brotundspiele

You can have historic neighborhoods without cars. We've had them for millennia in the rest of the world.

Even in North America people used to know how to do that.

I guess, these things weigh more than 3.5 tons. In Germany that means that you would need a truck driver's license to drive them. That license alone costs 3000-5000€ and you have to pass a medical test every few years to keep it. You also need a digital driver's card which, combined with a digital tachograph permanently stores your speed and your driving times. You'll be treated like a professional truck driver, so you can't drive for more than 9 hours per day, have to have an 11 hour break every night and at least a 45 hour break once a week. In practice that means that you can't use your vehicle after 8pm if you drive to work at 7 in the morning and you can't really use it on the weekend etc.

That's enough of a hassle to deter most of the people from getting such a car so much that I rarely ever see them here.

For delivery vans that's no problem because they have to adhere to these limits anyway, because of workers protection rights.

Just to be the man who walks a 1000m to take the bus.

Of cause you can decide not to live in a nice place. It's always your choice if you want to move somewhere else where you have to drive 2 hours to get to any useful place. Just don't expect that we want you driving through our neighborhood. I don't see how a 15 minute city would limit your freedom of movement when it is literally built around a mobility hub.

Busses work perfectly well for suburban neighbourhoods with back yards. With 1000m² each, you can place more than 250 lots around a bus stop, so that no one will have to walk more than 500m. With average families of four, that's a thousand potential passengers. Not enough for a metro station, but more than enough for a bus service every 10-20 minutes to get to the next train station.

What also works well: Build a few 3 story apartment buildings, a supermarket, a few small stores, a school, a kindergarten and a pub around a train station. Build the single family homes around that infrastructure and you have the perfect place for almost everyone. Families can live in the outer area, when the kids get older they can move out into the apartments and still be around. When they start their own family they move back into the garden homes and the grandparents who get too old to work their gardens can move to the apartments. And all that within 15 minutes walking distance of a train station.

Usually as in "Usually in India"? Because where I'm from, I've never heard of Metro being more expensive than bus or suburban rail. On the contrary, as ticket prices are often determined per distance travelled, suburban rail will usually be more expensive.

The class system on the other hand does exist here.

There's a simple solution for this: Make public transport more expensive, until owning a monthly ticket and taking the bus is considered a status symbol again.

“between 16:42 and 18:30” seems oddly specific. Did, by any chance, the guy responsible for these fares have to take the train at 16:41?

Yeah, I don't get that point either. Just as cul-de-sacs, one-way streets are a great way to prevent through-traffic in a neighborhood. But then again, I'm not from the US, so maybe it's just because our streets are designed differently.

Where I'm from, most one-way streets are single lane, 20 or 30km/h and allow cyclists in both directions. Emergency vehicles usually don't have a problem with them, as they can drive through them in the wrong direction anyway.

Many cul-de-sacs also allow cyclists and pedestrians through, acting as a modal filter. If I understand the video correctly, they also don't have a problem with the cul-de-sac itself but with the stroad it is connected to. So just fix the stroad, then.

I will just leave this recent study here:

https://www.duh.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilung/deutsche-umwelthilfe-belegt-hvo100-aus-altspeiseoel-klimaschaedlicher-als-fossiler-diesel-1/

Sorry for the German, here's a translation of the abstract:

German Environmental Aid (DUH) proves: HVO100 from used cooking oil is more harmful to the climate than fossil diesel

• New study commissioned by DUH: HVO100 and "bio" diesel from used cooking oil are even more harmful to the climate than fossil diesel, taken as a whole from production to consumption.

• Promises of almost 90 percent CO2 savings refuted, as shifting effects boost climate-damaging palm oil production.

• DUH calls on the German government to stop the use and promotion of HVO100 from used cooking oil in road transport.

ASL?

That's the rightful punishment for clinking with food. Barbarian!