this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
1132 points (99.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

12223 readers
2659 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The tables on the road were only there for the inauguration day, but bike lane is here to stay.

https://www.lavoixdunord.fr/1596032/article/2025-06-14/lomme-apaise-securise-et-cyclable-le-bourg-renove-prefigure-l-avenue-de

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I can't honestly believe that some people would rather have the hellscape in the top photo, rather than the paradise in the lower one.

Communities, and society as a whole, need more of the "after", please!

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Paradise is a stretch. Paradise to a non-cyclist like me would be a robust tram system with cheap monthly pass. This looks nicer I agree, but if you're not a cyclist you're still driving.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Paradise to a non-cyclist like me would be a robust tram system with cheap monthly pass. This looks nicer I agree, but if you’re not a cyclist you’re still driving.

Ironically, there's a subway directly under where this photo is taken, so robust public transportation can still move people to these destinations. No need to drive to these shops now, since you can get there without needing a car.

Before this transformation, there was barely a sidewalk, and almost no people enjoying this public space.

Here's another angle of that street, so you get a better idea:

Two things strike me the most.

The first is that in the "before", there's just all wasted space and no people.

Now you now see elderly and children enjoying that space, people talking, people sitting down to eat or rest. You don't have to be a cyclist to appreciate that this is what streets should look like.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The added context of the underground subway system definitely helps. In pure terms of use of space i definitely agree that we allocate way too much space to cars and car infrastructure. It'd be nice to see these ideas implemented as a broad ideology. Where i live we are moving further and further away from public transportation infrastructure.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago

It’d be nice to see these ideas implemented as a broad ideology.

Attend every public consultation that your municipality makes available when it comes to new projects and development. It often only takes a few people to make or break certain plans (good or bad ones).

Where i live we are moving further and further away from public transportation infrastructure.

North America? Some cities seem to be moving forward (i.e. San Francisco), while others are going way backward (i.e. Toronto).

In Montreal, Quebec, they are making huge progress in the same way that France has. De-growing certain roads, and giving them back to the communities. It's incredible to see!

Hopefully, as some cities adopt more people-centric design, it catches on. And it has to, because cities that keep pushing car dependency will bankrupt themselves.

[–] iglou@programming.dev 3 points 12 hours ago

Moving from a car to a bike is a choice, though. Become a cyclist :)

[–] fishpen0@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Complete idiot local business owners keep trying to remove the bike lanes in San Diego because “their customers need to parallel park there”. Up to and including a fucking bike repair shop. Even when people have this better way right in front of them they reject it

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago

Yes, idiot business owners.

Why do they believe they are in competition with people? As if having more people in front of their shop (vs. parked cars) is somehow bad?

What they should be worried about is online businesses stealing their market share.

And what better way to offer something more than what online businesses do then by making your brick and mortar shop friendly to people!

[–] JBar2@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

In defense of business owners, when their customers are trained from birth to drive everywhere, their customers expect parking. When there is no parking, they lose business

Every major US city receives immense backlash from local businesses when roads/parking are unavailable due to added bike lanes, traffic calming projects that reduce parking, or much-needed major construction projects such as water main or sewer work. This is happening right now in downtown Burlington, VT, for example

https://m.sevendaysvt.com/news/main-street-construction-is-hurting-burlington-businesses-43270506

There's no easy answer in most cases

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

There can be other forms of parking, but on-street parking on a street like that is by far the worst type.

In my city's downtown area, we have four lanes going one way, with parking taking up two.

We also have a few unused, large parking buildings and many empty parking lots within walking distance of every shop, restaurant, and service building.

As it stands today, my downtown is hostile to pedestrians, cyclists, and the disabled. Businesses would thrive if the area was designed for people.

Constriction hurts businesses, for sure. Road maintenance tends to be a huge reason for that, and frequent road maintenance is needed when areas only supports cars.

[–] pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm unable to open the link due to being blocked, but do they have the data to prove sales went down?

Every study I've seen shows shops always sell more when they have more foot traffic from pedestrianization and protected bike lanes. Businesses tend to complain initially, but when the cash starts flowing in, they never want it removed afterwards

[–] rooster_butt@lemm.ee 2 points 9 hours ago

The linked article talks about business owners that are complaining about reduced sales while construction is going on... It's not even a completed project that they are complaining about.

[–] JBar2@lemmy.world 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

They're typically small businesses, what reason do they have to lie about business being down?

I'm sure they have the data, and I'm sure if a local government or journalist wanted to, they could look at tax records to see revenue impact

I don't think anyone would argue that such enhancements are a bad thing in the long run if 1) If the enhancements ultimately bring in more shoppers/customers, 2) there is still parking available in the area, and 3) the businesses can survive 6-12 months of reduced revenues

My response was really directed at comments implying that the businesses are essentially whining. There's a very real impact during construction, and certain businesses could be hurt by reduced parking, particularly in the states where the car is king

Lie? Nah, they're just ignorant. They don't check the numbers.