81–90 of 243 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're only talking about 200m stretches, so even at 10km/h it's only a couple of minutes max.
I can't even make my car go that slow without tapping the break. We have kids that play in the streets in my community, most people go the speed limit 20mph and we have no problems. Just saying 6mph is really really slow.
That's an issue with your car, not with the speed limit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not just hop on a bus then? How is it different?
In Chile they have "collectivos" which are basically taxis that go on set routes, more like buses, and charges are closer to bus fares.
Great idea! The only puzzling point is the 10 km/h limit. In my experience it's almost impossible to go that slow. Better to set the limit at 20 km/h and cope with the conditions of the road. It will be slow for bicycles too. It forces bikers to go on the roads for cars or be very patient. Maybe it's the intended effect but I don't approve it.
One of the biggest problems with cars in the city is that they are ridiculously overengineered for that environment. It feels too slow because all that power and speed gives the illusion of control. If it were possible to electronically put cars into "city mode" (low power, acceleration and speed), say, based on GPS coordinates and municipal laws, they could share the public travel ways with more equanimity with othe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have to say, it kind of blows my mind that someone could not see the difference in user experience between a bus and an Uber/Lyft... Even in the absolute best case scenario for the bus, where there's a perfect bus route from where you are now to your destination and there's a bus leaving exactly when you get to the stop, Uber/Lyft is still clearly better, and that best case scenario for the bus almost never occurs.
I can easily see the difference, but I am no lord or duke, and thus not be bothered if sometimes my voyage is a bit uncomfortable. It's (edit: I meant public transport in general) cheaper, better for the environment, more social, certainly more secure than a random multinational company, quicker than any other option besides the motorbike, and helps free the roads for emergencies like ambulances carrying ill or wound…
Uber in no way replaces local businesses with lower quality cheaper services. In most markets it is replacing corrupt monopolies with a higher quality product. In the other markets it is just a higher quality product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or share the car with other people for a lot fewer cars overall. Imagine a town with 1/5 as many cars as today. How nice it would be.
Why not just hop on a bus then? How is it different?
I imagine this would be similar.
Even before the superblock idea, that first picture of existing Barcelona blocks looks so massively better than anything I've seen in USA. I looked hard, twice, before reading article cause I was sure it was is was artist rendering rather than reality. So, uniform, dense, but no sky scrapers, corners cut off, wide wide streets, wide sidewalks, interior (to block) "courtyards". I want to move to Barcelona!
It's one of the nicest cities in Europe but the Spanish economy is still so far down that many Spanish people with marketable skills are to be found all over Europe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not just hop on a bus then? How is it different?
I have to say, it kind of blows my mind that someone could not see the difference in user experience between a bus and an Uber/Lyft... Even in the absolute best case scenario for the bus, where there's a perfect bus route from where you are now to your destination and there's a bus leaving exactly when you get to the stop, Uber/Lyft is still clearly better, and that best case scenario for the bus almost never occurs.
It is also kind of a social experience in Spain, since many times I would meet people from the University and chat up with them (also I am in an large student group that I started so I know a lot of people). The buses are normally really lively and just fun to ride.
Lastly I am happier knowing that I am using a not-so-contaminating bus instead of my large old car, and that in doing so I am helping even if a bit to make public transportation use more common. While this is not so convenient, making me happier about this is for sure part of the user experience. Also I realize that it's a drop in the bucket, but every bit matters.
But the truth is that it comes down to price vs technology. Right now the price of taxi (or Uber) doesn't make economic sense for students or Spain, and the technology is not there yet in terms of automation and parking is a major issue here. So bus is more convenient for many people. Also it frees up a lot of time if you would drive instead (which is also a major point for me taking up the bus) as I would read in the train or review some notes.
Edit: I also have to point out that once I took a bus in USA and it was probably one of the worst experiences in my life in transportation; it smelled like s*, people were staring rudely at us all the time while filling many more seats for no reason at all, it was super slow in a really bad street, the bus came really late and the driver was totally unhelpful and just plain rude.
for instance, Philadelphia has these:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitler_Square,_Philadelphia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Circle_(Philadelphia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Square_(Philadelphi...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rittenhouse_Square
not to mention the smaller ones:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2011/02/04/a-guide-to-phila...
the pictures of Barcelona look like a living nightmare. could you imagine trying to get essential services into the middle of one of those?
good luck getting an ambulance into the middle of one of those on a crowded Saturday night.
honestly, it looks more like the beginning of a block from judge dred than anything else.
One of the problems is that the grid in Barcelona is quite imperfect. A similar plan to prioritize bus transit across orthogonal lines has been far from successful, and my take is that one of the reasons is that orthogonal lines have ended up not being quite orthogonal at all.
Anyway it's been the policy of the city government at least from the 90s to reduce the surface area dedicated to the cars. Interestingly most of the recent interventions have been on what would be on the superblocks concept considered 'fast' streets (mostly by increasing the side of the sidewalks [Arago, Balmes St, Diagonal, General Mitre] and by reorganization massive intersections [Glories, Lesseps].
And there are a few committed plans also in this direction [Via Laietana, Urquinaona].
So there are really two competing visions here:
* Make "fast" streets more pedestrian-friendly, kill urban highways, make the grid work in a homogenous way, increase surface for pedestrians across all the city. * Create a hierarchy of streets (with fast/slow streets)
And to me it's far from clear which vision is going to win.
Great idea! The only puzzling point is the 10 km/h limit. In my experience it's almost impossible to go that slow. Better to set the limit at 20 km/h and cope with the conditions of the road. It will be slow for bicycles too. It forces bikers to go on the roads for cars or be very patient. Maybe it's the intended effect but I don't approve it.
> Great idea! The only puzzling point is the 10 km/h limit. In my experience it's almost impossible to go that slow. Are you in europe? Keep in mind most EU drivers drive stick, and most cars in barcelona would be "city" cars, C-segment or below (compact and smaller in US segmentation). Depends on the exact car of course, but in my experience 1st and slow 2nd should be well into that range, and trivial to achieve on…