How do you fix a stroad? • Hacker News Board

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#261

Post by mcv » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:11 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #176

adrianN wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People like their cars because the city design makes all alternatives comically impractical.

Nope. I live in a country with high quality transit and the first thing people buy when they can afford it is a car. Why? Convenience, flexibility, ability to haul a family. Cars certainly aren’t a requirement if you have good walkability and/transit, but given the choice many people prefer cars.

I have a car too. But when the opportunity exists, I will always prefer to go by bike. My kids ride bikes too, and my 7-year old son prefers to ride to his swimming lessons on his own bike. The car is only really for when we leave the city, or occasionally when we quickly need to go to the complete opposite end of the city and it's close to the motorway.

When given the choice between bad bike/walking infrastructure and cars, people prefer cars. But when you give them good infrastructure, many prefer bikes.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#262

Post by TulliusCicero » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:15 AM UTC

throwawaysea wrote: post #246

renewiltord wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is rather suspicious. If people are so fond of this, then why the laws prohibiting the other. It sounds like there’s a pressure group distorting the market and preventing people from expressing their preferences. Fairly convincing actually.

It's not that suspicious. People who like their quality of life in their city and neighborhood don't want to lose that. This is perfectly normal and legitimate. Those who want higher density are usually either outsiders who want to live there but can't, or developers (or departing residents) who seek to make money by flipping a property for cheaply-built denser properties. If you increase density, you end up changing…

Yeah, this comment is the mindset I'm talking about. Protecting "neighborhood character" by prioritizing cars over people, increasing property values at the expense of affordability, keeping out the poors, etc.

They put a lot of nice words on a lot of very bad results.

Meanwhile, very-dense-by-US-standards cities like Vienna and Munich often top the charts for quality of life. And I can attest to that myself: Munich felt very nice and comfortable to live in. It had far less crime than the US average, you were less likely to get hit by a car, people were much healthier, you had actual options to get around, etc. It was pleasant to be in the city in a way that is rare in the US.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#263

Post by scrollaway » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:19 AM UTC

Kiro wrote: post #260

It's funny. As someone who has never been to the US stroads are what define the American urban landscape for me and what I want to experience. They feel really exotic. It's like being in an American movie or TV show.

Are you thinking of actual stroads or rather simply the large american roads?

US roads definitely have a cool factor to them but American stroads are awful and really not something you want to experience.

I remember taking a two hour walk in Irvine a decade ago. Walking in a straight line, palm trees in the middle of the stroad to separate the ten lanes, walking, walking... Nothing changing around me other than the names of the shops.

I didn't fully understand what made me feel so uneasy and what made the whole thing so surreal. I realized years later what i had experienced then.

It was not a good experience. I had little room to walk, almost died three times. I eventually hitchhiked and was picked up by a car, the woman who picked me up had two kids in the back and as soon as I hopped in the front seat, closed the door and said thank you, she said "and don't you try anything, I have a gun".

The whole trip left me with a horrible taste in my mouth that can only be rivaled by marmite.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#264

Post by mcv » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:21 AM UTC

seoulmetro wrote: post #171

scrollaway wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NJB is not an "outrage" channel, that is utterly absurd. It's an information channel that mostly shows you how things work in the Netherlands and makes the case that it's a better way than the idiotic car-centric north American way. If you're outraged after watching his videos, it's not his fault, it's the fault of your city planners.

It is an outrage channel. >It's an information channel that mostly shows you how things work in the Netherlands and makes the case that it's a better way than the idiotic car-centric north American way. Yes. Comparing apples to oranges. What an outrage! My apples have less vitamin C! How dare they. >If you're outraged after watching his videos I'm not. But the majority who do watch the video are. It's his fault. The…

Are people outraged by what he says, or by the reality he exposes? Should that reality then remain hidden to keep people complacent?

I think it's reality that's outrageous, and it's people like NJB and Strong Towns that are pointing out it could be better, they are pointing out how to make it better. People are outraged because they realise how bad their infrastructure is, and how much better it could be. That's a positive, constructive type of outrage. It's not just fomenting anger for its own sake (as indeed happens way too often in other media).

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#265

Post by mcv » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:37 AM UTC

curtisf wrote: post #217

josephcsible wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Loving cars immediately must mean that his high quality, well researched content is "trash". Why is it surprising that people who love cars don't like a channel that basically says you're a bad person if you don't think cars should be abolished?

NotJustBikes doesn't think cars should be abolished. In fact, they shared a video just three weeks ago about how non-car-centered cities are _better_ to drive in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8RRE2rDw4k Car-centric designs for cities makes living in cities worse, _even for people who like cars_. The thesis of Strong Towns isn't that we should ban cars, it's that we should stop _subsidizing_ something that we know…

It's worth noting that although Dutch infrastructure puts a lot of effort into different modes of transport, especially bikes, it's also excellent for cars. Dutch car drivers often complain about poor road quality in neighbouring countries like Germany and Belgium. There's also a lot of innovation here on smoothing traffic flow, removing traffic lights where possible, and many other things that I'm sure car drivers love.

And if you care about well-maintained roads, it helps if your roads are actually maintainable, and for that, it helps if they're efficient and well-designed. I've read a lot about the poor state of infrastructure in the US, and agree with calls to invest more in infrastructure, but it's been Strong Towns, NJB and similar channels that made me realise why US infrastructure is struggling: it's inefficiently designed, making it way too expensive to maintain. The entire past 70 years of US suburban development is apparently build on massive amounts of debt, which has sent several cities into bankruptcy. If you don't want your cities to go bankrupt, you need more efficient infrastructure. And stroads are clearly not that.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#266

Post by mcv » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:40 AM UTC

Kiro wrote: post #260

It's funny. As someone who has never been to the US stroads are what define the American urban landscape for me and what I want to experience. They feel really exotic. It's like being in an American movie or TV show.

I used to be impressed by these massive American roads too, but I understand much better now why they exist and how impractical they really are.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#267

Post by sokoloff » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:47 AM UTC

pcmoney wrote: post #182

refurb wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so out of touch it's kind of offensive. Unlike you, most people struggle to make ends meet, are happy they have a job and can provide for their family. The upper-class "let's build architecture that inspires" screams "I have more money and time than I know what to do with". It's like looking down at people who eat at McDonald's (I got your reference!) with comments like "these folks wouldn't know good food if…

We as a society, in many aspects, used to eat AND build better when we were poorer. It is a matter of desire and priority. Also McDonalds is only cheaper if you’re in a food desert. Which areas that rely on stroads rarely are. Also, notice how the building around stroads and most “modern” buildings get knocked down and rebuilt every 10 years? Seems like something only a rich society could afford to do.

I have not noticed widespread occurrences of 10-year old buildings being knocked down and rebuilt. Have you noticed this? Where?

A building takes more than a year to build typically; if they were being knocked down every 10 years, the entire city would look like nothing more than a construction site.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#268

Post by mcv » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 9:47 AM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #236

w0mbat wrote: post #172

I have a house in Sunnyvale, California a few blocks from El Camino Real. It's the ultimate stroad, hundreds of miles long and lined with thriving businesses and I love it. It's getting really quite clean and quiet now a ridiculous proportion of traffic around here is Teslas.

Take it from someone who grew up in Santa Clara: El Camino Real fucking sucks. Now, many businesses along El Camino Real are great, don't get me wrong. But the road itself is miserable. When we lived in Sunnyvale there was a bigass Korean market literally across the street from us; we'd only drive there, despite it being, again, directly across the street , because that's how painful and dangerous-feeling it was to c…

> we'd only drive there, despite it being, again, directly across the street

That is just bizarre.

And it's important to understand how inefficient this is to need a car to cross the street; you need parking space on this side, parking space on the other side, you need to get on and off the stroad, causing wear, interfering with and slowing down the other traffic, which is mostly through traffic that's not interested at all in your house or that Korean market. It's unbelievably inefficient.

It's much more efficient if through traffic is separated from local traffic, if you can walk to the store, if stores are close to each other with one central parking space from which you can easily reach them all, and if people only use cars for trips that intrinsically require a car.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#269

Post by mcv » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 10:00 AM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #93

takk309 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traffic engineer here. Generally there is a hierarchy of roads called functional class. It goes local street - collector - minor arterial - major arterial - freeway. From local to freeway the speeds increase and the land access decreases. Good urban design should connect only roads one "step" apart, that is local roads should only connect to collectors and so forth. Reality is clearly different. I would imagine every…

> Generally there is a hierarchy of roads called functional class. It goes local street - collector - minor arterial - major arterial - freeway. This heirarchy seems to miss the importance distinction that Strong Towns makes between a "street" and a "road", in that "streets" are places where human life takes place, and "roads" are how vehicles move rapidly from place to place. It has only category with the word "stre…

Exactly. Ideally, only the street should have real street functionality (houses and shops directly accessible from the street). Maybe the collector too; it's meant to have many streets connecting to it, so access to car parks for shops makes a lot of sense there too. But anything arterial should just be about getting people from one end to the other as smoothly as possible.

There's one more category that's often ignored in this list: the rural road. There, the functions can mix without any problems, but only because of its very low density and low use; very little traffic means you can still cross the road easily, and have time to turn into drive ways and things like that without hindering anyone.

Re: How do you fix a stroad?

#270

Post by throwawaysea » Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 10:08 AM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #262

throwawaysea wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that suspicious. People who like their quality of life in their city and neighborhood don't want to lose that. This is perfectly normal and legitimate. Those who want higher density are usually either outsiders who want to live there but can't, or developers (or departing residents) who seek to make money by flipping a property for cheaply-built denser properties. If you increase density, you end up changing…

Yeah, this comment is the mindset I'm talking about. Protecting "neighborhood character" by prioritizing cars over people, increasing property values at the expense of affordability, keeping out the poors, etc. They put a lot of nice words on a lot of very bad results. Meanwhile, very-dense-by-US-standards cities like Vienna and Munich often top the charts for quality of life. And I can attest to that myself: Munich…

Why are those bad results? Neighborhood character matters - what's wrong with people having a preference for low density, open air, fast access, uncrowded parks, and so forth? You are engaging in the same dishonest recasting of people's personal preferences by summoning a caricature about increasing property values or "keeping out the poors". No one I know who favors low density cares about those things - it is first and foremost about preserving the kind of life and community feel they get from a lower density neighborhood, that you simply cannot get in an impersonal dense city.

I would argue that neighborhood character is prioritizing people. It's prioritizing the ones who live there already, who have built their town into a desirable location, and want to protect what they have. It's about prioritizing a connection with others that you would lose with higher density. There's nothing wrong with that, and I would argue those are very good results.

> Meanwhile, very-dense-by-US-standards cities like Vienna and Munich often top the charts for quality of life.

Based on what opinion? Self-reported opinions of European residents? Why are those a useful measure? It may just be they simply don't know their lives could be better elsewhere or that they have a low bar for quality of life or that they simply hold a different set of preferences culturally. I've traveled and lived all over the world, and have spent a lot of time in both Vienna and Munich. They're fine, but to me they're not amazing and they don't strike me as having a great quality of life. I did appreciate high speed rail providing easy access to other cities and countries. But locally, I didn't feel life was happier or better - rather it felt like these were dull, boring cities that lacked the character of American towns that many people appreciate. To me they felt culturally repressed, with less of an entrepreneurial or lively spirit, and life felt a lot like living in a limited sandbox. That's not surprising, since the urbanist push to design lives within 15 minutes necessarily means living with a small set of hyper-local choices.

> you were less likely to get hit by a car, people were much healthier, you had actual options to get around

There is no rational basis for living in fear of getting hit by a car. It is just something that is exceedingly rare in America. Health is also orthogonal and dependent on so many other factors, including personal choice and priorities. Everyone can certainly choose to be healthy while living a car-centric lifestyle, if they wanted. As for options to get around - cars are the ultimate option, because they give you far more freedom to go where you want, when you want.