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

If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

streets.mn

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 713 posts

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#371

Post by erik_seaberg »

FooBarBizBazz wrote: post #223
skrebbel wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain this to me? For example, my local supermarket is a 8 minute walk from my house. Driving there would take about 5 minutes, due to one way streets etc, so including the hassle of parking etc it takes about as long. Driving there seems positively insane to me, except if I’m shopping for a party or something and need to fill the trunk. Are you saying that Americans would choose the car here? Or that in Am…

Americans don't live in cities, or in towns, or in villages. They are farmed in facilities called "housing developments", where there are no stores. A developer purchases large plots of agricultural land, and colludes with government to put a sprawling system of widely-separated four- to six- lane roads through it (often by widening and paving country roads until they are unrecognizable). Then, to hide this ugliness…

> preserved in your oversized fridge

Our governments recommend storing several days' worth of food and water in case of emergency. Your supply chain had better be very reliable without it.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#372

Post by vivalasvega »

closeparen wrote: post #363
whimsicalism wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” When you are using transportation infrastructure that’s designed with contempt for you, you know, and you don’t want to be there. I grew up in close contact with a large urban poor population and I think the view of bikes was the exact opposite of this. Biking in the city is considered the purview of affluent white people

I've had multiple professional-managerial friends tell me they personally won't bike because that's something they left behind in their childhood or broke-student days. It's beneath them now. But you're right, people also complain about bike infrastructure projects taking space from working-class drivers to benefit white yuppies. We see this often with urbanist topics. New multifamily construction is gentrification a…

Leftwing radicals and rightwing septuagenarians both joining hands to oppose new development was absolutely not on my bingo card for this decade.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#373

Post by brightlancer »

xtracto wrote: post #58
goda90 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have literally seen people scoff at biking or riding the bus as something for poor people. It is a common sentiment.

Anecdote time. Ten years ago I (Mexican, living in Mexico, a bit "white-er" than the average Mexican skin color) worked for a Silicon Valley startup with HQs in Mountain View. One time I was visiting said HQ, I met several people, I got to talk with one of them (Chinese/Asiatic looking woman) about how I was moving while I was there, and where was I staying (she didn't know where I was from). At some point I told her…

> I guess the stigma that only poor people (And we Mexicans are poor you know haha) take the bus is pretty alive in some parts of the US.

Because it's mostly true.

It's not _always_ true and we shouldn't hold prejudices, but it would be just as wrong (though not as un-PC) to claim that public transit was used equally across income levels, racial/ ethnic checkboxes, etc.

"Americans who are lower-income, black or Hispanic, immigrants or under 50 are especially likely to use public transportation on a regular basis, Pew Research Center data show."

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/04/07/who-relie...

The bigger problem for most folks (not your racist co-worker) is the crime, drug use and general anti-social behavior on public transit. This will vary by city/ transit district, but it's gotten much worse in the last decade (after it had gotten much better for the previous two).

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#375

Post by [deleted] »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #345
brightlancer wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's illegal in the US to block the sidewalk with a car and it's one of the few things cities will actually enforce aggressively -- if they don't, they can be sued for discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

At least in San Francsico this is very rarely enforced. What I've seen professionally and personally is that cities will ticket the easy stuff. Street cleaning is at the top of that list followed by time-based red zones.

[deleted]

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#376

Post by vivalasvega »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #263
whimsicalism wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” When you are using transportation infrastructure that’s designed with contempt for you, you know, and you don’t want to be there. I grew up in close contact with a large urban poor population and I think the view of bikes was the exact opposite of this. Biking in the city is considered the purview of affluent white people

Thank you! OP's view is a naive outsider's view. Anyone who actually lives in the US knows you need to be rich enough to not be car dependent. https://grist.org/cities/black-chicago-biking-disparities-in... In reality, only rich (and white) folks can afford to live in areas that are not car-dependent. https://granfondodailynews.com/2020/01/17/is-north-american- ... > From 2001 to 2017 the number of people cycling inc…

This isn't an immutable law of the universe. It just demonstrates that there is ridiculous demand for walkable, pedestrian-friendly cities, and, predictably and demonstrably if you've ever been to any city council meeting ever, not nearly enough supply. Everyone always says "not in MY back yard!" and then complains that downtowns are expensive. You cannot have it both ways.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#377

Post by closeparen »

NoZebra120vClip wrote: post #241
closeparen wrote: post #3

This lens is underutilized in the discourse, but people feel it acutely. Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” When you are using transportation infrastructure that’s designed with contempt for you, you know, and you don’t want to be there. See also: rail slow zones, buses that shimmy and rattle violently on imperfect pavement, how Muni trains close their doors and pull one foot out…

> how Muni trains close their doors and pull one foot out of the station just to wait at a red light There are safety and scheduling reasons for this. They are not merely trying to snub riders. For example, the light rail trains here have a standard for how long they open their doors at each station. It's something like 14 seconds. A vehicle with open doors will also allow passengers to disembark; it's a two-way pass…

That's exactly what I'm talking about. The space is for drivers. The rules governing the space are tuned for the predictability and convenience of drivers. The light rail is just a slower, less maneuverable, very timidly driven car that we're all sharing.

It wasn't like that in The Netherlands. Urban spaces where the LRVs operate have few cars and fewer traffic lights. The train moves like it means business and anything in its way scatters. As a passenger, it feels like you & your journey matter. On Muni it's like you're in a DMV waiting room.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#378

Post by CaliforniaKarl »

Guvante wrote: post #325
mc32 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn’t one reason. Some of it came down to liability (buckling sidewalks, falling limbs in storms, pruning), public safety (baddies can hide under trees and away from choppers before FLiR), impact on utilities (100+ years ago maybe there was a sewer line and maybe a water line, but not much else in most places).

It can cost tens of thousands to remove a single tree. No shot those reasons would justify millions in tree removal fees. However the huge budgets for roads could do it trivially. You underestimate the impact of measuring fatalities as the only way of verifying success of transportation policy... Certainly if other benefits were weighed properly it might not happen but if you ignore the upsides... (certainly we histo…

Closer to where I work, over the four-year period ending one year ago, we had one tree per year fall during the Winter season. The period ended when the campus arborist did a detailed check of all the trees in the immediate area, and a number were removed.

In the wider area, this part Winter had multiple trees fall. Not tree limbs, entire trees. One came down in front of a minivan carrying a local bus driver & his supervisor. I've got pictures.

I'm a pedestrian: I own neither a car nor a bike. But I understand why some trees are removed. I don't think the trees here are not watered deeply enough, so they don't have a deep hold on the ground.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#379

Post by sndknd »

dymk wrote: post #327
ytdytvhxgydvhh wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tinted windows are such a pet peeve of mine. I get it in the tropics but in most of America the individual benefits of dark tint seem like they’d be outweighed by the collective good of better visibility through cars, enabling eye contact with drivers, etc. The SUV craze is really to blame - in general many US states don’t allow dark tint on traditional cars but do on SUVs. And since rear windows on vans and light tr…

In most states (all?) it's illegal to have a tinted front window, yet people still have them, because it's not enforced. IMO cops should be citing people left and right for tinted windows and tinted license plate covers. You'd think they'd already be taking advantage of such an easy revenue source.

Exactly this. I’m not a fan of cops, but ENFORCE THE LAWS.

If the tint is illegal, cite the person and force them to remove it right there.

If we aren’t going to enforce the law, remove it from the books.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#380

Post by bluefirebrand »

carlob wrote: post #332
ufmace wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistics are not a good indicator either because most events never get recorded. Nobody keeps statistics on how often cyclists whiz within inches of pedestrians on the sidewalk, scrape by people, or knock people over but they get right back up again with a few bruises. It doesn't get recorded unless the police get involved or somebody goes to the hospital, both of which are pretty rare. Believing you understand wha…

> both of which are pretty rare so what you're saying is that people don't really get injured by bikes, they just get a bit rattled.

Being rattled frequently is surely enough to instill feelings of fear, right?
Post reply on HN