If there’s heavy traffic in your city and private cars are still preferable to public transport, your infrastructure is shit and you should go pester your politicians about it
I’m in an odd situation where there’s heavy traffic but we have very good bike lanes and bike trails. Yet I am afraid to use the bike lanes most of the time because the drivers are so insane. And half the people who do ride bikes end up doing it wrong because they feel unsafe: they ride in the bike lane against traffic or just ride on the sidewalks where they become the threat: to pedestrians.
Yes. I’m not sure how it’s the infrastructure’s fault that we don’t have better transit though. Better transit would mean busses here as we have decent bike support and regional rail. We do have busses, too, but for them to be better they need to go more places that the cars are going.
And actually the biggest reason we have so many cars is they keep building more and more housing further and further out from our town, which then needs to pass through our town to get anywhere.
There’s multiple layers to this, but if all you wanted to say was “your infrastructure is shit” then, well, you’ve said it.
Because improving infrastructure makes these layers easier to deal with. More bike and bus lanes, more car traffic restrictions, extending public transport routes to suburbs, even building tram lines potentially. All of this and more will make your town better and all of it is possible if you pressure your elected representatives enough.
The reason you have so many cars is because people in charge prioritize the comfort of cars.
How could having my own personal space that operates on my schedule ever not be preferable to being crammed into a smelly tube with a bunch of other people?
Hello, yes. I work in construction. I carry 50+lbs (23+kg) of tools and/or material to work (which constantly changes locations as buildings and projects finished being built).
I never claimed everyone could work from home. But I think you’ll agree, that your commute would probably become quicker and less stressful, if the majority of office workers could stay at home.
Less traffic if you have to drive, less crowded public transport. As a side effect life in the city might also become less stressful, as the noise from traffic reduces.
I can walk to literally everything I need in my daily life except my job, and the share of residents lucky enough to work in the city can walk or bike to those too. My city scores incredibly high in both walk and bike scores; this drives real estate prices up, which drives employers to the suburbs, and—wouldn’t you know it!—the cheapest places to build office parks are situated away from the commuter transit.
Idk if you’re trolling or just obstinate, but if you don’t explain the exact definition you are using, it is impossible to determine what meets it and what does not.
For example:
Walkability is a measure of how accessible services and amenities are by foot or transit. A city is walkable if a broad range of these are thusly available.
Sure, your definition works. Your place of work is obviously included into the list of location that needs to be accessible, since it’s somewhere you commute to almost every day.
If there’s heavy traffic in your city and private cars are still preferable to public transport, your infrastructure is shit and you should go pester your politicians about it
I’m in an odd situation where there’s heavy traffic but we have very good bike lanes and bike trails. Yet I am afraid to use the bike lanes most of the time because the drivers are so insane. And half the people who do ride bikes end up doing it wrong because they feel unsafe: they ride in the bike lane against traffic or just ride on the sidewalks where they become the threat: to pedestrians.
Public transport would still alleviate the issue by moving a portion of the drivers off the roads. Which, in turn, will make bike lanes safer.
Yes. I’m not sure how it’s the infrastructure’s fault that we don’t have better transit though. Better transit would mean busses here as we have decent bike support and regional rail. We do have busses, too, but for them to be better they need to go more places that the cars are going.
And actually the biggest reason we have so many cars is they keep building more and more housing further and further out from our town, which then needs to pass through our town to get anywhere.
There’s multiple layers to this, but if all you wanted to say was “your infrastructure is shit” then, well, you’ve said it.
Because improving infrastructure makes these layers easier to deal with. More bike and bus lanes, more car traffic restrictions, extending public transport routes to suburbs, even building tram lines potentially. All of this and more will make your town better and all of it is possible if you pressure your elected representatives enough.
The reason you have so many cars is because people in charge prioritize the comfort of cars.
How could having my own personal space that operates on my schedule ever not be preferable to being crammed into a smelly tube with a bunch of other people?
Maybe if you gave even a fraction of care that you give your car to the people around you, it wouldn’t be smelly and crammed.
What am I supposed to do about either of those issues?
Refer to my original comment
Pester politicians? To do what? Tell people to shower and lose weight?
To build more public transport instead of parking lots and highways lanes. Then you’ll have enough space to travel comfortably.
What do I do if the public transit is pretty good and the city is walkable, but all the jobs are in office parks 40 minutes out of town?
Pester your politicians that they forgot a part of the walkable city. Either a walkable workplace or work from home.
Hello, yes. I work in construction. I carry 50+lbs (23+kg) of tools and/or material to work (which constantly changes locations as buildings and projects finished being built).
How do I fit into the walkable city plan?
I never claimed everyone could work from home. But I think you’ll agree, that your commute would probably become quicker and less stressful, if the majority of office workers could stay at home.
Less traffic if you have to drive, less crowded public transport. As a side effect life in the city might also become less stressful, as the noise from traffic reduces.
So the city isn’t walkable, then
Define walkable.
I can walk to literally everything I need in my daily life except my job, and the share of residents lucky enough to work in the city can walk or bike to those too. My city scores incredibly high in both walk and bike scores; this drives real estate prices up, which drives employers to the suburbs, and—wouldn’t you know it!—the cheapest places to build office parks are situated away from the commuter transit.
Walkable: jobs, homes, and basic essentials shopping coexist near enough to each other.
It’s not walkable if you only have 2 out of 3.
That’s not walkable. The definition is not that difficult
Idk if you’re trolling or just obstinate, but if you don’t explain the exact definition you are using, it is impossible to determine what meets it and what does not.
For example:
Walkability is a measure of how accessible services and amenities are by foot or transit. A city is walkable if a broad range of these are thusly available.
They’re not being obstinate. You are working very hard not to understand that your job has to be walkable too.
Sure, your definition works. Your place of work is obviously included into the list of location that needs to be accessible, since it’s somewhere you commute to almost every day.
Fair enough, but I would contend “a broad range” is compatible with “all but one”
That depends. If the one that is excluded is the majority of your destinations, I’d say it is in fact required to be walkable
Let me just walk my 315lb welder to work each morning. Can I borrow your kids radio flyer after you walked them to school?
If your job makes you take a welder home with you at night, you need a new job.
If only the only people that use cars on a daily basis were the ones that actually need to, maybe you wouldn’t be so bitter and angry about it.