Nah it’s typical online leftism. Good at defining problems and not so good at working up solutions that don’t just bubble down to “everyone should think like me”.
There are plenty of good solutions. Just because you’re only hearing the very valid complaints doesn’t mean solutions don’t exist. They just aren’t going to be easy or immediate. Life doesn’t work that way.
Cars are indeed here to stay. But we can make cities much better over time.
Well yeah of course. But I think what you’re not factoring in is that people will always choose the convenience of cars. People don’t just drive to and from places in the same city.
I believe I did mention cars as valuable for use outside of cities. I live in the US, cars are an absolute necessity outside of major population centers.
Even so, cities are better when cars are unnecessary within them. CAPABLE, but unnecessary.
Yup, I’ve been there. The story is the same with Paris and NYC. I still prefer those cities over, say, Los Angeles. Cities that have made an effort to be livable without cars are better than cities that haven’t.
Well yeah of course they cater to everyone. But a lot of people around here are pro designing cities to be deliberately annoying to drive in which is just the other extreme to LA.
There’s a city near me (so-called, but realistically a subset of the greater metro area) which has made changes to attempt to slow down cars. Curvier roads, curbs that cut out the shoulder near intersections (which still allow for parking but make the road seem narrower, psychologically, so people subconsciously slow down), strict enforcement of speed limits, cutting four-lane roads down to two-lane with a turn lane between them and bike lanes on the sides, etc.
Arguably these changes make it “deliberately annoying to drive in,” but this area is still perfectly drivable, and is still often the fastest way to get from one place to another if they’re nearby. And yet it has made that area much more pedestrian and bike friendly. I am far more likely to see people on foot there than in other parts of the city (barring the downtown area, which is of course most densely populated and therefore full of people).
It also makes it a delight to bike through.
This is the kind of change I want to see. I want cars to share the road. (To this end, I don’t hesitate to bike in the road. If people are annoyed because I top out around 28mph with my eBike, then they should vote for more bike lanes. 😁) I don’t want cities to be places where cars are the primary mode of transit and the others are afterthoughts, I want cars to be one of many viable options. I want to see parking lots reduced in favor of housing and businesses, and centralized parking garages emphasized.
As stated previously, these aren’t going to be immediate changes. They will take time, but they’re worth working toward for better and healthier cities (and a healthier planet).
Infinite money if we want to do it immediately. Don’t be so defeatist. Changing hearts, minds, and infrastructure is not immediate.
Nah it’s typical online leftism. Good at defining problems and not so good at working up solutions that don’t just bubble down to “everyone should think like me”.
Cars are here to stay.
There are plenty of good solutions. Just because you’re only hearing the very valid complaints doesn’t mean solutions don’t exist. They just aren’t going to be easy or immediate. Life doesn’t work that way.
Cars are indeed here to stay. But we can make cities much better over time.
Well yeah of course. But I think what you’re not factoring in is that people will always choose the convenience of cars. People don’t just drive to and from places in the same city.
I believe I did mention cars as valuable for use outside of cities. I live in the US, cars are an absolute necessity outside of major population centers.
Even so, cities are better when cars are unnecessary within them. CAPABLE, but unnecessary.
London is what you lot over the pond would call a “walkable city”. Is there still a metric fuck ton of cars? Yes.
Yup, I’ve been there. The story is the same with Paris and NYC. I still prefer those cities over, say, Los Angeles. Cities that have made an effort to be livable without cars are better than cities that haven’t.
Well yeah of course they cater to everyone. But a lot of people around here are pro designing cities to be deliberately annoying to drive in which is just the other extreme to LA.
There’s a city near me (so-called, but realistically a subset of the greater metro area) which has made changes to attempt to slow down cars. Curvier roads, curbs that cut out the shoulder near intersections (which still allow for parking but make the road seem narrower, psychologically, so people subconsciously slow down), strict enforcement of speed limits, cutting four-lane roads down to two-lane with a turn lane between them and bike lanes on the sides, etc.
Arguably these changes make it “deliberately annoying to drive in,” but this area is still perfectly drivable, and is still often the fastest way to get from one place to another if they’re nearby. And yet it has made that area much more pedestrian and bike friendly. I am far more likely to see people on foot there than in other parts of the city (barring the downtown area, which is of course most densely populated and therefore full of people).
It also makes it a delight to bike through.
This is the kind of change I want to see. I want cars to share the road. (To this end, I don’t hesitate to bike in the road. If people are annoyed because I top out around 28mph with my eBike, then they should vote for more bike lanes. 😁) I don’t want cities to be places where cars are the primary mode of transit and the others are afterthoughts, I want cars to be one of many viable options. I want to see parking lots reduced in favor of housing and businesses, and centralized parking garages emphasized.
As stated previously, these aren’t going to be immediate changes. They will take time, but they’re worth working toward for better and healthier cities (and a healthier planet).