A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don'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 topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do 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.
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:
Apparently pedestrians should take personal responsibility but not drivers
The go-to method right now seems to be to enforce it electronically, using the systems that are built into most new cars nowadays. Personally I'm not a fan of that, but it IS preferable to having all the surveillance electronics built into cars and just not doing anything worthwhile with it.
I don't understand how they want to use cars to enforce this electronically. My car tries to tell me the speed limit, and it's often wrong. I think you need to have a signal built into the road to tell cars the speed limit, and that sounds expensive and impractical.
But designing roads so lower speed feels reasonable is very effective. You can make the road narrower, curvier and bumpier is various ways, but you can also make it appear or feel narrower, curvier and bumpier without actual making it so.
The electronic solutions are definitely shit shows. They're probably going to try and use them to enforce it, anyway. If nothing else, it's cheaper than building speedbumps etc. everywhere.
I shudder to think what will happen when I'm driving on a 120 kph highway and the camera on my windscreen sees a 30 sign on a dirt road next to the highway.
There’s another method using visual design that “calms” traffic. Ex, if you have a wide road, paint the sides of it a notable color that visually corrals people to a tighter space. They have the sides if absolutely needed, but recognize they need to go slower to stay within the lines.
You need forceful enforcement in some situations, but for the most part it pays to inspect the psychology that gets people to behave a certain way.
i've long thought that all the rural roads that are like, 1.9 lanes wide should just be repainted so there's one lane in the middle and generous shoulders, like those bike-first roads in the netherlands on a budget.
It is very possible to make higher speeds seem extremely unreasonable to drivers.
Having the streets be cobblestone instead of asphalt, for one, makes driving faster louder and more difficult for drivers. I'm not rooting for cars, I'm just saying there are so many methods that governments just don't think are worth implementing because they value corporate lobbying more than citizen safety.
But ... that exasperates so many issues that cars already cause. Like noise pollution, street maintenance costs (IDK maybe cobblestone lasts longer, but it's for sure expensive to change a street into cobblestone vs. leaving it as-is), it compromises road safety for people who will drive fast anyway, and on streets that are too narrow for separate bike lanes they compromise bike safety (if we assume that cars start driving slow enough that it's reasonably safe to ride a bicycle on that streets).
Sure, speed bumps are better solutions that cobblestone?