410
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
410 points (92.9% liked)
Technology
60108 readers
1820 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The traffic argument is so infuriating. When will American journalism, and Americans at large, realize the very simple truth: no large city in the US will ever exist without traffic, without a fundamental shift from our car-centric culture and development to transit-oriented?
Yeah, I hear you, but what if we add another 7 lane highway that cuts right through the center? I think that would solve the issue
-random US city response, probably
Not random. You just described Houston, Texas.
Atlanta as well. The frustrating thing is that Atlanta has MARTA, but the state refuses to fund it and MARTA's answer for everything is to divert funds away from rail to bus lines. But then the degraded rail service means more people drive than ride trains, thereby increasing gridlock, which causes bus service to suffer. So then MARTA diverts funds away from rail to bus lines...
Can't be Houston, he said 7 lane highway not pothole ridden, Mad Max hellscape
not just any rando city, literally Austin https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/2/27/a-75-billion-boondoggle-advances-in-austin
That's hard to do now since we've run out of affluent African-American neighborhoods to build them through.
It is not possible to explain the horribleness that is Austin road planning and the complete and utter lack of available transit. Exhibit 1 https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/2/27/a-75-billion-boondoggle-advances-in-austin
Just consider what it must mean for an average Californian to say traffic is bad. These aren't people coming from rural Montana complaining about city traffic.
Even that headline image is Jesus Christ. Temporally closed ramp onto a packed full outer road from a freeway that's sitting squarely in the E rating. (Can't move without major effort)
I feel like for $7.5 billion they could build a city wide monorail system with tons of stops. Charge a few bucks a ride and it pays for itself. Or make it totally free and see what happens when your city suddenly has total freedom of movement. Bet it would have huge economic benefits for everyone. (So of course it'll never happen.)
The issue with Austin is most of the traffic isn't Austin residents. A shitty Austin house will cost $300,000 more than the exact same house 30 miles away.
Austin is quickly becoming one of the most expensive cities in the county. Which, by the way, is another reason it's being abandoned. Companies came here on the promise of cheap housing, and house prices in the area tripled in 5 years
So it's super expensive, hot, has shitty traffic, and it's a liberal island trapped in a state run by land developers and fascists.
I was hoping to flip Texas blue in 2028 or 32 but I guess not. It's extra frustrating because you know all this insane shit they pull is specifically designed to discourage liberals from moving in.
I'm not sure. Public transportation infrastructure is insanely expensive. Where I live (France), there was a project to add a new subway line. A single one. Estimated cost was more than 2 G€. And that's before taking into the numerous issues of another subway line modernization program...
People forget that transportation has an amplification affect across your entire economy. It takes all of the friction caused by traffic and removes a percentage of that. Helping not any one individual but everyone. It's understandable that it's harder to wrap our heads around something that isn't directly profitable when we're raised that way... but all the evidence and research is clear. Public Infastructure not only is the right way to help people, but is the best long term economic solution to transportation.
Further, who do you think pays for roads? Or their repair? Road infastructure is heavily subsidized and far more expensive than any public transportation project. The big difference? You won't hear politicians making a stink about it
I don't disagree with you on the principle. But at this price tag (a significant part of the budget of a major Metropolitan area), you don't only need to know it's good : you need to know by how much it is better ; when the payoff is going to begin ;and how to you make sure you don't create issues which will persist for up to a century. Granted, large road projects aren't cheap either.
It also tie a significant amount of money each year to pay for continuous operation of these transportation, and for the moment, there is a significant number of transportation jobs which can't be filled. Roads are costly too, but can withstand these employment issue... for a time.
US cities probably should invest much more in this area, but there are limits to the ability of these project to solve transportation issues.
Does that 'G' mean billion?
Gillion. €2 Gillion.
Yep, Giga-Euro.
Monorail! It put Brockway, Ogdenville and North Haverbrook on the map!
This NEVER happens. It is always subsidized and traffic is still a mess.
When you are at the point where you are building roads from hell like that maybe it is time to start looking at alternatives. It smells like a sunk cost fallacy in the works.
I see the article addresses something I saw firsthand. I remember they expanded rt 3 (a popular route to access rt 95/128 into Boston) because it was getting jammed during commutes. I said to myself "That will be jammed again in a few years". Sure enough, everyone moved to places fed by it and started switching to it and it was jammed up again.
People moved there because anything inside 128 costs a million dollars. I have friends with pretty good jobs who can't hope to afford to live closer to Boston. MA has their "MBTA Communities" upzoning push but it doesn't go far enough, IMO. We need to eliminate single family zoning entirely.
City Beautiful also has a good video on the shitshow that is I-35. TX DOT must have a little shrine to Robert Moses in their lobby.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcUx5r_ksk8
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=NcUx5r_ksk8
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
To be fair, Austin has to be not far behind LA as some of the worst. Everything in Texas is made for cars only basically.
It's not all or nothing. Most people are willing to deal with a 30 or 40 minute commute If they're not already working from home. The reason people point out LA in Austin is because they are significantly worse than other cities like Atlanta Philly and Baltimore.
Wait. Atlanta resident here. There are cities worse than us?
You have bad traffic but your average commute times are actually kind of nominal. The MARTA could be better You're like right on that line where you have bad traffic but your public transportation hasn't been made effective yet.
You should check out San Francisco's problems. Half their commuters are coming ovary major bridge from Oakland or elsewhere in California and the city itself is a peninsula so everyone's squeezed coming up from the south. And the bart is hands down awful
I never would've accepted a job in Boston or Cambridge if it wasn't for the T (train). No way in hell was I going to drive into there every day.
There's traffic in NYC and Chicago. As long as there are roads people will drive. There will always be traffic. Public transit only affects how bad the traffic will be and limit growth of the city.
You are so close to understanding ... as long as there are roads ... there will be traffic ...
The solution isn't build more roads and enable car culture more, the solution is to stop catering to cars and build less roads. Instead build more public transit. Literally stop catering to cars, make cars less viable as a transportation method by limiting how much space is available to them. Cities can work just fine without cars.
Cities can work fine without cars if they have viable alternatives
I know you mentioned this but it bears repeating, because so many of the "fuck cars" people don't bother to prioritize investing in alternatives, just making driving more miserable.
If you make car commutes twice as long but offer trains, you get more people on trains.
If you make car commutes twice as long but don't offer any alternatives, you just have the same people sitting in cars for twice as long.
I think there's something to be said for places like Houston vs Chicago though. In Chicago I can easily find and take public transit to get around. You don't necessarily need a car.
In Houston however you pretty much need it. It'll take you at least half an hour to get anywhere, no matter how close it may be geographically
And in NYC a car is a liability.
There are differences between cities though. It makes. A difference how they developed, what their geography is, and how concentrated their growth phase was. Austin is a place you can’t take a shit without driving to a bathroom. It’s not laid out for public transportation even if they could fund it. It is massively spread out with pockets of hills and rocks all over. The weather is hostile to walking and biking anyway.
I have many friends in Austin and visit often. People there obsess about traffic, working overtime to tune their day around finding low traffic windows and such. It’s not like that where I live, and I don’t live in some Amsterdam style utopia.
The deal with a lot of places like Austin where you have homes way over there and a shopping plaza waaaayyyy over there is not only do you have to drive usually but even if it is close enough to walk there is no frigging continuous sidewalk. You always end up with long breaks in it between developments, having to walk out in the road where it is overgrown, deep drainage ditches stopping you, etc.
I support things like light rail but only where it makes sense. I think a lot of comments like yours are from people who live in dense cities and have no idea what life is like in suburban and rural areas that constitute a large part of the US. Also, the last mile issue is very real and needs to be solved.
Bicycle
Folding bikes, sure. Or you get a bikeshare sub. Regular bikes aren't allowed on trains because they're too crowded.
- Dense city dweller
Philadelphia allows bikes on their subway, or at least doesn't enforce not allowing them. But, they probably wouldn't if bikes were more normalized here.
E-scooters are multimodal friendly and can do a mile without a lot of fuss.