How can you stand the lopsided car infrastructure?

[hanselthecaretaker2]

That’s probably because many orders of magnitudes more people drive than cycle - more’s the pity.

Cyclists unfortunately occupy this almost vestigial space in terms of transport where they’re dangers to the general user base of footpaths and roads.



This may not be uniform, but when I was taught to drive I was told both pedestrians and cyclists had the right of way in all road interactions outside of blatantly incorrect if not illegal actions. Maybe that is more common than I thought.

This is where it gets messy (possibly in more ways than one), because if a cyclist has the right of way on a bike lane, shoulder, etc. and debris on the road cause them to spill into the path of a car, the driver will be at fault if they make contact with the cyclist. This then causes drivers to be extra cautious whenever approaching cyclists, which can affect the flow of auto traffic if heavy. Additionally, normal practice out of courtesy here in MI and I’m guessing many other places is to swerve away from a cyclist to give them more room, which again can cause interference with oncoming traffic if that motorist crosses the center line.

There really *ideally* should be a bike lane adjacent to sidewalks, still with ample spacing from roadways. But infrastructure is already a nightmare in many places with increased traffic on freeway systems built when a fraction of the current population existed. Not gonna hold my breath.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Okay, not sweat as much.

Yeah, having to catch the one bus or train for that wide segment of time (or the service not operating on the weekends/Sundays or late is night) is one of the reasons few people here take public transit. It should be more frequent, even if that costs the city more. It's a public service; it doesn't have to make a profit. You make that sacrifice because having a system that's frequent in more areas attracts riders and benefits everyone by getting more cars off the road. Then when you no longer have so many cars you can rebuild parts of the city that have to be repaired/updated to a more human scale. Another reason few people here take public transit is because it still has to travel through jammed car traffic and traffic lights in most areas and gets no priority (despite often carrying more commuters). I used to try to catch the light rail on my way home from work, but stopped when I realized that with all the traffic lights it barely saved me any time. Once I even outran the light rail, was ahead by almost half a mile when I finally had to make my turn, and I wasn't going that fast.

Again, I have nothing against adding more and proper bike infrastructure as I've seen other countries with more biking and Louis Rossmann did videos riding his bike through NYC and some of the biking areas were pretty separate from the road and it looked like a decent way to get around. I personally think it would be great have trolleys going down main arteries in communities and that requires things to be zoned off (which you hate). So you can have a couple trolleys just going back and forth from the residential area to the business area so you can hop on to go to the grocery store/big box store or bar or restaurant or dentist or movie theater in your town. I don't think that system would be useful going to other towns/cities but would eliminate traffic for doing general errands. I would personally take the trolley to do such close errands because that is easily the most annoying driving is just doing the small errands around town.

 

[Ag3ma]

Many people don't cycle because the current infrastructure and city planning makes it inconvenient and dangerous. If that is changed and cycling becomes both safe and convenient, people will do. As seen in many European cities that took appropriate measures.

This reminds of the time I sat bemused when some rando ranted to me about how they needed to get rid of the buses because they held him up when he was driving. I didn't even bother pointing out that each bus trip was probably preventing another 20-50 cars on the road which would probably hold him up a lot more.

 

[Ezekiel]

Watched some political pundits talk about some school districts cancelling Halloween celebrations because some kids can't afford costumes. Towards the end, one of the pundits mentions the unfounded fear of poisoned candy every year and concludes by saying that the one way in which Halloween is dangerous to kids is in terms of car accidents. Implying (but of course not saying it) that kids are never outside because of the clownish car infrastructure. Lol. Yeah, that coupled with the wide distances is why so many Americans now do trunk-or-treating, such cope.

 

[Drathnoxis]

Watched some political pundits talk about some school districts cancelling Halloween celebrations because some kids can't afford costumes. Towards the end, one of the pundits mentions the unfounded fear of poisoned candy every year and concludes by saying that the one way in which Halloween is dangerous to kids is in terms of car accidents. Implying (but of course not saying it) that kids are never outside because of the clownish car infrastructure. Lol. Yeah, that coupled with the wide distances is why so many Americans now do trunk-or-treating, such cope.

How can anybody not afford a costume? You just make it yourself. I remember in highschool that one person dressed up as a bag of gumballs, which consisted of them wearing a clear garbage bag full of balloons. Everybody thought it was a fantastic costume and it probably cost less than a dollar.

 

[Ezekiel]

How can anybody not afford a costume? You just make it yourself. I remember in highschool that one person dressed up as a bag of gumballs, which consisted of them wearing a clear garbage bag full of balloons. Everybody thought it was a fantastic costume and it probably cost less than a dollar.

Don't wanna get into it, probably should have skipped to the last part, but it's one of those things where two people complain and then they remove it for everyone.

 

[Ezekiel]

Noticed more shit about American car infrastructure.

I live in Washington now. Starting September 14th, the Swift Blue Line bus up to Everett starts at 5:01 on Saturdays, so I no longer have to bike 28 miles or so from Kenmore on Saturdays. However, today I had mandatory extra time, and Sundays that bus starts only 30 minutes before my 6:30 shift, so I biked all the way again.

When I leave the apartment at 4:30, I'm normally at that bus stop 23 minutes (or about nine miles with a lot of climbing) later. I ride from the first Blue Line stop to the last, then bike about another four miles. When I'm in the building, I have about twenty minutes to spare.

Today I left at 4:30 and did not take the bus. I did not bike that fast. My route is totally different without that bus. When I was finally in the building, I only had about 8 minutes to spare at 6:22.

This shit is so spread out because of the moronic car obsession with huge parking lots, single story stores, gas stations, single-use zoning, wasteful suburbs and all the other shit that when you add all the stop lights that drivers have to wait for and travel to and from the bus stops (regular exercise I should be getting anyway), a fucking cyclist doesn't lose that much (health-wise) unproductive time. Fifteen minutes!

Takes even longer to go home, when the bus is on congested stroad. Not a small difference.

From N 200th St to Pacific Ave, that blue line is one very long stroad.

 

[Ezekiel]

"In the US, around 42,000 people are killed in car crashes every year and hundreds of thousands are seriously injured."

Sounds about right. Still, when you hear it and think about it... Damn. And only reason it's not many times higher is because almost nobody walks or bikes.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

"In the US, around 42,000 people are killed in car crashes every year and hundreds of thousands are seriously injured."

Sounds about right. Still, when you hear it and think about it... Damn. And only reason it's not many times higher is because almost nobody walks or bikes.

Self-driving cars aren't happening.

 

[Ezekiel]

They call it a bomb cyclone, the windy rain that left tens of thousands here without power. We've been without power for three days. I take my family's devices to work, so that I can charge them there. This too I blame on car infrastructure. Everything so needlessly spread out that the idiots have to wire the electricity up in the air. Rode my bike by a downed power line with the whole tree that dragged it in the middle of the street Wednesday morning. In some places in Japan the steps on the way to elementary schools are small because little kids walk to school there, are ABLE to.

 

[Drathnoxis]

They call it a bomb cyclone, the windy rain that left tens of thousands here without power. We've been without power for three days. I take my family's devices to work, so that I can charge them there. This too I blame on car infrastructure. Everything so needlessly spread out that the idiots have to wire the electricity up in the air. Rode my bike by a downed power line with the whole tree that dragged it in the middle of the street Wednesday morning. In some places in Japan the steps on the way to elementary schools are small because little kids walk to school there, are ABLE to.

You think it's due to cars that power poles exist?

 

[Ezekiel]

You think it's due to cars that power poles exist?

Far more common in car-centric places. Cost to place all of it underground in a spread-out nightmare like USA would be astronomical. All the big American cities are finding that out painfully with regard to the water pipe costs after seventy years. All in dept. Because the idiots would rather add another lane or more parking than densify and mix zones. Would add good public transit to what they should aim for, but that already becomes so much more affordable and financially viable to do when you take care of the density and zoning first. Americans have a mind virus that makes them think everything needs to be divided up into different systems.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Far more common in car-centric places. Cost to place all of it underground in a spread-out nightmare like USA would be astronomical. All the big American cities are finding that out painfully with regard to the water pipe costs after seventy years. All in dept. Because the idiots would rather add another lane or more parking than densify and mix zones. Would add good public transit to what they should aim for, but that already becomes so much more affordable and financially viable to do when you take care of the density and zoning first. Americans have a mind virus that makes them think everything needs to be divided up into different systems.

Power poles have little to do with density, or lack thereof. New York city is pretty dang dense and it still has above-ground power lines.

The county I live in has almost all of its power lines underground, because most of the cities in that county are fairly new and planned for that ahead of time, and because the cities in that county are wealthy and can afford to put the power lines underground.

Most American cities existed before electricity, and retrofitting power lines underground when it wasn't originally planned for is expensive. Politicians would rather spend money on the defense department than on infrastructure.

The reason your power lines are above ground is the same reason that your bridges are in shitty shape, because of a lack of infrastructure spending.

 

[Ezekiel]

Power poles have little to do with density, or lacQk thereof. New York city is pretty dang dense and it still has above-ground power lines.

The county I live in has almost all of its power lines underground, because most of the cities in that county are fairly new and planned for that ahead of time, and because the cities in that county are wealthy and can afford to put the power lines underground.

Most American cities existed before electricity, and retrofitting power lines underground when it wasn't originally planned for is expensive. Politicians would rather spend money on the defense department than on infrastructure.

The reason your power lines are above ground is the same reason that your bridges are in shitty shape, because of a lack of infrastructure spending.

Cost of placing it underground is affected by density, definitely. Infrastructure costs more when you spread out needlessly.

Most of any American city was built after the harnessing of electricity, and what was there before became more spaced out (old buildings replaced by road) thanks to cars, almost everywhere.

The lack of density is also because of settler mentality, which Americans still have even so long after westward expansion. "Good enough that we're here. Don't need to make it good." Explains why their houses are made of cardboard. They are comfortable building them cheaply because of settler mentality. The car only exasperates the ugliness of settler mentality.

 

[Gordon_4]

They call it a bomb cyclone, the windy rain that left tens of thousands here without power. We've been without power for three days. I take my family's devices to work, so that I can charge them there. This too I blame on car infrastructure. Everything so needlessly spread out that the idiots have to wire the electricity up in the air. Rode my bike by a downed power line with the whole tree that dragged it in the middle of the street Wednesday morning. In some places in Japan the steps on the way to elementary schools are small because little kids walk to school there, are ABLE to.

I don't know how to break this to you, but there's generally no single perfect way to lay power cables - or indeed any kind of infrastructure - because both overhead lines and submerged cabling have their pros and cons.

I say that because based on your whole act of draping yourself in ash and sackcloth, if the lines had been underground and something had still caused power loss, you'd still be on here doing your best level of bitching.

 

[Ezekiel]

If my whole life, I experienced one earthquake. But I can't count the number of power losses due to weather.

 

[Ezekiel]

 

[EvilRoy]

I've actually been part of a push in my area to improve cycling and mass transit in my city. Not as a driver but as a designer, so when other people decide what they want and where to go I find solutions to implement it.

It's been weird. Conceptually it doesn't seem that hard to figure out alignments and earmark structures for new bike lanes or transit centers, but there is really no established method by which one slams a bunch of new infrastructure into an existing space. To your point about utilities, they have frankly been an absolute nightmare to deal with. When they're overhead it's all about moving goddamn everything and somehow incorporating into new structures. When they're underground it's all about actually finding the damn things, and then when you touch them you find out the only thing holding them together down there was mole shit.

. I'm basically in favour of making cities more traversable without cars, but it has been a hell of a journey so far, and that's with a public generally on our side. Existing structures really do not want to accomodate all this new stuff.

 

[Elvis Starburst]

I've actually been part of a push in my area to improve cycling and mass transit in my city. Not as a driver but as a designer, so when other people decide what they want and where to go I find solutions to implement it.

It's been weird. Conceptually it doesn't seem that hard to figure out alignments and earmark structures for new bike lanes or transit centers, but there is really no established method by which one slams a bunch of new infrastructure into an existing space. To your point about utilities, they have frankly been an absolute nightmare to deal with. When they're overhead it's all about moving goddamn everything and somehow incorporating into new structures. When they're underground it's all about actually finding the damn things, and then when you touch them you find out the only thing holding them together down there was mole shit.

. I'm basically in favour of making cities more traversable without cars, but it has been a hell of a journey so far, and that's with a public generally on our side. Existing structures really do not want to accomodate all this new stuff.

It's interesting to hear this coming from someone we on the forum might be more familiar with. An ear from the inside, in a way. I've often wondered why it's taken so long for some of our infrastructure to follow suit as well, or why they only added a bike lane in a slight half step method on one road they just refinished... and yet did it more thoroughly on the road next to it. Probably more to do with the stuff you mentioned than I initially thought. It always seems so simple at first, huh?

 

[Ezekiel]

But most of the people in charge don't even try, and the old people who vote mostly reject any kind of improvement.

One of the comments: "Based on how projects are funded by my MPO, my guess is that the purpose of that bike lane was not to be useful for cyclist and ONLY to ensure the project could receive additional federal funding meant for active transportation projects. They don't expect any cyclist to use it but they do expect to use money allocated for cyclist for more car infrastructure."