Comment by 1970-01-01

Comment by 1970-01-01 5 days ago

>The story focuses on a redesign of one intersection in this town. The case highlights how we’ve elevated the value of moving cars quickly at the expense of everything else, even in highly walkable areas.

We should all expect this kind of regressing in walking. Pedestrians and cyclists don't seem to understand how this always will be a car-by-default country due to lifestyle. Yes, there are several cities bucking the trend with exceptions, but those exceptions are either economically able to buck that car-first engineering trend and build massive bike and walking infra or they have exceptional transportation alternatives (train, bus, and subway).

hombre_fatal 5 days ago

You think pedestrians and cyclists don't realize how car dominant we are?

Reply View 24 replies

1970-01-01 5 days ago

Correct. They expect safe walking and biking infra to fall from the sky and complain online when it does not.

Reply View | 23 replies
- inetknght 5 days ago
  
  Pedestrians rightfully expect safe walking and biking infrastructure.
  Not everyone can drive. Most of those who can't drive also cannot afford a taxi or rideshare. Many of them also do not have friends or family who can get them where they need to go, and reliance on others is extremely demoralizing to independence.
  That says nothing of the carbon cost in fuel, the microparticle cost in tire and brake dust, or other inflated pollutants.
  The U.S.'s car-dominant infrastructure is a tragedy.
  
  Reply View | 12 replies
  
  gs17 5 days ago
  
  > Pedestrians rightfully expect safe walking and biking infrastructure.
  Cyclists and pedestrians should be considered two separate groups. Most biking infrastructure doesn't benefit me at all as a pedestrian (but it's okay, because the cyclists will still ride on sidewalk instead of the bike lane).
  
  Reply View | 2 replies
  
  ImPostingOnHN 5 days ago
  
  > Not everyone can drive
  Not everyone can afford to live in an area of the city where they don't have to drive places, either.
  
  Reply View | 2 replies
  
  1970-01-01 5 days ago
  
  I agree with everything you said except your first sentence. Why should people rightfully expect walking and biking infra to be paid for when it contributes so little to their economy?
  
  Reply View | 5 replies
- dvdkon 5 days ago
  
  "Car-centrism" isn't some immutable property given to the US at the dawn of time. Infrastructure is built according to people's opinions, and in a democracy you change those people's opinions (or replace them altogether) by complaining.
  And I don't think pedestrian infrastructure advocates expect it to "fall from the sky". They expect it to be built by municipalities over time, just like everyone else.
  
  Reply View | 5 replies
  
  1970-01-01 5 days ago
  
  I fully disagree. Road infra is engineered to move goods quickly, and never to public opinion unless that public opinion brings loads of cash to help. Again, there are major exceptions to this default. Complaining about it helps, but does not bring cash to the table when it's time to build or rebuild road infra. As municipalities change over time, a city will always regress to car-first. Cars are simply the easiest path for it to move goods quickly.
  
  Reply View | 4 replies
- affinepplan 5 days ago
  
  this is a very uncharitable characterization of communities' desires for safe, quiet, and walkable/bikeable neighborhoods
  
  Reply View | 2 replies
  
  SoftTalker 5 days ago
  
  It does sometimes seem that they think they should be able to walk/bike without concern for their own safety. I see pedestrians step into traffic and bicycles blow traffic signals and stop signs all the time. Safety and situational awareness is everyone's responsibility.
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  affinepplan 5 days ago
  
  I guess I kind feel like yeah the person operating the heavy machinery at high speed does bear more responsibility for the damage they cause rather than their victims
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
- sitkack 5 days ago
  
  You uncharitably speak for all pedestrians.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

CalRobert 5 days ago

I'm literally just trying to stop drivers from killing my kids when they bike to school.

Some "lifestyle".

Reply View 6 replies

zer0x4d 5 days ago

The way you make your kids safe bikers:
1. NEVER RIDE ON THE SIDEWALK. Cars on the street cannot see you due to other parked cars and WILL make right or left turn on you. Additionaly, cars coming out of parking lots won't see you on the sidewalk.
2. NEVER RIDE ON OPPOSITE SIDE. Ride on the same direction as cars, make yourself visible.
3. INDICATE ALL TURNS WITH HAND SIGNALS. Be predictable. Don't just turn or otherwise behave unpredictably. Indicate turns, make eye contact and then turn.
4. (Obvious) ACT LIKE A CAR AND DON'T RUN LIGHTS.

Reply View | 3 replies
- gs17 5 days ago
  
  > 1. NEVER RIDE ON THE SIDEWALK. Cars on the street cannot see you due to other parked cars and WILL make right or left turn on you. Additionaly, cars coming out of parking lots won't see you on the sidewalk.
  How about to avoid hitting people walking? It's not always safe for pedestrians to jump into the street to avoid a guy on a bike.
  > 3. INDICATE ALL TURNS WITH HAND SIGNALS. Be predictable. Don't just turn or otherwise behave unpredictably. Indicate turns, make eye contact and then turn.
  You should also explain to them that 99% of drivers will not understand the typical bike hand signals. Making eye contact will help a lot, but mostly it makes sure they're watching you.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
- CalRobert 5 days ago
  
  Do you really think the answer is for my 5 year old to ride her pink bike with a basket and flowers in the same street as a Dodge Ram 3500 piloted by someone staring at their phone?
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  zer0x4d 4 days ago
  
  1. Your 5 year old kid with her pink bike should not be on the street alone. This is just a matter of judgement, independent from other motorists. You should be behind her watching for cars. 2. If you want to ignore point 1, my argument still stands. The chances of a Dodge Ram 3500 ramming into her is far higher if she is on the sidewalk as opposed to on the street. A 5 year old doesn't understand traffic rules good enough to be riding on the side walk and watching for cars. Her best chances are to make herself as visible as possible (ie. by being on the road in a bright bike and protective gear).
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
[removed] 5 days ago

[deleted]

Reply View | 0 replies
ImPostingOnHN 5 days ago

"Whether car, scooter, bike, or feet, look both ways before crossing a street"

Reply View | 0 replies

TomK32 5 days ago

Nonsense, the money spent on safer roads is an investment on human lives. Infrastructure needs to be rebuilt every few decades and with good planning roads that are being resurfaced anyways can be altered at little extra cost. Finally, let's not ignore that suburban sprawl is economically not viable for cities as the cost per household is higher in sprawl compared to a denser populated area. Changing the last point is obviously the toughest.

https://cayimby.org/blog/sprawl-costs-the-u-s-1-trillion-eve... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmQomKCfYZY

Reply View 0 replies