps/preview/@41.949016,-87.655596,3a... At Yankee stadium they built a parking garage and so few people use it that the garage operator is bankrupt. They are tearing them down. The stadium is served by a subway line and Metro North even has a station literally called "Yankees". I suggest you get out of Mom's basement and see the country before holding forth on its infrastructure.
jessaustin 13y ago
What we need is more money spent on roads and parking. Done the right way, of course. Nothing wrong with wide roads, wide sidewalks, strips of parks and trees and green spaces. Have you ever visited an urban area? Where on earth would this "infrastructure" be placed? Next to the Best Buy and the Outback Steakhouse?
jchrisa 13y ago
Principle of charity requires me to imagine that you just have had the bad luck to be only exposed to outdated ideas... Plenty of places to start, maybe here: http://m.fastcoexist.com/3021074/making-the-economic-case-for-cycling-friendly-cities-with-bikeonomics http://m.fastcoexist.com/3021074/making-the-economic-case-fo...
gburt 13y ago
> Just remember where the bread is buttered, pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer. Hah. What? Driving consumes a tremendous amount of most people's disposable income. I know people who spend $5-10k a year on transportation.
- briandon 13y ago
  If someone is living in an urban area without a vehicle, they are likely to be paying more for housing and living in a significantly smaller space than someone living in a lower-density setting (e.g. suburbs) who owns and uses a vehicle of their own and may have a lawn, swimming pool, tool shed, little machine shop or sewing/crafts room, etc. Can you sell more gardening products (seeds, soil, tools, fertilizer, etc.) to someone who has a yard or someone who has a balcony that could potentially accommodate a planter or two? Will you sell more pool toys and equipment to someone who has a pool in their yard or to someone who may periodically use their building's clubhouse's pool or walk to the local municipal pool? How much less furniture or art or carpeting or pretty much anything can you sell to someone who has 500 square feet to live in versus someone who has 1000 to 2000 square feet of space in their home? Smaller kitchens translates into less counter space, so less space for kitchen appliances or even fancy pasta storage containers. The knock-on effects of your customers living in smaller, urban spaces vs. larger suburban-type homes are huge.
  - cylinder 13y ago
    So the downside to beautifying and reclaiming our cities by discouraging the automobile is that ... we buy less useless crap and live more efficiently? Shudder.
nhaehnle 13y ago
Just remember where the bread is buttered, pedestrians = homeless panhandler but car = customer. I'm not sure if you're trolling or just a bit tone-deaf, but this is an incredibly US-centric way to see things. Seriously, it makes you seem a bit clueless. Clearly, the mindset you voice here is something that city planners in the US need to take into account. The question is, where does this difference come from, and can something be done about it? After all, cars and all the infrastructure surrounding them take up an enormous amount of space, which seems wasteful in the design of efficient and compact cities. How can those inner cities be "revived" in a way that makes them livable?

chrismcb 13y ago

I live 30 miles from work, having more pedestrian and cycle friendly laws won't do one bit of good.

maxerickson 13y ago
You would likely take them into account if you happened to move.
jonemo 13y ago
A few more bike lanes and bike storage space on the commuter train goes a long way. I live 20 miles from work and prefer to leave the car at home.
cylinder 13y ago
The problem is that you live 30 miles from work, a fact you find acceptable only because you know cars can get you there. Before the automobile era this was unheard of.
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  How are you privy to the reason the OP lives 30 miles from work? Perhaps he has other obligations, such as family, that require him to live where he does. Or perhaps the cost of living near OP's workplace is beyond his means. You assume too much.

Tiktaalik 13y ago

Some cities are doing this. Vancouver BC has a policy of not expanding its road network whatsoever, and is actively decreasing by reserving portions of it to exclusive bike and pedestrian use. The city has also engaged with communities to find portions of road that are unused enough that they could be converted to parklets.

katbyte 13y ago
I think that only applies to the DT core not the GVRD / lower mainland as a whole. In the last 5 or so years we have built a new bridge to replace the albion ferry (golden ears), replaced & widened the pitt river bridge and interchange, construction of a new 10-lane Port Mann Bridge, 37 kilometres of highway widening from Vancouver to Langley & the replacement of nine highway interchanges, widened/improved 176th to the blaine truck crossing & fraser highway, construction of the south fraser perimeter road, and iirc some improvements around white rock and the airport. Translink is also considering replacing/widening the pattullo and george massy tunnels. And this is just what i know about and can remember. However we have also increased bus service in general, built a new rapid transit line from DT to the airport (canada line), are now extending the skytrain to the tri cities and hopefully soon after down the broadway corridor to UBC. DT Vancouver isn't building more roads, but theres not exactly room for any new ones. It has also converted some road space to bike lanes and is now considering removing the viaducts, but it only covers a small part of the region's transportation infrastructure.
- Tiktaalik 13y ago
  You're right I'm only talking about Vancouver City proper. The provincial government, which controls the highway system, does not have the right approach and has been dramatically over building with the new bridges.