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

No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 236 posts

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#171

Post by jamil7 »

ARandomerDude wrote: post #128

It would be awesome if you had something like a bicycle, only more comfortable that could hold you, a friend, and some of your things. You could enclose it to protect you from the weather, too. For longer distances, or people with disabilities, you could add some mechanical contraption in case you can't pedal that far. That'll be the day.

Riding a bike is also comfortable and fun, you should try it! I regularly see people with disabilities use all kinds of modified bikes in my city, as well as parents dropping off kids in cargo bikes. Yeah it doesn't work for every usecase but the bike is a pretty amazing piece of tech thats been around way longer than cars and will likely outlast them.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#172

Post by scrumbledober »

ghaff wrote: post #79
jjoonathan wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes much more sense, thanks! Less useful for the pedestrians -- but also less apocalyptic for traffic.

Yes, some traffic is being taken off Market but it's a long way from being made into a pedestrian mall. I'm not sure you'd want one on Market anyway. It's not a very pleasant stretch of the city for the most part for reasons that are only somewhat car traffic related.

This brings up an interesting question. What street(s) in SF would be best for a truly automobile free pedestrian mall? My first thought would be the embarcadero, but it already has a very nice wide sidewalk and I think closing it to cars would be a pretty large hindrance to traffic.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#173

Post by [deleted] »

brnt wrote: post #5
Symbiote wrote: post #3

The linked article (1) says the redesign will have "sidewalk level bike lanes". If there's a way for local people to comment on this, please encourage these to be changed to in-between-road-and-sidewalk level. (Or road level with a continuous kerb in between). This makes it much, much easier for pedestrians not to accidentally wander into the lane. (2) 1 https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Car-free-Market-...…

As a Dutchie blunders like the one you mention are so stupifying... Takes you a ten minute visit to NL to figure out why you need to separate modalities consistently, yet even as close as Germany and France cities are designed so obviously by people who never ever bike.

[deleted]

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#174

Post by ghaff »

scrumbledober wrote: post #172
ghaff wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, some traffic is being taken off Market but it's a long way from being made into a pedestrian mall. I'm not sure you'd want one on Market anyway. It's not a very pleasant stretch of the city for the most part for reasons that are only somewhat car traffic related.

This brings up an interesting question. What street(s) in SF would be best for a truly automobile free pedestrian mall? My first thought would be the embarcadero, but it already has a very nice wide sidewalk and I think closing it to cars would be a pretty large hindrance to traffic.

Yeah, the Embarcadero is already pretty pedestrian friendly and it's a rather essential thoroughfare that can't be easily bypassed.

In downtown-ish area? Presumably in and around Union Square somewhere. You already have a mini restaurant version in Belden Place. There's a lot of traffic through there but it was already being messed with by lots of construction for ages.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#175

Post by andys627 »

closeparen wrote: post #100

Market St. has never been a significant thoroughfare for private cars. Of course there’s no traffic impact. Try the same thing on Mission, Howard, Folsom, Harrison, Geary, Van Ness, etc. and you’ll see a very different story.

> Try the same thing on Mission, Howard, Folsom, Harrison, Geary, Van Ness, etc. and you’ll see a very different story.

Probably not. More car lanes = more cars. Less car lanes = less cars. People switch modes, drive elsewhere, don't take trips, etc. Time and time again (Paris, London, NYC, SF, Portland, Seattle, and many many more) cities have taken space from cars without carmageddon.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#176

Post by lotsofpulp »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #161
lotsofpulp wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the total amount of physical stuff churning through the US economy has declined since the 1930s (or so?) just in terms of sheer mass. That’s an extraordinary claim to me, especially given population growth, and I would need some rigorous evidence to believe it. Cars are bigger, homes are bigger, people live further apart, and people travel more. How can the sheer mass not be more simply because of the mass of all t…

If its measured in pure mass, I would assume construction, concrete and coal consumption to have biggest effects. iPhones don't weigh much.

Quite a bit has happened since the 1930s other than iPhones. Such as population increase of 2.5x. And the interstate highway system. The more I think about it, the crazier the claim is.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#177

Post by beefalo »

eindiran wrote: post #168
Symbiote wrote: post #3

The linked article (1) says the redesign will have "sidewalk level bike lanes". If there's a way for local people to comment on this, please encourage these to be changed to in-between-road-and-sidewalk level. (Or road level with a continuous kerb in between). This makes it much, much easier for pedestrians not to accidentally wander into the lane. (2) 1 https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Car-free-Market-...…

San Francisco has a few areas with the "sidewalk level bike lanes", especially near the waterfront from the Embarcadero towards The Marina. I've walked in there as a pedestrian and have ridden a bike in that area, and honestly the area has wide-enough sidewalks that that style of bike lane isn't too bad for pedestrians or cyclists, at least in my opinion. I imagine what's envisioned for Market Street will end up bein…

I"m not a fan of riding a bike at Embarcadero. I would like to see more bike/walk areas like the one on Townsend between 7th and 5th where there is a clearly marked bike only and walking only section.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#178

Post by dntrkv »

alamortsubite wrote: post #140
closeparen wrote: post #100

Market St. has never been a significant thoroughfare for private cars. Of course there’s no traffic impact. Try the same thing on Mission, Howard, Folsom, Harrison, Geary, Van Ness, etc. and you’ll see a very different story.

The changes to Market Street may have been gradual enough that you didn't notice, or by "never" maybe you mean only the last 20 years. I remember it was packed with cars in the '90s.

Exactly, this wasn't an overnight change. It was a gradual process which is how it should be done. Banning cars on a major road overnight with no plan in place will obviously result in chaos. Nobody is suggesting this.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#179

Post by standardUser »

ghaff wrote: post #137
standardUser wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived for over a decade in downtown SF without a car. I can't imagine having owned a car, or needing one, or wanting to deal with the hassle of actually using one. Things certainly got better with rideshares, but transit was abundant and taxis worked fine too (sort of).

I think a lot probably comes down to lifestyle preferences. I don't live in a city but, if I did, I'd almost certainly want a car because I'd be visiting people/doing things outside the city on a regular basis and it's pretty common that I go hiking or boating a few hours away for a day or a long weekend. There's no way I would want to feel restricted to a city especially somewhere that there are as many natural poss…

I used BART (regional transit) or just rented a car. A weekend car rental wasn't exactly cheap, but it was basically my only meaningful transit cost, so I didn't mind.

Re: No ‘carmageddon’ on auto-free Market Street: study shows bikes and buses benefit

#180

Post by jiofih »

Symbiote wrote: post #113
jiofih wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The curb is a hazard to cyclists, more so than a crash with inattentive pedestrians. The majority of Dutch cycle lanes are level with the sidewalk and how often do you hear of accidents (not caused by mopeds)?

> The majority of Dutch cycle lanes are level with the sidewalk That doesn't fit with my memories of visiting the Netherlands, or a quick Streetview-tour of The Hague. https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0645825,4.2251355,3a,75y,172...

That is considered “level” - pedestrians will wander into it anyway (mostly tourists) since there is no perceivable barrier unless there is enough traffic.
Post reply on HN