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

Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

greeneuropeanjournal.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 994 posts

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#241

Post by nonethewiser »

silvestrov wrote: post #52
stephen_g wrote: post #4

I think the thing that really struck a chord with me about car-centric development, as someone who lives in a city with fairly poor public transport (by certain standards, it would actually be quite good if it were in the US) and where driving is the norm for getting around - Prioritising cars actually makes things worse for drivers. We spend many tens of billions of dollars a year on roads in my state and traffic in…

Car oriented people seriously underestimate how many people that can be transported in a subway train and how much highway space it would take to transport the same number of people in cars. One subway line can transport more people than even the widest existing highway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Passenger_Capacity_of_dif... (edit: spelling)

What do you mean by "car oriented people."

People who primarily drive cars? People who primarily drive cars when competitive options exist? People who argue for cars in areas where its not very feasible? People who prefer car oriented cities?

I think most people who primarily drive arent estimating subways at all.

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#243

Post by nonethewiser »

osigurdson wrote: post #145
forinti wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen many times how some people react to a single bus lane or even a tiny bicycle lane as though cars are getting the raw end of the deal when 90%+ of infrastructure is for cars.

Some cities build dedicated bike paths. This is much nicer as you aren't fighting with cars that way.

Because bikes on roads with cars suck for both.

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#244

Post by Workaccount2 »

baby wrote: post #161

I'm always wondering how Americans feel traveling to Europe and being able to walk in cities. It must be so surreal that they either have to move, or they can't fathom that these cities are practical to live in.

New York City at least is extremely walk able/bike able and car unfriendly.

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#245

Post by nonethewiser »

trial3 wrote: post #118
forinti wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen many times how some people react to a single bus lane or even a tiny bicycle lane as though cars are getting the raw end of the deal when 90%+ of infrastructure is for cars.

unfortunately i think the crab bucket mentality kicks in when sitting in stop and go traffic and seeing someone breeze by in a bike lane makes people so enraged they’re against cycling infrastructure for the rest of their lives

nah its more like no right of way on right turns. the breaking of fundamental rules by adding bikes.

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#246

Post by pjmlp »

dijit wrote: post #96
npteljes wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>there's a lady next to you on the train that covered herself in perfume. Or urine. Or they want to beat you up, or worse. I can't imagine good public transport without the "good public".

Come to Europe, especially northern Europe. The wealthy population also take public transport, it's sort of expected that its for everyone... this seems to alter the behaviour of people in a positive way. Maybe through enhanced enforcement by police? or perhaps social conditioning through higher expectations? idk. US Public transport is not a model of what public transport is like; it's only an example of failed infr…

Southern Europe is quite far from the well connected city dream that often gets discussed here.

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#247

Post by skitter »

anonymars wrote: post #140
mschuster91 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, the Americans literally dug up a lot of the public transit infrastructure they had. Tramways and cable cars used to be widespread. You'd need to lay down all that track again.

What's wrong with buses?

They're great, compared to cars. But while they have a relatively fast and cheap setup, over the long term light rail and trams are a lot cheaper to run and can coexist with foot & bike traffic easier since the rails make them very predictable.

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#248

Post by seper8 »

komali2 wrote: post #201
mystifyingpoi wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have kids? I don't think so (correct me if I'm wrong). Car is absolutely essential for driving around small kids no matter the urban density. I'm more dependent on my car(s) when I got the first newborn than I ever was.

> Do you have kids? I don't think so (correct me if I'm wrong). Car is absolutely essential for driving around small kids no matter the urban density. I hear this all the time yet right now am traveling in Amsterdam and see many parents trucking their kids around in bicycles without issue. Actually I remember seeing this in SF as well, and in Taiwan and Japan I see incredibly young children riding public transit on t…

Most of these bike moms/dads still have a car at home.

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#249

Post by nonethewiser »

vjk800 wrote: post #123
yostrovs wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Train oriented people always forget that trains don't transport people from the origin to the destination. You still need to get to and from a train station. With all your groceries, gear, children's things, etc. Oh and you might be odor sensitive, but there's a lady next to you on the train that covered herself in perfume.

Oh yeah, public transportation is fucking horrible. Still, it is basically the only viable way to support a large population density and not turn everything into a wasteland of parking lots and car lanes. Let's face it: cars just take an order of magnitude or two more space than e.g. metro for the same number of passengers and, in big cities, space is a very scarce resource.

But why wouldnt I prefer having orders of magnitude more space, given the option?

Re: Pontevedra, Spain declares its entire urban area a "reduced traffic zone"

#250

Post by stephen_g »

anonymars wrote: post #140
mschuster91 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, the Americans literally dug up a lot of the public transit infrastructure they had. Tramways and cable cars used to be widespread. You'd need to lay down all that track again.

What's wrong with buses?

They’re flexible (don’t need to rip up rails to change routes) but they cost a lot more to run (tyres, fuel, maintenance, staffing cost) to carry fewer people. A tram can carry three, five or even more passengers with the same one driver, and are way more energy efficient to boot.

Then there’s ride quality (much smoother) and psychological differences - e.g. you can run them through pedestrianised areas because people know exactly where they are going to be - a bus can possible swerve and hit you but the tram will always be on its tracks so people feel (and are) much safer sharing space with them. And just because they feel more ‘premium’ than busses people seriously are more likely to use them.

Post reply on HN