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

691–700 of 713 posts

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

#691

Post by kiliantics »

sershe wrote: post #489
aesclepius wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jesus it's objectively worse. NY/Chicago/London/Paris/Tokyo you can conceivably and easily nip out to a grocer's, bodega, cafe or pub within 10 minutes of where you are. LA? Outside of certain certain pockets like DTLA, KTown, WeHo or similar walking is tough and if your friend is across town you're SoL without a car.

But I don't want to! I literally just walked to the store and it was in absoute perfect conditions - we wanted to go for a walk anyway, the weather is perfect (sunny but not hot), the store is 10min walk from my house, the neighborhood is nice and not drive-thru so there is ~0 non-local traffic. The plan was we go for a walk, and pop by a store and get one item. But as usual it never ends up being that way, so we had…

It's tragically hilarious to me that the car brain imagination can only consider moving a multi tonne large dangerous vehicle around in order to simply ease the discomfort of the small bag of groceries. Most people use little wheeled carts that are light and foldable and easy to push or pull around.

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

#692

Post by armandhammer »

kaashif wrote: post #602
Slow_Hand wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve lived in LA for five years now and lived in Boston for seven years prior. They’re both uniquely terrible. LA’s roads are easy to imagine because it’s synonymous with huge interstates, congestion, and long commutes. Boston is terrible because it’s layout makes zero intuitive sense and looks like spaghetti when viewed from the sky. Of course Boston predates the automobile, so I understand why. I do enjoy the preva…

> Of course Boston predates the automobile, so I understand why. New York City's grid plan far predates the automobile: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissioners%27_Plan_of_181... Grids are sometimes but not always caused by cities being designed for cars.

It's the opposite, no? Cities / suburbs that were built after 1950 often don't have a grid system.

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

#693

Post by armandhammer »

Doxin wrote: post #669
NoZebra120vClip wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> Our transit authority reminds riders to arrive at the stop 5 minutes early. For reference, In the Netherlands you only strictly need to be at the stop 30 seconds before departure, as that is when the doors close in preparation for departure. > Now, other motorists see a train stopped at a station and they think one thing. They see a train stopped and waiting for a red light and they know that it will proceed throug…

That's nothing compared to Tokyo and Osaka. The train arrives within 20 seconds of its scheduled time, the doors open for about 10 seconds, and 3 seconds after the doors close the train starts moving again.

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

#694

Post by climb_stealth »

mtalantikite wrote: post #680
climb_stealth wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ve certainly had people visit who think of themselves as fit and they get gassed out by regular New York walking life It's interesting how things become normal once you do it every day. I used to live in a fifth floor apartment without lift. Quite a few stairs to climb. Three things come to my mind. a) You very quickly learn not to forget anything when leaving the house. b) There is some perverse sense of satisfa…

> I will never forget the sight of him carrying something heavy up those stairs... Oh man, absolutely. I still have a vivid memory of moving out of a 5 floor walk-up with a narrow stairwell and as I was walking back into the building out comes the guy bear hugging my Fender Rhodes electric piano. It's gotta be around 150 pounds and very bulky. He was walking like it was nothing.

Hah, yes, I can see how that would leave quite an impression

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

#695

Post by sershe »

kiliantics wrote: post #691
sershe wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I don't want to! I literally just walked to the store and it was in absoute perfect conditions - we wanted to go for a walk anyway, the weather is perfect (sunny but not hot), the store is 10min walk from my house, the neighborhood is nice and not drive-thru so there is ~0 non-local traffic. The plan was we go for a walk, and pop by a store and get one item. But as usual it never ends up being that way, so we had…

It's tragically hilarious to me that the car brain imagination can only consider moving a multi tonne large dangerous vehicle around in order to simply ease the discomfort of the small bag of groceries. Most people use little wheeled carts that are light and foldable and easy to push or pull around.

Yeah, most people thru history were also subsistence farmers and it's "tragically hilarious" that "civilized brain" only considers I dunno, engineering or science or art to make a living, or whatever when you could be subsistence farming for reliable and easy to produce food.

I didn't drive until I was 29-30 and lived mostly in walkable areas so I can easily consider the alternatives. They are just, as I found out when I tried car-dependent lifestyle, inferior. One might even say, "objectively worse"...

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

#696

Post by sershe »

wizofaus wrote: post #690
sershe wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, this thread argues that the environment in Amsterdam/Tokyo/New York/... is "objectively better" than in LA to live in. "sedentary lifestyles" is not a real externality and anyway is also easy to achieve with transit; "time wasted in traffic" is simply false (far more time is wasted on transit given how fast it is to drive for an average trip, and sometimes even in rush hour), "dominance of cityscape by infras…

I basically waste no time at all travelling - I do it mostly by bike which is obviously beneficial health wise, and if I do take a train or bus I use the time to read etc. (plus walking to/fro stations/stops is, again, a positive use of time). The objective downsides in the amount of infrastructure dedicated to allowing everyone to drive everywhere is surely seen in the cost of maintaining it, and the impacts it has…

Cycling commuting distances/speeds, especially European-style, only counts as exercise for very sedentary people. Walking is barely exercise at all.. in the same time one could drive and also do some real exercise. Reading does make transit less bad, but usually only works on a familiar (no need to check for stops), transfer-free commute that's not very crowded. Otherwise if you time overhead vs reading (I've actually done it once in a place with bad traffic and relatively good buses, sadly I had a transfer) you can maybe get 30-40% of your commute as focused reading time and driving will still be faster in most places. Interestingly I think for that, transit is actually better on long inter-city trips, like someone I know commutes from Tacoma to Seattle during rush hour, it's I think 1:10 by train with no interruptions, or a 50min drive from hell. In that case I'd prefer transit :)

I think people just don't realize on gut level how fast driving is... someone mentioned Edinburgh as a place where it would never occur to them to drive. As it happens it was 5:30pm there when I plotted a random trip out of the city center to some residential area, it was 25min in "red" traffic vs 43min by transit, not counting overheads of waiting of course - so realistically x2 faster and that's from a city center. That was also my experience almot everywhere I lived or visited... you'd look at "terrible traffic" and wince, then you look at transit directions and drive/call a cab cause it's way faster anyway :)

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

#697

Post by hulitu »

chmod775 wrote: post #613
underdeserver wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an equal-parts driver, biker, e-scooter rider and pedestrian, this is horrible. Yes, you have to focus on the driving, or walking, or scooting, but you're in constant stress because you can accidentally hit someone coming from any direction. Or they can hit you. It's far better to have separate spaces, and cross only when you really have to.

Maybe you should be stressed? The point might be that environments where you're not stressed because they lull you into a false sense of security tend to kill more pedestrians. You're moving tons of metal at high speeds. Don't get too comfortable doing that.

Yet some cyclists have no issue going with high speed through children on those streets.

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

#698

Post by chmod775 »

hulitu wrote: post #697
chmod775 wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should be stressed? The point might be that environments where you're not stressed because they lull you into a false sense of security tend to kill more pedestrians. You're moving tons of metal at high speeds. Don't get too comfortable doing that.

Yet some cyclists have no issue going with high speed through children on those streets.

What is the point here?

We shouldn't build roads that are proven to be safer... because some cyclists are idiots?

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

#699

Post by tremon »

hulitu wrote: post #697
chmod775 wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should be stressed? The point might be that environments where you're not stressed because they lull you into a false sense of security tend to kill more pedestrians. You're moving tons of metal at high speeds. Don't get too comfortable doing that.

Yet some cyclists have no issue going with high speed through children on those streets.

I have also seen cars go 60+ km/h through traffic-calmed cul-de-sacs where children were playing on the street. Are you saying that only cyclists emulate Carmageddon in real life?

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

#700

Post by underdeserver »

chmod775 wrote: post #613
underdeserver wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an equal-parts driver, biker, e-scooter rider and pedestrian, this is horrible. Yes, you have to focus on the driving, or walking, or scooting, but you're in constant stress because you can accidentally hit someone coming from any direction. Or they can hit you. It's far better to have separate spaces, and cross only when you really have to.

Maybe you should be stressed? The point might be that environments where you're not stressed because they lull you into a false sense of security tend to kill more pedestrians. You're moving tons of metal at high speeds. Don't get too comfortable doing that.

Why do you assume I'm the driver in this case? I'm stressed as a pedestrian too.

You really think it's healthy to be stressed all the time?

I live in Israel and we've had pro-democracy demonstrations in a main intersection in Tel Aviv, every Saturday for the past 30 weeks. There are people and bikes all around but no cars and no motorcycles. It's ridiculous how calming it is to be on the street and not have to worry about hitting someone or getting hit.

Post reply on HN