this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
133 points (92.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

9642 readers
344 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fishos@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Roundabouts would like a word. Properly designed ones don't need to dramatically lower speeds and are more efficient. And can easily be made pedestrian friendly. It doesn't have to be either or.

[–] LibertyLizard 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can they though? What does a pedestrian friendly roundabout look like? The ones I’ve seen seem outright hostile.

I tried to find data but it doesn’t seem well studied. Since standard road design is so horrifically unsafe, unless it is substantially better it does not seem worth redesigning the intersection. I’d rather see that money go into something that has a proven benefit.

Further reading: https://streets.mn/2017/11/17/are-roundabouts-safer-for-pedestrians/

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Crosswalk bridges. Something used in not just roundabouts.

[–] Hagdos@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Crosswalk bridges are pretty hostile to pedestrians. They need to be at least 4 meters/12 ft high, to accommodate standard lorries. Nobody likes climbing high stairs on every crossing. Even worse for wheelchair users.

[–] fishos@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If only we'd invented some sort of sloped surface. Maybe call it a "ramp"?

[–] Hagdos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Scaling a 4 meter high ramps on every intersection sounds like a fucking nightmare

[–] fishos@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, because no one anywhere has ever built a ramp that made sense.

You're intentionally being obtuse.

[–] Hagdos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It doesn't matter how much sense your ramp makes, it still needs enough height to allow trucks to pass under it. That's a lot of height to gain. Any sensible ramp would be very long and take up a lot of space, and be very impractical to have to scale at every intersection.

[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I live I nthe Netherlands. The Dutch road system has a very good reputation. And I agree, I love our infrastructure. I hope it is an example for the rest of the world.

When I started driving myself, I loved to drive fast on the highway. I arrived supper annoyed at my destination as I had to evade near exidents ndue to people texting or just not paying attention. When I started to drive slow, making sure I wasn't blocking others, I arrived calm and only 10min later then when I was speeding all the time. Also, most traffic jams happen because eof speeding people. They break more, which causes jams. In a traffic jam, try to maintain a constant speed, while barely breaking, keeping a lot of room in front of you. This helps solve traffic jams, of everyone would do this.

[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Same experience as you, when you drive slow and calm you find you arrive more calm and relaxed. Less traffic as well and most times there is the added benefit of not being stuck at the next red as it turns green before you get there.

[–] neuropean@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I mean it’s pretty obvious from the headline, but the goal is to compromise if you’re to have any meaningful volume of transportation.

[–] LibertyLizard 3 points 1 year ago

We’ve already compromised too much by allowing cars in cities at all. If you are going to drive around innocent bystanders it needs to be done in a safe manner. Saving a minute on your commute is insignificant compared to a life.

[–] Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I do like the Las Vegas approach where pedestrians have a completely separate infrastructure. Its very easy to get around and i find vehicle traffic is fairly efficient for that sized city.

[–] LibertyLizard 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean most cities have this, don’t they? Sidewalks vs car lanes. Or what do you mean by this?

[–] Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are sections of permanent elevated walkways and a network of bridges completely separating pedestrian and vehicle traffic. Just walk over the streets, no waiting for lights. Its pretty cool.

[–] LibertyLizard 1 points 1 year ago

Oh wow interesting. If I ever go I’ll have to take a look. Sounds expensive but if it works it works I guess.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

What’s your definition notion of speed? This one major street in my town was restricted from two lanes down to one through lane with turn lanes. They also reduced the speed limit and adjusted traffic lights.

Result: much safer AND you reliably get through in less time. No stop and go, no weaving or merging, just slow and steady winning the race