this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
7 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

14097 readers
193 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
toaster@slrpnk.net
grue@lemmy.world
Toaster1@lemmy.world
7
[blog] Looking for tonight's on the UBCx skytrain expansion (cityhallwatch.wordpress.com)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by CanadianCorhen@lemmy.ca to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I came across this piece:

I’m a big supporter of public transit and usually in favour of ambitious infrastructure projects. Still, this article raised some great points about how big transit builds are planned, justified, and communicated to the public.

It got me wondering, how do we strike the balance between building bold, future-proof systems and keeping projects practical and efficient? When is a project like this justified, vs LRT?

Would like to hear how others read it, either agreeing with it, or rebutting it.

top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It got me wondering, how do we strike the balance between building bold, future-proof systems and keeping projects practical and efficient? When is a project like this justified, vs LRT?

Busses!!

Nobody likes them but there is no way you can sabotage them at a structural level because busses don't need politically fragile construction and maintenance projects to work. Busses are the guerilla warfare of mass transit, when corrupt, wealthy interests destroy or sabotage other forms of mass transit they also do their worst to bus systems and yet the busses still keep crawling out of the woodwork and moving people even when it seems like everybody hates them, they still keep running, everywhere in almost every city, all over the world...

I love more permanent forms of mass transit, their permanence imbues a sense of place at a basic level for one, but talking tactics here... busses are just beasts when it comes to escaping death from both austerity on one hand AND unsustainable overreach on the other.

[–] egerlach@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

It depends on what your goals are with the transit.

If you're trying to connect existing, dense areas, then buses are potentially fine.

If you're trying to guide future growth, buses are useless. Bus routes can change, train tracks can't. Developers will build around train stations because of this immovability.

That said, if what this poster says is true, then LRT might have been the right choice not just for the UBC extension, but the entire Millenium Line extension from Commercial-Broadway all the way to UBC. But try convincing the car-brained of that… Doug Ford is a good example of someone who thinks it's a good idea to spend 10s of billions on subway instead of 100s of millions on LRT.