Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 699 posts

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#531

Post by bertil »

corndoge wrote: post #506
soperj wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The real solution is to eliminate cars from the roads, that way they wouldn't have to share with bikers.

This kind of snark, or perhaps just unrealistic statements, gets us nowhere...dedicated infrastructure for cyclists alongside the same infrastructure for cars is actually viable. Making a comment about how everybody should be using bikes isn't helpful.

>>> Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

>> ban cars

> unrealistic statements

You, sir, are funny.

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#532

Post by bllguo »

kyleblarson wrote: post #475
montenegrohugo wrote: post #3

This may be shocking to people with an American upbringing, but cars (especially privately owned ones) just do not make sense going forward. Cities get bigger and denser, and wasting a big % of land on parking spaces, roads, intersections and accepting a horrible air quality (that reduces citizen life spans and health quality) and noise pollution just does not make any sense anymore. Carse are effective in less dense…

"But privately owned gasoline-guzzlers are an archaic solution to the transportation problem, and they are not effective in today's society." I live in a remote mountain town in the North Cascades mountains and am approximately 80 miles from the closest stoplight. Obviously we rely on cars and trucks. It is wonderful place, and an additional benefit is that sanctimonious city dwellers who make comments like this are…

Why are you so hostile? It is eminently clear in OP's comment that we are talking about transportation in cities. Even if it wasn't, you could give OP the benefit of the doubt.

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#533

Post by legulere »

corndoge wrote: post #466
sunshinelackof wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Portland and Eugene love to boast how bicycle friendly they are, but neither are really commutable by anything besides a car for most people. Which is why most cyclists are so prolific -- it's hard to be a cyclist by circumstance. Riding your bike inherently comes with crossing a dozen intersections beaming with cars that treat you like you don't belong on the road. A solution is to level the planes of separatio…

Cyclists really don't belong on the road. It's such an odd collective viewpoint that a vehicle which virtually always travels far below the speed limit should be allowed alongside vehicles that travel at the speed limit. I think this is because we conflate the benefits of cycling and the value of making our public infrastructure amenable to cycling with the opinion that cyclists should share highways with cars. It's…

It really depends. The biggest safety issue for cyclists is being overlooked at crossings. Being on the road makes them safer for cyclists in those situations. Especially for bigger roads there are also other solutions to this problem.

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#534

Post by legulere »

njarboe wrote: post #509
soperj wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The real solution is to eliminate cars from the roads, that way they wouldn't have to share with bikers.

I love small walkable shopping centers that are organically grown over decades that mix residential, commercial, and retail uses. I live in such an area and it is great, but, if society wants to find a way to move to a better human scale constructed landscapes, it might be a good idea to stop referring to people in cars as non-human inhabited objects and use a more human focus word like motorist. We use pedestrian fo…

Cars are typically utilized under 5% of the time. A car most of the time is a non-human inhabited object that is wasting a lot of space

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#535

Post by guelo »

electricslpnsld wrote: post #446
sunshinelackof wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Portland and Eugene love to boast how bicycle friendly they are, but neither are really commutable by anything besides a car for most people. Which is why most cyclists are so prolific -- it's hard to be a cyclist by circumstance. Riding your bike inherently comes with crossing a dozen intersections beaming with cars that treat you like you don't belong on the road. A solution is to level the planes of separatio…

> Even Portland and Eugene love to boast how bicycle friendly they are, but neither are really commutable by anything besides a car for most people. Which is why most cyclists are so prolific -- it's hard to be a cyclist by circumstance. Riding your bike inherently comes with crossing a dozen intersections beaming with cars that treat you like you don't belong on the road. I commuted by bike for two years or so in Po…

I've been biking in Oakland for over 10 years and have never gotten a death threat.

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#536

Post by AmericanChopper »

montenegrohugo wrote: post #3

This may be shocking to people with an American upbringing, but cars (especially privately owned ones) just do not make sense going forward. Cities get bigger and denser, and wasting a big % of land on parking spaces, roads, intersections and accepting a horrible air quality (that reduces citizen life spans and health quality) and noise pollution just does not make any sense anymore. Carse are effective in less dense…

>But privately owned gasoline-guzzlers are an archaic solution to the transportation problem

Private vehicle ownership isn’t about solving society’s transportation issue. As far as consumers are concerned, a car is one of the most significant and life changing purchases they’ll ever make. It gives them far more than just a solution to a ‘transport problem’, it provides the freedom to pretty much go anywhere and do anything at any time. If your idea is ‘convince people they don’t actually want cars’, then your idea is going to fail.

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#537

Post by the_clarence »

meguest wrote: post #177
alkonaut wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cars (especially privately owned ones) just do not make sense going forward Inside cities that is. One must remember that a lot of the people that move around in a city every day don't live in the city. And for many of them a car is a requirement anyway. For me the car is a sunk cost - I have it for the rare times I need it (I don't need it to go into the city), but buying/maintaining/insuring it is mostly a fixed…

This is normal for people who work in London and live in the commuter belt around it. Most of these people have a car but walk to the station, or drive to the station, and then take a train into London. Once in London these people then take the tube, buses, bikes or walk to get around. The car still gets used outside work to get groceries, pick up kids from schools and of course at the weekends.

Same things for most cities in France

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#538

Post by the_clarence »

drstewart wrote: post #458
collyw wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you honestly think we can't do that in Europe?

Do you honestly think there are no walkable cities in the US or whatever outlandish claims are being made by Europeans in this thread?

There is no comparison to be made between european cities where you can walk for hours and hours and see a thousand things vs americans cities where you will mostly spend your time crossing large streets. If you really believe this you probably never have been to Europe.

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#539

Post by pmontra »

corndoge wrote: post #506
soperj wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The real solution is to eliminate cars from the roads, that way they wouldn't have to share with bikers.

This kind of snark, or perhaps just unrealistic statements, gets us nowhere...dedicated infrastructure for cyclists alongside the same infrastructure for cars is actually viable. Making a comment about how everybody should be using bikes isn't helpful.

I'm a cyclist and I drive a car. Dedicated infrastructure is usually for slow bicycles. I welcome it but I stay clear of it. I don't feel in danger in the road and I can go faster.

Problems with bicycle roads:

90% of traffic is much slower than me, which I do 20 km/h in cities (nothing special with some training)

They go up and down sidewalks and turn before intersections. This slows down everybody willing to go faster than 10 km/h

They are bumpier than roads

They are on the side of the road and more dangerous at any intersection, where they are close or before the stop line for cars coming from the side. Furthermore there is less space to look for incoming traffic. Being on the car's road is safer. I like bicycle roads when they are far away from car's roads, for example along rivers. Small low traffic roads are good enough.

On the other side, roundabouts and every other modern road layout that force cars and bikes to get close is dangerous for bikes. I feel safe to say that roads became less dangerous for cars in the last 20 years and more dangerous for bicycles.

I'd like to have the roads of the 70s: long straights, no speed bumps, no roundabouts (cyclists also don't like stop and go),

Re: Life in the Spanish city that banned cars

#540

Post by rootusrootus »

screye wrote: post #376
alkonaut wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cars (especially privately owned ones) just do not make sense going forward Inside cities that is. One must remember that a lot of the people that move around in a city every day don't live in the city. And for many of them a car is a requirement anyway. For me the car is a sunk cost - I have it for the rare times I need it (I don't need it to go into the city), but buying/maintaining/insuring it is mostly a fixed…

Won't something like rental cars make more sense in such a case ?

Locally (Portland, Oregon) the car2go rental rate is approximately equivalent at 1 hour versus my cost of owning a new car for a day. So if I could get by on less than an hour of car2go time per day it would be worthwhile.
Post reply on HN