this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

14127 readers
814 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
 

My original question was "How do we disincentivize the purchase of pickup trucks/SUVs" but then I thought it would be better to approach the larger problem of car dependency and car ownership. One option is, of course, to create public transit infrastructure and improve it where it already exist. This, however, doesn't change the fact that some will still choose to drive. What would be the best ways to discourage people from owning personal cars?

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

don't discourage people from owning personal cars. most of the time this mentality is just a tax on the poor.

Flip the idea. Encourage people to not use cars instead.

  • not just bike lanes, but bike storage & lockers
  • not just public transport, but better connections between transport modes (buses with bike carriers, train stations with better car parking and bike lockers and bus connections)
  • more small car parking bays with all large truck bays further away from the stores
  • more motorcycle parking bays
  • cheaper motorcycle registration, etc.

it's all about spending money and effort in the areas you want it. Not about being restrictive.

it's a slower method of conversion, but more effective.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Imho the best policy is to require a permanent parking space close to the main residence of the person owning the car. With permanent access I mean that the space is only to be used for the car and has to be either rented or owned by the person using it. This is rather easy to do in a rural setting, but much harder the more urban the area becomes.

The next part is making access worse for cars. Place parking further away from interesting destinations then bicycle parking and public transport access. Like having bicycle racks right next to the shop doors. That also includes just removing parking as much as possible. Besides handicap spots obviously. Also modal filters to block cars to move through certain streets, but allow bicycles and pedestrians to use those. That can also mean one directional roads.

Slow down cars as much as possible. When cars are as fast as bicycles, cars loose a massive advantage. This has to be done using built infrastructure and not just street signs, but those are an important start. So narrow roads, little viewing space and speed bumps. Also traffic lights are a good option. Give priority to other forms of transport(default green for pedestrians and bicycles for example).

[–] nutcase2690@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

the first point makes it sound like you either don't want cities or you love vast amount of space being wasted. it would just be more reasons for developers to not build homes and new businesses, while also complete inflating parking lots everywhere.

instead, scrap the bit in zoning laws where businesses have to allocate space and funds for parking lots in their designs. denser setting incentivizes walking or biking. in line with this, make mixed use development more apparent-- shops on bottom floor with apartments on top. capitalism will say to developers that they could fit another 2 or 3 stores in a lot that was previously going to be dedicated to parking

reduce the number of road lanes and make them narrower in cities while opting for curb-raised and separated bike paths. ditch the grid based road map for a more natural one. the visual clutter on and around the road will make drivers go slow. ensure there is proper daylighting for points of conflict. get large trucks back onto rural roads, and incentivize, both to consumers and corporations, a return of small vehicles. we should be able to find a happy medium where if you need a car, be it for hauling furniture or going on a camping trip, it should still be convenient enough to do so.

let there be a priority bus or emergency vehicle lane in the center of the road. that way busses and emergency vehicles don't get stuck behind any car traffic

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

to developers that they could fit another 2 or 3 stores in a lot that was previously going to be dedicated to parking

That is exactly my point. Underground parking adds 35-50% to a mid rise building construction cost. That means people have the choice between larger or cheaper units without a parking spot and more expensive ones with a parking spot. Even with underground parking mid rise buildings are already cheaper then single family housing. Especially ifthe area we are talking about has high land prices, like pretty much every city.

[–] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Not much you can do without them reacting the opposing way.

One solution is for example 15 minute cities. I've never felt like I wanted a car living in Montréal because it's literally faster and more convenient to just walk there. I rarely even needed to use the metro. Genuinely healthier way of life.

And then the F350 owners all go that's just the first step, they won't allow you to go outside of your city, blah blah blah.

The thing is it's been drilled into so many people's heads that a car is essential that everything that deviates from driving your car wherever you go is seen as a direct attack on personal freedoms, your right to go wherever you want and all that.

People also seem to rely a lot on their cars as a status symbol. Look, I'm broke AF but I got a brand new giant boat of an SUV... to go work in an office on a computer everyday. So many trucks have perfect mint condition never used truck beds. But you gotta have a truck to show you're a hard working manly man.

There's nothing you can do to change those people. They'll make a F950 and run it coal just to spite you. We'll be stuck with the status quo as long as egocentric people exist. Because you can't inconvenience them for the sake of others, they don't give a shit about anyone but themselves.

[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com -1 points 2 years ago

The problem with 15 minute cities is the last few thousand years of people giving an inch and the government taking every mile they can. People who took history class and have pattern recognition skills often see that pattern in things.

Do you really think that 15 minute cities wont be enshittified?

[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com -1 points 2 years ago

The problem with 15 minute cities is the last few thousand years of people giving an inch and the government taking every mile they can. People who took history class and have pattern recognition skills often see that pattern in things.

Do you really think that 15 minute cities wont be enshittified?