this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
555 points (89.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

9643 readers
425 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kozy138@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Aren't bike lanes technically "private transport infrastructure" though?

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As long as you can use it to walk/reduced mobility on, no. That allows everyone to use it.

[–] thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You shouldn't be walking in bike lanes. That's what the sidewalk is for.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you build wide enough tarmac, everyone can use it.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Shared-use paths work best when they're low use and low-speed. Ergo why people will walk, bike and drive in the road on a cul de sac but not on a main stroad.

It's common to have separate sidewalks and bike paths on faster, more commonly used routes, because bikes don't actually mix all that well with pedestrians. It's the same reason we don't make sidewalks wide enough to drive a bus down.

By your logic, public car roads are fine so long as there's a bus that drives down them. Even if 99% of the people on them are in a privately-owned bike or car.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Fair enough, it was an unthought retort to "bikes are private, cars are private, same thing."

I'm against building roads for personal vehicles because it is very expensive. Sidewalks and bike paths are cheap to build, cost nothing to maintain (other than SNIC) and last 30+ years.

I'm also not opposed to building roads for the transport of goods and services, that's why humans have built them for recorded history. I've got nothing against personal vehicles using roads built for trucks anyways (the maintenance cost of one truck on a road is equivalent to a lot of cars); so long as the cars don't impede trucks.

My bigger issue the the building of roads specifically for personal vehicles and the building of free (or under market value) parking alongside roads, increasing their cost.

Also, why wouldn't build bike paths the same width as a bus road? It lets you use the same SNIC fleet on paths and sidewalks as roads, allows emergency vehicles to pass, and provides easier access to path amenity maintenance.